Basingstoke & Dean Borough Council Council Meeting

Apologies were received from Councillors McKay, Miller and Tuck.

There were no declarations of interest.

Subject to the following amendments, the minutes of the meetings held on 11 May 2023 and 18 May 2023 were confirmed as an accurate record and signed by the Mayor.

Minute 17/23 – 2) Typographical error, amend Ashford to Ashfield.

Minute 19/23 – Amend the outside bodies table to add Councillor M Bound to the AWE Local Liaison Committee.

The Mayor announced that certificates for public service would be sent to former councillors Stephen Williams, Samantha Jeans, Aji Peter, Kerri Carruthers and Stuart Frost.

He also announced that he attended the raising of the Windrush flag and the exhibition held at the Willis Museum which was very informative.

From: Jean Fisher - Chair of Crown Heights Residents’ Association

To:       Leader of the Council

Question

Given that BDBC may have delegated the work of building inspection but retain ultimate responsibility for building control, yet Crown Heights was built with flammable cladding contrary to building regulations in force at the time and the cladding supplier warned the contractor of the danger of using this type of cladding without firebreaks, given that control of planning was never delegated yet the construction of Crown Heights does not appear to conform to the details listed in planning permission and given that the planning permission did not specify standards of safety when this might be considered a vital specification, what does BDBC intend to do to assist the residents of Crown Heights with the serious situation that we find ourselves in, specifically with regard to the financial impact, which is in the control of the council?

I propose that the buildings are unsafe and should be exempt from council tax from the date of construction to the date that the EWS1 certificate declaring the building safe is issued.  I understand that the council tax banding is a matter for the valuation office and not local government and therefore not under local control so I am asking BDBC to immediately make a change to something which is under their control – the discretionary exemption of Crown Heights properties from council tax liability.

Answer

Thank you for your question, and from the outset, I just want to be absolutely clear that we do understand the issues that residents in Crown Heights have faced. The Council is of course sympathetic to those serious concerns being raised by residents in Crown Heights and has worked hard to ensure that the building owner carries out the works needed to remediate the building as quickly as possible. This included lobbying central government to ensure that the cost of these works were borne by the building owner and not the leaseholders. It is unfortunately not correct to say that BDBC is involved in building control, that was a matter that the developer chose to retain under their own control. It’s important that we address the relevant authorities in this regard and so the government and Barratt Homes, who have responsibility to address the issues that have been faced by many residents, however we have, and will continue to do what we can.

In specific regard to the question asked, I understand that the Council gave a response last year on the same question after taking advice from colleagues in local tax. This point also relates to Councillor Mummalaneni’s motion later on the agenda. The Council does not have a policy against which it can grant Council tax exemption or discount in this circumstance. It should also be noted that Council tax is levied to help residents to help meet the cost of ongoing provision for frontline services which are of benefit to all residents, and those services are actually still available for the residents of Crown Heights.   We should also note the current situation where Barratts are due to begin works to remove the cladding at their cost and that is a major step forward for residents.

I wholly understand the question and the concerns that lie behind it, and we will do what is within our power to help, and we will lobby those who are responsible to meet their obligations. And thank you for the question.

Supplementary Question

Thank you, Councillor Harvey, and thank you for all the support that you have given to this point. A minor point of correction, the building owner is an absentee owner and is not paying a penny towards anything and Barratt Homes are paying the bare minimum that the law requires them to, no more. Residents are severely out of pocket because of this, in tremendous financial difficulty. To put that into context, almost all properties are buy-to-let therefore, there’s no option to switch mortgages to repayment only because they are repayment only. It’s easy to think of buy-to-let properties as landlords who are rich. The majority of families who simply can’t sell their home, can’t re-mortgage their home, can’t fix the interest on their mortgage and as their family grew, they are what is known as accidental landlords who have been forced to let out a property bought for their own accommodation in order to be able to live somewhere else, and the rental income is not covering the mortgage which cannot be capped or changed or improved or anything because we are stuck with this cladding and it is not covering the service charge which is astronomical due to this cladding, approximately three times that of Skyline immediately opposite, and it is not covering the costs that we are incurring because of this. Everybody is pushing it to somebody else, now I see no reason why this cannot be done as a discretionary allowance. The valuation office has taken forever. We have people facing really severe financial difficulty right now. Where there’s a will there’s a way and if you wish to help us financially you can do so. These are young families who are renting out their home so that they could live in a house where their family could grow. This is not a lot of rich landlords profiteering. These are genuine constituents in real difficulty and therefore I would implore you please, if there’s a will there’s a way. Find a way to help us financially. Thank you.

