Agenda item

To receive and answer questions submitted by councillors in accordance with rule 11.2 of the Constitution.

Councillor Questions Process:

·         Councillors can ask questions in accordance with rule 11.2 of the Constitution.

·         An answer to a question submitted may take the form of:

a)    A direct oral answer;

b)   Where the desired information is in a publication of the Council or other published work, a reference to that publication; or

c)    Where the reply cannot conveniently be given orally, a written answer circulated later to all members of the Council.

·         A councillor asking a question may ask one supplementary question, without notice, of the councillor to whom the first question was asked. The supplementary question must arise directly out of the original question or the reply.

Four questions from Councillors have been submitted for consideration.

It was noted that four questions had been submitted for consideration.

Question One

Councillor J McCartney asked question one which related to untidy land and the Council’s approach in tackling it.

The Leader explained that the Council had asked the landowner to remedy the situation, but that a dispute had ensued following damage to items in question during removal. If is was not removed, the Council would investigate the option of legal action.

Councillor J McCartney expressed his frustration at the amount of time taken to remove the items in question.

Question Two

Councillor M McCartney asked a question relating to the timing of the consultation on the Council’s Local Plan Preferred Options Report.

The Leader stated that that it was the wrong time for local government reorganisation work to be undertaken in North Yorkshire, but that when it came to the Local Plan, the Council had been given clear instructions by central government that every authority had to have an up-to-date Local Plan and Five-Year Housing Land Supply. As such, the work being undertaken by Officer had to continue, and the need for a housing land supply was especially important in order to prevent development in the district that both Members and residents would not want. Local authorities had asked the government for more time due to the pandemic, but they had not been forthcoming with extensions of time.

Councillor M McCartney asked a supplemental question regarding the future of the Council’s Local Plan should devolution go ahead.

The Leader explained that should, for example, a North Yorkshire unitary model be decided upon, each local authority’s Local Plan would be amalgamated into a single county-wide plan, until the time came for one overarching plan to be developed for the whole county.

Question Three

Councillor J McCartney asked a question about the fly tipping of tyres in the district.

The Lead Executive Member for Housing, Health and Culture described to Members how the Council relied on local people to report fly tipping in the district, and that Officers had been working with other local authorities such as Doncaster and Leeds to try to identify the source of the tyres. In 2019-20 there had been 50 incidents, and in 2020-21 35 to date, which was a reduction. However, even one occurrence was too many. The Council had deployed CTV units that were operational 24/7 and had numerous fixed penalty notices and fines at its disposal to issue to those caught fly tipping, littering, dog fouling or failing in household duty of care. The income current from fines and fixed penalty notices was around £5,800.

Councillor J McCartney asked a supplemental question, asking what was being done by the Council and other local authorities to track down the origins of the tyres.

The Lead Executive Member for Housing, Health and Culture acknowledged that it was very difficult to trace the source of the tyres, and that they were often dumped across the whole district.

Question Four

Councillor J McCartney asked a question about the publication date of the Council’s Infrastructure Delivery Plan, which was associated with the Local Plan Preferred Options sites, and when it would be available in order for sites to be properly assessed and enable residents to receive answers to their questions.

The Deputy Leader and Lead Executive Member for Place Shaping clarified the purpose of the Local Infrastructure Plan and confirmed that the Council had been working with several infrastructure providers including the County Council, healthcare providers, Highways England and utility providers. The Plan would establish the importance of the local infrastructure required to support proposals set out in the Local Plan; it would constitute a key piece of evidence at the Local Plan’s publicity stage which would be in early 2022. Officers had already identified a number of requirements, with further work to be undertaken in the coming months on specific costs for improvements to the district’s highways network, utilities, healthcare and flood and water management. All of these elements would be factored into an assessment for the viability and deliverability of the sites at the publication stage of the plan.

Councillor McCartney felt that not enough background work had been done by the Council into any prospective sites, and that the Infrastructure Delivery Plan should have been completed already.

The Deputy Leader and Lead Executive Member for Place Shaping stated that it was an emerging plan, with information being gathered constantly. Over 400 sites had been submitted by landowners, and as such it was not practical to evidence the required infrastructure for all of them; therefore, Officers would be bringing forward preferred options and asking for comments on these instead. Infrastructure was a key part of this work; residents were urged to comment on the plans and await detailed propositions in a year’s time.