Members of the public are invited to put questions to the Chair and Executive Councillors on any matters within the powers and duties of the Executive, subject to the exclusions set out in the Code of Practice. (Questions must be submitted no later than 30 minutes prior to the commencement of the meeting on the card provided. These are available at the meeting. You can also submit via the Council’s website at www.stockport.gov.uk/publicquestions)
Minutes:
Members of the public were invited to put questions to the Executive on any matters within its powers and duties, subject to the exclusions set out in the Code of Practice.
Four public questions were submitted.
(1) The first question sought clarification as to why the Council had borrowed money to finance the building of new office accommodation for Stockport Homes given the availability of empty office accommodation in the town centre, some of which was very close to the Town Hall, and within the context of severe financial constraints facing the Council.
The Leader of the Council clarified that the decision on financing the new Stockport Homes Head Quarters (HQ) had been taken by a previous Executive administration. The Labour Group at the time had raised concerns about the appropriateness of this approach at the Adult Care Service & Housing Scrutiny Committee.
The Leader further clarified that the funding of the HQ was through capital borrowing, and was separate from the Council’s Revenue Budget that covered day to day expenditure. The Council had borrowed the resources because Stockport Homes was not able to do so, and based on a Business Case that demonstrated the cost effectiveness of the proposal. Regardless of the merits or otherwise of the scheme, the Council had satisfied itself that the decision was financially sound.
The Leader of the Council also undertook to ensure that details of the public committee reports about this matter were provided to the questioner.
(2) The second question related to proposals to reduce the frequency of the collection of black bins for non-recyclable waste. While acknowledging the importance of a review of this service, and the work of the Council over a number of years to improve recycling rates, the rationale for moving to a three weekly collection for non-recyclables was queried and assurances were sought that (i) the proposals would be consulted on widely with the public and with the Scrutiny Committee to determine its likely effectiveness, and (ii) that the decision needed to be evidence based.
In response the Executive Councillor (Communities & Housing) welcomed the support for the Review of the waste collection service, but stated that the proposals set out tin the report were simply proposals and may be revised. She emphasised that the consultation on the proposals would be open to all residents and stakeholders.
The Executive Councillor further acknowledged the importance of evidence based decision-making and emphasised that the proposals set out in the agenda were based on evidence of their likely effectiveness. Prior to any final decision on these proposals evidence would be gathered, including from the consultation and the proposals may be amended in light of this.
(3) The third question referenced the proposed Council Tax increase of 3.99% in 2017/18, and Stockport’s position within Greater Manchester as the Council with the highest level of Council Tax. The questioner asked whether this represented value for money given that other Greater Manchester Councils were paying £320 less for similar or better levels of service, and whether it was justified for Stockport Council Tax payers to receive another increase those those in Trafford would be, despite that Council operating under broadly similar financial constraints?
The Executive Councillor (Reform & Governance) responded by stating that he believed that the previous increase in Council Tax had been justified in context of Stockport’s financial circumstances. While recognising the similarities in levels of the funding received from Central Government by both Stockport and Trafford councils, the Executive Councillor emphasised the disparities in levels of need in Stockport between differing areas, and the ageing population.
The Executive Councillor further referenced the review of Council Reserves and the development of a Reserves Policy, which the Council had not had before, and the indication from that Review that levels of reserves were appropriate.
The Executive Councillor also emphasised the differing approaches taken by Stockport and Trafford councils to responding to the reductions in local government resources, in particular the political decisions taken by Trafford to outsource some Council services, which may have been cheaper but did not always lead to better outcomes. Stockport Council had taken a different approach which the Executive Councillor believed was more appropriate for Stockport.
(4) The fourth question related to proposals contained in the Executive Response to the Medium Term Financial Plan to remove the Essential Car User Allowance, and other changes to staff travel. Given the changes proposed could see some staff, particularly those working with the most vulnerable clients, £1000 per year worse off, and with free parking permits for councillors unaffected, could the changes be justified given the damage to morale when the saving was only projected to be £70,000 per year?
The Executive Councillor (Reform & Governance) responded by acknowledging that while the proposal would impact on staff, he queried the accuracy of the figures quoted in the question. He further emphasised that the proposal was subject to consultation with staff and that he had already received representations. He stated that he would be seeking further evidence to inform the eventual decision on whether to pursue the proposal, including meeting front line staff affected.
The Executive Councillor also acknowledged that there were councillor benefits that would be addressed in future proposals.