Answer

Thank you, Mr Mayor. Jean, I hear you and I’ve spoken to you about this and raised this question and others in this chamber have as well consistently. It isn’t as if we haven’t heard, quite understandably, the concerns of residents in Crown Heights over many years and if you think about it you’ve been living with this for six years, since the incident at Grenfell and beyond that, the years of the building being built so I hear that. The responsibility does lie with Barratts as the developer, that’s very clear, and they have signed up to the development pledge the government created so there’s a clear line of responsibility to what they have to do, and they have committed to doing that at their own cost and that work will start in September as we understand. Their planning application has gone through, we assisted that planning application at the Borough as quickly as we possibly could and thank you to our officers for doing that because we facilitated it as quickly as was possible to achieve that. In term of the issues, the financial pressures, I get it, I understand what you’re saying but the responsibility needs to lie where we’re able to deal with that. We don’t have that discretion at this time, we just don’t. But the reality is both government and Barratt’s can assist here and we’ve been lobbying them, having been taking part in that debate quite effectively but also others who are also elected representatives, have been part of that debate, and they also have their part to play in this, and so the lobbying of government to give the appropriate financial support is key. I also understand that the mortgage lenders have given that commitment to government to take part again in terms of lending mortgages but I’m conscious it needs to go more than that. So yes, lobbying government is a key part of this, so encouraging those elected representatives to help us again to make a stronger representation as we can, I totally understand. I hear what you’re saying, we will do what is within our gift to do. I will not make you a commitment that we cannot deliver on because that will be false. Thank you. 

No petitions were presented.

The following changes to committees were made:

1)     Councillor G Watts replace Councillor Ashfield as Chair of the Economic, Planning and Housing Committee.

2)     Councillor Lee replace Councillor Slimin as Chair of the Community, Environment and Partnerships Committee.

3)     Councillor Phillimore replace Councillor Durrant on the Scrutiny Committee.

4)     Councillor Tuck replace Councillor Phillimore as a reserve member on the Scrutiny Committee.

Council considered a report which provided a summary of the council’s pay and benefits review including the background to the review, the process undertaken and the proposed changes to the original proposals as a result of the feedback received during the consultation period with staff and UNISON.

As recommended by the Human Resources Committee, the report also proposed an amended pay policy statement for 2023/2024 for approval, which had been amended as a result of the proposed changes to the current pay and benefits system.

Resolved: To approve the Pay Policy statement 2023/2024.

The Co-Leader and Cabinet Member for Finance and Property introduced the report which presented the final capital outturn position for 2022/23, compared it with the latest approved budget, and provided explanations of the significant variances.  An underspend of £3.155 million was reported.

Resolved: Council

note:

1)     That the actual capital spending in 2022/23 was £20.129M as shown in section 3 of the report. This is £3.155M less than the latest agreed capital programme budget of £23.284M and £3.738M less than the forecast outturn of £23.867M in quarter three. The actual capital financing in 2022/23 is shown in paragraph 3.2 of the report.

2)     The 2022/23 significant outturn variations and explanations for them are shown in Appendices 1 and 2 of the report.

3)     The addition of £0.026M to the programme and rephasing since the last reported position in February 2023, under delegated powers, as shown in Table 7 and paragraphs 4.4 to 4.7of the report.

