To receive any questions from and provide answers to the public in relation to matters relevant to the Council’s activities.
Minutes:
Members of the public were invited to put questions to the Mayor and Councillors on any matters within the powers and duties of the Council.
Eight public questions were submitted as follows:-
· Relating to whether there had been an attempt made by Stockport Council to discuss with the new operators of the Northern rail franchise the possibility of introducing a new rail service from Stockport to Manchester Victoria via Reddish South and Denton railway stations.
The Deputy Leader of the Council (Support & Governance) responded that he regretted that the work undertaken by various parties had not achieved the inclusion of such a service within the basic specification of the franchise. It was further stated that the Council would continue to pursue the introduction of this service along with Tameside Council and the Friends of Reddish South Station.
· Relating to whether the Council would support an approach from the market traders to operate Stockport Market under a new management model concentrating on retaining Stockport’s market within the traditional marketplace, aim to increase and retain market traders, increase footfall and operate within a neutral budget.
The Leader of the Council (Councillor Sue Derbyshire) replied that the issue of a different trading style was something that had been discussed with the traders a number of years ago and view of traders at that time that they did not wish to pursue that avenue and instead a market improvement plan was instituted instead. Notwithstanding the investment put into place as part of that plan, the market was still not trading at the level it should be. It was stated that should the market be relocated, then the issue of the management of the market could be investigated again.
The Executive Councillor (Thriving Economy) (Councillor Patrick McAuley) further responded that a consultation in relation to Stockport Market would commence on 7 March and end on 1 April 2016.
· Relating generally to devolution to Greater Manchester and a perceived lack of information being made available to public and specifically what share of the devolution budget in relation to health, mental health and housing was being allocated to Stockport and what the criteria was for such an allocation.
The Leader of the Council (Councillor Sue Derbyshire) responded that she did not agree that the work of the Greater Manchester Combined Authority and the Strategic Health Partnership Board was not in the public domain as all of their meetings were held in public, were webcast live and their agendas and reports were made available on the website of the Authority. Councillor Derbyshire then stated that there was not a devolved budget for health, mental health and housing, but rather partners had been given more influence over how public money was spent in Greater Manchester.
· Relating to the report in the Stockport Review that the efforts of the public of Stockport in recycling had avoided the Council incurring costs of £12 million in landfill charges in 2014/15 and that this money was spent on vital local services. Clarification was requested on how this £12 million had been spent by the Council.
The Leader of the Council (Councillor Sue Derbyshire) responded that the £12 million had been avoided costs rather than additional income and therefore it was not possible to attribute specific beneficiaries of this avoided cost.
· Relating to whether Stockport Market was in profit or loss.
The Leader of the Council (Councillor Sue Derbyshire) responded that while the inside market produced a modest profit and the produce hall a small loss, the outside market ran at such a loss as to mean that the whole market operation was running at a loss of £220,000.
Councillor Andy Sorton further responded that the level of losses sustained by the market could not continue in the long term. He noted that the indoor market had generated a profit over the last two years with a year on year increase in the level of that profit. Councillor Sorton added that consideration needed to be given to the consequences of moving traders away from the traditional marketplace and that any consultation needed to avoid the potential for ‘confirmation bias’ resulting from the way in which the questions were posed.
Three further public questions had been submitted where the questioner was not present at the meeting and in accordance with the Code of Practice, the Chief Executive was requested to respond to the questioners in writing.