Council Procedure Rule 12.6 provides for questions by any member of the Council to the Leader or any Portfolio Holder, without notice on:
(i) reports under item 5 above; or
(ii) any other matter of a non operational character in relation to the powers and duties of the Council or which affects all or part of the District or some or all of its inhabitants.
Council Procedure Rule 12.7 provides that answers to questions without notice may take the form of:
(a) direct oral answer from the Leader or, at the request of the Leader, from another member of the Cabinet;
(b) where the desired information is in a publication of the Council or other published work, a reference to that publication;
(c) where the reply cannot conveniently be given orally, a written answer circulated later to the questioner; or
(d) where the question relates to an operational matter, the Leader or a member of the Cabinet will request that a response be given direct to the questioner by the relevant Chief Officer.
In accordance with the Council Procedure Rule 12.8, a time limit of twenty minutes is set for questions. Any question not dealt with within the time available will receive a written reply. The Chairman may extend this period by up to a further 10 minutes to ensure that all political groups and independent members may have their questions answered.
Minutes:
(a) Epping and Buckhurst Hill Parking Reviews
Councillor J M Whitehouse drew attention to the written report of the Safer, Greener and Highways Portfolio Holder in which it was stated that the Epping Parking Review had been completed. He advised that certain roads in Epping had not been painted with the appropriate yellow lines and asked the Portfolio Holder when this work would be undertaken. He also sought information about the progress of the Buckhurst Hill Parking Review.
Councillor Waller stated that he had consulted the District Council representatives for Buckhurst Hill on the proposals for that area and the consultation exercise was due to be completed the following day. He advised that following that process discussions would take place with the County Council as implementation would be a matter for that authority although the District Council had set aside funds for the review. Councillor Waller said that there was a programme for the replacement of yellow line markings on highways but he did not have the details to hand. He reported that future traffic regulation order schemes would be considered by the North Essex Parking Partnership and priorities would be determined. He said that he hoped to be able to inform members about proposed schemes in the near future.
(b) Local Plan Issues and Options Consultation
Councillor Wagland asked the Planning Portfolio Holder if he agreed that the comment included in his written report about the non-receipt of leaflets by residents was an understatement bearing in mind that residents of Chigwell had not received leaflets.
Councillor Bassett pointed out that the distribution of leaflets had been only one method of drawing attention to the consultation exercise. He pointed out that numerous methods had been used to publicise the process including the Council's website, press briefings and liaison with parish and town councils. In relation to the distribution of leaflets he advised that the company used by the Council had used GPS tracking and had been able to show extensive coverage of the District. He acknowledged that an area of Chigwell had been missed and apologised for that omission. He also advised that letters had been sent to those who had suggested land for inclusion in the Issues and Options document and to the statutory bodies. He undertook to place an item in the Council's Bulletin explaining the consultation exercise in more detail.
(c) Housing Register
Councillor Wixley drew attention to the Housing Portfolio Holder's written report regarding steps to reduce the size of the Housing Register. He asked the Portfolio Holder if such reduction had been taken into account in relation to the preparation of the Local Plan and the number of houses to be built.
Councillor Stallan, Housing Portfolio Holder, stated that he would liaise with the Planning Portfolio Holder on this matter and that they would publish a reply in the Council Bulletin.
(d) Precedence of the Local Plan over Development Briefs and Consultancy Exercises
Councillor Watson drew attention to the advice of Counsel that the Local Plan would take precedence over the Design and Development Brief for the St John's Road Area, Epping. She asked whether the same considerations would apply in relation to the results of the consultation exercise proposed for North Weald Airfield.
Councillor Grigg, Asset Management and Economic Development Portfolio Holder drew attention to the report to be considered later in the meeting regarding the Development and Design Brief for the St John's Road Area, Epping and in particular, the advice of Counsel regarding the inclusion of wording within the Brief regarding the status of the Local Plan. She continued that the outcome of the proposed consultancy exercise in relation to North Weald Airfield would also play a material part in the Council's ongoing Local Plan process. She advised that in order to ensure that the consultancy exercise dovetailed with the Local Plan process it would be necessary for package 1 of the proposals as described in the report to be considered later in the meeting to be undertaken, reported and considered by the Council by April next year.
(e) Tenancy Deposit Protection
Councillor Gadsby advised that Tenancy Deposit Protection (TDP) Schemes ensured that deposits paid by private tenants were kept safe and would be returned to the tenant at the end of their tenancy if they met the terms of the tenancy agreement and did not damage the property. She continued that landlords were under a statutory obligation to protect their tenants' deposits using a TDP Scheme if they had let a property on an assured short?hold tenancy which started on or after 6 April 2007. Councillor Gadsby stated that experience from a recent Housing Appeals and Review Panel meeting suggested that not all landlords were aware of their responsibilities to place deposits into a protection scheme. She asked the Housing Portfolio Holder if he agreed that there appeared to be a lack of Central Government publicity about TDP schemes and if so whether he would consider issuing some publicity locally.
Councillor Stallan advised that he had also been present at the recent Housing Appeals and Review Panel meeting and had been surprised about comments made at that meeting in relation to tenancy deposit protection. He said he would establish from Housing Officers what checks were made on private landlords whose details were provided to prospective tenants and would provide further details in the Council Bulletin. He continued that if he established the need for further steps to be taken locally he would suggest that consideration be given to the matter by the Housing Scrutiny Panel.
(f) Local Plan Consultation – Community Choice – Issues and Options
Following on from her earlier question, Councillor Wagland asked how many Chigwell residents had received a leaflet regarding the consultation exercise. She pointed out that many residents of Chigwell did not have access to the other methods of communication outlined by the Portfolio Holder and suggested that if comparatively few residents had been notified there could be questions raised about the soundness of the Local Plan.
Councillor Bassett, Planning Portfolio Holder replied that he would be happy to extract the relevant information from the schedules listing the methods of communication and that he would place those extracts in the Council Bulletin.
(g) Changes/Relaxation of Certain Planning Rules
Councillor Wixley advised that certain London Borough Councils were challenging the Government's changes/relaxation of certain planning rules. He said that those councils had been described as rebels and he asked the Planning Portfolio Holder if this Council would consider becoming a rebel.
Councillor Bassett, Planning Portfolio Holder, said that he had concerns about the Government proposals but was currently awaiting clarification of the position of the London Borough Councils. He said that when he received clarification he would consider this Council's position.