4)     The impact of scheme variances for 2022/23 on future years’ capital expenditure has been reported to the Capital Programme Board and has been included in the revised capital programme to 2026/27 aligned to Council Plan Priorities and Outcomes.

5)     The revised capital programme for 2023/24 to 2026/27, adjusted for slippage and rephasing and additions contained within section 4 of this report and detailed in Appendices 3 and 4 of the report.

6)     That the capital programme remains fully funded up to 2026/27, based on the latest forecast of available resources.

approve:

7)     The capital programme changes Appendix 3 including scheme virements detailed in paragraphs 4.8 to 4.10 of the report, relating to Electric Vehicle (EV) Charge Points and Parking and Access (£0.075M in 2023/24) and from Developers Contributions for Replacement/Refurbishment of Community Facilities to the Local Infrastructure Fund Pamber Heath Memorial Hall scheme (£0.023M in 2023/24).

8)     The creation of a new scheme in 2023/24 for the Local Authority Housing Fund (LAHF) to assist in delivering longer term affordable homes for settling refugees in the borough in accordance with the Government’s LAHF scheme and funding. Delegation to be given to the S151 Officer to approve the expenditure once the preferred delivery option has been recommended by the Capital Programme Board.

9)     The release of £0.409M in from the Climate Change Reserve to fund the installation of Electric Vehicle (EV) Charging Points and the release of £0.028M from Revenue Reserves for Capital Purposes to fund the purchase of the Green Team vehicle.

10)  The revised capital programme for 2023/24 to 2026/27 as shown in Appendix 4 and the programme financing as shown in paragraph 5.1of the report.

The Co-Leader and Cabinet Member for Finance and Property presented a report which set out the outturn position as at the 31 March 2023 for revenue expenditure and income against the budget that was approved by Council on 28 February 2022.  A favourable variance of £3.6 million was reported attributed to a number of large items which included receipt of grant funding at the end of the year for the work to support Ukrainian refugees, staffing costs due to vacancies and additional income from the council’s waste contractor as compensation for failure to deliver the appropriate service during the year.

Resolved:  To approve transfer of the outturn surplus of £3.67M to earmarked revenue reserves as detailed in section 3 of the report:

• To the Economic Recovery Fund Reserve £0.08M;

• To the Efficiency, Transformation and Digital Reserve £0.36M;

• To the Budget Carry Forward Reserve £0.34M; and

• To the MTFS Risk Reserve £2.89M

Council considered a report which proposed amendments to the council’s petition scheme, its arrangements for dealing with complaints made against councillors and some other more minor changes. The proposed changes had been agreed with Group Leaders at a Constitution Working Group held on 28 June 2023.

The report was debated where concern was expressed regarding the proposed changes to the council’s petition scheme particularly in relation to restricting the submission of e-petitions to the council’s platform of modern.gov. It was commented that to increase engagement and allow a petitioner to share information via social media, petitions should be accepted through other platforms such as change.org rather than suppress democracy by limiting electronic petitions to one platform.  Comments were also made regarding issues with the use of other petition platforms such as change.org where it was difficult to validate and verify signatories to ensure they met the criteria of the petitions scheme. 

It was suggested there should be a lower threshold than 4,000 signatures to trigger a council debate, however concern was expressed regarding the standard of debate should an instant debate be triggered by a petition reaching the threshold.  Some petitions relate to complex topics which require officer support to ensure that members have the full information to have an informed council debate. 

It was suggested that amendments to the petitions scheme be reconsidered by the Constitutional Working Group.

The recommendations were put to a vote. Recommendations 2 to 5 were agreed.  Recommendation 1 which related to the petition scheme was put to a recorded vote upon which there were 6 votes in favour, 18 votes against and 26 abstentions and therefore was rejected.

Resolved: Council

1)     Reject the amendments to the Petition Scheme in Part 4 of the Constitution as set out in appendix 1of the report.

2)     Agree the amendments to the Arrangements for dealing with complaints made against councillors in Part 5 as set out in appendix 2 of the report.

3)     Agree to change the name of the Investigation and Disciplinary Committee to the Investigation and Disciplinary and Standards Appeals Committee and to agree the amended terms of reference as set out in appendix 3.

4)     Agree the miscellaneous amendments detailed in appendix 4 of the report.

5)     Delegate authority to the Head of Law and Governance to reinstate the Virtual Meetings Rules should it be necessary by reason of an emergency and provided for in legislation.

A proposal was considered to change Rule 4 of the Committee Procedure Rules relating to the Chairs of the Community, Environment and Partnerships Committee, the Economic, Planning and Housing Committee and Manydown Overview Committee and to the vice chair of the Scrutiny Committee. The proposed changes had been agreed with Group Leaders at a Constitution Working Group held on 28 June 2023.

Resolved: 

To agree the amendment to Rule 4 of the Committee Procedure Rules in Part 4 of the Constitution as set out in Appendix 1 of the report which:

a)     removes the requirement that the Chairs of Community, Environment and Partnerships Committee, the Economic, Planning and Housing Committee, and Manydown Overview Committee be councillors from the administration; and

b)     removes the requirement that Scrutiny Committee has two vice chairs. Scrutiny Committee will appoint one vice chair.

Council considered a report seeking approval to appoint an Independent Co-opted Member to the Audit Committee following a recruitment process.

Resolved: To appoint Richard Harbord as a Co-opted Member of the Audit and Accounts Committee for a period of two years with an option to extend for a further two years.

Council considered a report which sought approval to the extension of the terms of the independent person and the independent standards assessors.

Resolved:     Council agree

1)     To extend the period of appointment of Alan Harrison as Independent Person to 31 October 2025.

2)     To extend the period of appointment of Amanda Orchard as Independent Standards Assessor to 31 October 2025.

3)     To extend the period of appointment beyond the usual maximum term 4 years of Verity Murricane to 30 April 2024.

4)     To thank Rachel Childs, Judith Curson and Camilla Proctor for their commitment to their roles and the contributions they have made in promoting and maintaining high standards of conduct in the council and the parish and town councils.

The report before Council sought consideration of the request which had been made by Popham Parish Meeting to confer upon it the functions of a Parish Council in relation to the acquisition of land for the benefit of the Parish area and to appoint a Proper Officer at the District Council who would together with the Chairman of the Parish Meeting become Parish Trustees.

Resolved: Council agree

1)     To make an Order, pursuant to section 109 of the Local Government Act 1972, to confer upon Popham Parish Meeting the power to acquire land under section 124 of the Local Government Act 1972 for the purposes of the benefit, improvement or development of the parish area

2)     Appoint the Monitoring Officer to be the Proper Officer for the purposes of Section 13(3) Local Government Act 1972 to act as a Parish Trustee to all Parish Meetings within the borough

3)     To an indemnity being provided to the Proper Officer of the Council for the purposes of undertaking the duties of a Parish Trustee under Section 13 of the Local Government Act 1972.

The Annual Report of the Standards Committee provided information on the work of the committee during the last municipal year and complaints made during the year.

Resolved:     That the Standards Committee Annual Report 2022/2023 be noted.

The report presented to Council highlighted the key achievements of the council’s four overview and scrutiny committees; Community Environment and Partnerships Committee; Economic, Planning and Housing Committee; Manydown Overview Committee and Scrutiny Committee.

Resolved:     That the Overview and Scrutiny Annual Report 2022/23 be noted.

The following motion was proposed by Councillor Mummalaneni and seconded by Councillor Court:

Background:

Crown Heights is a stark example of inadequate development and management practices.

Residents of Crown Heights are currently facing a multitude of issues, including anti-social behaviour, increased mortgages, unacceptable maintenance charges, fire safety concerns, and more. 

The delays and failures of the responsible parties to deliver fire safety improvements has led to exorbitant maintenance charges, impacting both the finances and wellbeing of residents. 

The ongoing issues with the development has also led to negative equity, trapping residents in properties they cannot sell. In this situation, landlords are defaulting and tenants, through no fault of their own, are receiving eviction notices. 

In these circumstances, council tax bands on these properties no longer match their real value, placing a significant financial burden on Crown Heights residents, compared to their neighbours. 

Motion:

This Council requests Cabinet to:

·         Write to the Valuation Agency, calling for revisions to the council tax bands of these properties, given the impact of problems with the development on the value of these properties.

·         Establish a task force within the Council to ensure rapid completion of cladding and remedial works at Crown Heights. This task force will collaborate with relevant authorities put pressure on the responsible parties to deliver chance for residents. 

·         Provide of a single point of contact at the Council for Crown Heights, streamlining the process for its residents to receive guidance and support. 

·         Provide fortnightly updates on progress against this Motion to the ward members of Brookvale and Kings Furlong. 

The motion was debated and comments made included:

·           Support for residents of Crown Heights from the relevant authorities was expressed and there was a view that the council should do what it could to assist within its power but should not raise false expectations of residents. 

·           Whilst there was support for the sentiment of the motion, some members expressed concern regarding the language of the motion and actions requested, an example being writing to the Valuation Office for revaluation of council tax bands as this was something that any resident could do however it could result in the tax band increasing rather than reducing.

·           Council were informed of the considerable work that had been undertaken, following a motion in 2021 where a multi-disciplinary team had been formed, representing officers from across relevant disciplines such as housing standards, building control, legal and communications, to support residents.  Officers had continued to liaise with residents to ensure work to remediate the building was progressed as quickly as possible and the planning team had worked proactively with the applicant for the removal and replacement of the cladding to ensure all matters were dealt with as quickly as possible.

·           Council were informed that the council’s building control team had been appointed as the inspector for the remedial works to the building.  It was clarified that remedial works were due to commence in November rather than September.

·           Barrett Homes held monthly calls with residents and leaseholders to keep them updated and it was suggested this could be extended to include ward councillors. 

·           A fire safety update report had been presented to committee during 2021 and 2022 and a further update had been emailed to ward councillors in March 2023.  Assurance was given that ward members would be notified of any significant developments.

·           It was suggested that the local MP be lobbied to challenge the laws governing management companies.

·           The importance of communication with residents on a regular basis was recognised.

·           It was suggested the motion would benefit from substantial amendments to reflect actions the council could take.

The motion was put to a recorded vote.  There voted 49 in favour and 2 abstentions.  The motion was carried.

Resolved: The motion be carried and referred to Cabinet for consideration.

The following motion was proposed by Councillor Vaux and seconded by Councillor Court:

It is common practice for social landlords to let accommodation without providing flooring in any rooms other than kitchens and bathrooms. Inside Housing estimates 80% of properties are let in this way. Tenants are required to remove and dispose of flooring before they leave a property, adding to their costs and increasing landfill disposals, irrespective of the condition of the floorings.  

New tenants, who may have viewed the property with the floorings in situ, are faced with bare unfinished wooden or concrete floors when they move into the property, and the considerable expense of purchasing flooring and its installation.

Residents moving into social housing properties are not in a financial position to meet these costs — and they should not have to. 

With the high demand for social housing, people have little choice but to accept properties without adequate flooring. Further, moving house is a very stressful time, incurring additional unplanned costs at the best of times, without the challenge of floor coverings. Consequently, many live for extended periods, if not years, with bare floors, adding to heating costs and creating potential hazards for young children and the elderly.  

Living in accommodation which is not in a decent and safe condition is a recognised determinant of health and wellbeing, which, together with the financial implications, makes this a matter of concern for all of us.  

The Council therefore regards the provision of decent floor coverings throughout social properties as a basic responsibility that social landlords should deliver. To let a property without decent flooring to the most vulnerable, in the expectation that they fund replacements, is inappropriate. 

The Council therefore expects social housing providers to meet the costs of any replacement flooring that may be needed for new tenants to move in. 

The Council therefore resolves to request Cabinet to:

1.    Write to the Secretary of State for Levelling Up, seeking change to relevant national policy, requiring housing associations to provide safe and decent floor coverings in new-let social properties. 

2.    Convene a meeting with social housing providers in the borough, making clear to them that the provision of decent and safe floor coverings throughout new-let properties is a minimum standard expected in our borough. This would follow other social landlords who have adopted higher lettings standards across all homes, such as Thirteen, and L&Q.

3.    Convene a coalition of district councils to lobby the Secretary of State for changes in the law and the Decent Homes Standards, and to require social landlords across the region to adopt higher letting standards, which includes the provision of decent and safe flooring throughout new-let properties. 

4.    Outline progress made against this Motion through a Portfolio Holder report to the Economic, Planning, and Housing Committee within 12 months.

The motion was debated.  Comments made included:

·           Recognition of the impact of lack of suitable and safe accommodation on children and their ability to thrive and learn.

·           Funding was available for residents to assist in the purchase of flooring, furniture and white goods and the Community Furniture Project could assist those in need with free furnishings and white goods.

·           A new Housing Association Liaison Officer post had been created to improve partnership working with housing associations who were key partners in helping the council deliver on its Housing and Homelessness Strategy and improve housing standards for residents.

·           The council had no power to require a housing association to fit floorings.

·           It was suggested the motion should include flooring in the private rented sector not just social housing.

The motion was put to a recorded vote and unanimously supported with 51 votes in favour.

Resolved:     The motion be carried and referred to Cabinet for consideration.

Question 1

From:  Councillor Dillow

To:       Cabinet Member for Climate and Ecological Emergency

In the Kempshott & Buckskin ward there is a jewel that needs saving from the threat of development, it's called Old Down Woodland Park. 

Old Down is about 12 hectares of exquisite grassland and mature woodland classed as a site of importance for nature conservation. There are over 150 different species of trees, shrubs, plants and grasses, where wild birds, butterflies and small mammals thrive. It is a place of tranquillity where families can take an evening stroll or an afternoon dog walk and over the past month we have seen the grassland covered with a blanket of wild cowslips.

Maria Miller our MP has been campaigning to save Old Down for years, and I want to ensure along with my fellow Kempshott & Buckskin Cllr's that this area is protected for future generations to enjoy.

Would the cabinet member please give me a concise update on the progress that has been made on giving Old Down Woodland Park the benefit of protection it deserves with Local Nature Reserve Status, and specifically when LNR status will be given?"

Answer

Thank you, Mr Mayor, and thank you Councillor Dillow for your question. I totally agree that Old Down is an important area of open space, and it delivers both recreation and wildlife habitat. The land is protected by its SINC status whilst being managed proactively by the Council and local volunteers in line with a management plan that was put in place in 2010. The protection afforded by the SINC designation along with our Local Plan policies ensures the site won’t be adversely impacted by development.

I hugely appreciate and recognise the tremendous efforts of local conservation volunteers and their achievements in delivering the biodiversity enhancements on Old Down. The recent Environment Act requires us, the Council, to set objectives to protect and enhance biodiversity and act on those objectives. We will be driving this forward through the new biodiversity strategy.

The proposal to designate Old Down as a local green space in the Local Plan Update was set out in the report to EPH on the 3^rd March 2022. This designation effectively provides the same level of protection in planning terms as green belts. Councillor Dillow attended the Manydown Overview Committee on the 21^st June this year and raised a similar question, it’s viewable on YouTube. The answer from the Manydown Project Director explained that part of the site is held as a potential access into a parcel of land currently promoted in the draft Local Plan and I would like to remind Councillor Dillow that these plans were drafted by the previous administration, which it seems did not inform their own group, or indeed inform Dame Maria Miller and so I assume the reason for your question. Nothing would give me greater pleasure than to declare Old Down as an LNR but as you can see, there are complex land interests at stake and the need to protect the Council’s interests. However, we are working hard to overcome these inherited issues as part of the Local Plan Update.

Whilst the Local Plan Update is progressing, the Environment Team are planning to deliver significant open space at Old Down in 2024/25 using £400,000 of S106 contributions. We will consult with local residents and local conservation groups to share these proposals to maximise the benefits to everyone who enjoys this valued landscape. Thank you.

Question 2

From: Cllr Lee

To:     To the Leader of the Council

In April of this year former leader of the council, Councillor Minas-Bound stated, in what appears to have been purely an electioneering stunt, that with regards to the ice rink,  “The council has been working closely with operator Planet Ice to understand the works being planned, with a start date expected after the end of the ice hockey season in May.” We are now well into July with no timelines set for repair work. Can you confirm where we currently are regarding work being conducted, what and/or who seems to be the hold-up, and what can be done to encourage all parties involved to get around the table to sort this out once and for all?

Answer

We are as keen as the ice rink users are to see the poor conditions of the ice rink addressed as soon as possible to ensure that it continues to be a key part of the Basingstoke Leisure Park. We’re a freeholder of a land that the building stands on but as we do not own or operate the rink, the action we can take directly is to encourage the owner and the operator of the rink to come to a formal agreement with us about how they’re going to carry out the repairs that they are responsible for under their leases. We want to move this forward as quickly as possible. Discussions with the leaseholders and operators of the rink are continuing to agree a phased program of work that they will carry out.

I can’t speak to the statements that others made just before the election, but I know where we stand on this and we will do everything we can to get a solution. We recognise that the ice rink is an important part of the Leisure Park and we’re also driving forward the Aquadrome and looking at other potential facilities. So, the future of the ice rink is as an important part of that successful Leisure Park that we are all looking for. Thank you for your question, I appreciate where it comes from.

Supplementary Question

So, from my understanding, having spoken to many people involved behind the scenes, Planet Ice have gone as far as they can with regards to starting the repairs. Contractors are lined up, raring to go. It’s also subsequently been brought to my attention that the EIHL (The English Ice Hockey League), have been informed that there may be no ice available from January 2024, due to the need for repair works to take place and the limited time available to do them. This poses a real threat to ice hockey in Basingstoke as junior and rec ice hockey will likely have to be disbanded. This could mean that it takes 10 years to re-establish the required setup leaving a hole in the income for Planet Ice, putting the viability of our rink in jeopardy and risking the loss of a well-used and loved facility. It also risks the loss of jobs for those who work there.

Could I request a meeting with the relevant Cabinet members to look into any potential solutions, whether that be permanent or temporary, as I’m sure my son and many others would disown me if they didn’t have a venue to play a sport he so much loves every weekend. Thank you.

Answer:

Thank you, Councillor Lee, the answer is yes. I think any loss of access to ice is going to be sorely felt by any of the ice users and sports teams. We recognise this, which is why getting agreement to move the matters forward so quickly is clearly what we need to see happen. I hear what you’re saying, and I agree with you that the situation needs resolution. Now given the years that we’ve been waiting for action on the ice rink, all of New River Retail’s promises over all those years we’ve been sat waiting, is there any wonder we are where we are today? Now, any more delay simply adds frustration to those ice users so I just want to be absolutely clear, we get it, and we are going to do everything we can to find a solution.

Question 3

From: Cllr Lee

To:     To the Leader of the Council

Over recent months, during the evenings, Basingstoke has been sounding more and more like a banger racing track. Some residents of the Borough feel it is justified to use the roads around the town as their own personal race course causing nuisance to communities across the area. What actions can this council take to deter and put an end to this?

Answer

Thank you, Mr Mayor, it is pretty infuriating when you sit in your home, and you can hear these idiots using our ring road as a racetrack. It’s anti-social behaviour, it’s downright dangerous. What I know is that the police do take this issue very seriously and that we can reassure our residents that they are taking action. Obviously, we can’t go beyond that, but I can assure you that they do take it seriously and they are taking action. Suffice to say, it’s a fair question and the issue does need to be tackled.

Supplementary Question:

A number of Councils across the country have been trialling noise cameras that help identify excessive noise from cars. Can I invite the new leader of the Council to write to the relevant department in government which I believe is the Transport Secretary, Mark Harper MP to express our interest in taking part in those trials?

Answer

We’re going to be writing to lots of ministers tonight, given everything we’ve done, but I’m very happy to add that to the list. Let’s hope government steps up to the point you’re asking for. We’ll write to them, we’ll do that.

Question 4

From: Cllr Lee

To:     Cabinet Member for Residents’ Services and Housing

For many years now users of the war memorial park, such as those who attend Saturday morning park runs, have been without the use of toilet facilities. When in opposition, I recall her raising this issue so can she inform members what actions she will be taking to reopen those toilets so that users of this wonderful park aren’t left embarrassed and caught out when needing to relieve themselves?

Answer

I’m grateful to Councillor Lee for his question. You know how long I’ve been campaigning for access to public toilets in our Memorial Park. I met with the then new leader of the Council, Councillor Rhatigan with the executive of Park Run years ago to ask for his support to deliver toilets in the park, and the answer we got was no. Hundreds of runners on a Saturday morning in the park were particularly affected by the lack of toilets. One of the first things we have done as an administration is to deliver toilet facilities to the hundreds of park runners. One runner came with me to meet Councillor Rhatigan and has even emailed me and said ‘Yesterday in complete amazement I found refurbished, fully accessible toilets open just for us on Saturday morning. At last, and so very welcome. This is just to say very many thanks to the Council for doing this. We had almost 500 yesterday all marking 75 years of the NHS for our run. It was an excellent day in both respects’.

Accessible public toilets matter to this administration, and we are exploring how we can deliver public toilets in the park, and you will be pleased to know, Councillor Lee that we are looking at how toilets can be fully accessible to everyone. We are committed to and want to see greater access to public toilets in our urban parks and our rural areas too.

Supplementary Question

I did have a supplementary that I’ve prepared however, I welcome the fact that the toilets have been reopened for those that park run. I look forward to seeing more toilet facilities around the Borough, not just at the War Memorial. As part of looking into how you can provide that, can you also look at how you can provide disabled access toilets including the relevant adult lifts. As a father of a disabled daughter, I wouldn’t be changing my child in many disabled toilets across the country because they just don’t have the right lifts, they’re not clean, so if we can look into that as part of it, then that would be great. Thank you.

Answer

Councillor Lee, I’d be very happy to look at it, but if you would like to come and talk to me and we can talk about it so I can really understand the issue, I will pick it up for you.

Question 5

From:  Cllr Lee

To:      Cabinet Member for Strategic Planning and Infrastructure

I welcome the news that parking charges have been removed at Eastrop Park especially as we approach the summer holiday period. This will encourage and enable more families from across the borough to use the great facilities without worrying about how it'll effect their finances. Will this new administration consider looking at all other charges at any other park or larger outdoor spaces that have them so that families, especially those who do have finance concerns, have access to the outdoors this summer?

Answer

Thank you, Mr Mayor, thank you Alex for the question. I was very pleased that we were able to scrap the car parking charges at Eastrop Park earlier on this week just ahead of the start of the school holidays. I was there myself, earlier on and it was great to see the car parking machines covered up and the free parking signs put up. In terms of your question, I’m told by officers that there aren’t any other car parks near green spaces or parks, that currently charge.

Supplementary Question

Thank you, Mr Mayor, given that our town centre and especially the town area is suffering from a lack of football with shops closing and prices increasing, could I ask that the new administration look into increasing the free parking time limit in all Council owned car parks in the town centre so that it can bring new life into what was once a thriving hub for our Borough?

Answer

As you know, we’re looking as a Cabinet as to how we can rejuvenate the town centre and the Top of Town is a particularly important part of that and getting parking right is going to be part of the solution. So yes, it is something we’ll definitely look at.

There were no questions.