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 7 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 30 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 at his discretion.
Minutes:
(a) District Sixth Forms
Councillor Murray asked the Leader whether he thought sixth forms in all the secondary schools across the District by September 2015 were;
(a) excellent news for parents, pupils and schools;
(b) that acknowledgment was due to the Head Teachers, Governors, Local MP Eleanor Laing and Essex County Councillor V Metcalfe, who all helped in the hard work to achieve this; and
(c) that a long over due apology was required for the removal of sixth forms in District, 25 years ago by a Conservative Essex County Council (ECC) and Government administration.
Councillor Whitbread acknowledged the hard work that had been out in by the Local MP, Eleanor Laing and ECC, V Metcalfe with the teachers and parents, for returning sixth forms to each Secondary school in the District. Although he would not apologise for previous Governments decisions, as all decisions could be looked back on with hindsight and he felt that the Conservative Governments had made the most progress in education.
(b) St John’s Site, Epping
Cllr J H Whitehouse asked Asset Management and Economic Development Portfolio Holder, Councillor Grigg whether there would be any opportunity for residents to see the development proposals and make comments before planning application were submitted on the St John’s Site, Epping.
Councillor Grigg advised that the proposal would be put forward by the developer not the Council, so in order for consultation to happen between the residents and the developer an agreement would have to be made beforehand. She advised that even though she believed they would consult, she could not guarantee it, however she would try to ensure this happened.
(c) Oakwood Hill
Councillor C C Pond congratulated Cllr Stallan on setting up and progressing the Oakwood Hill Environment Task Force that met on 16 July 2014 .However he felt it was a shame that the Essex Highways representatives had not attended. Councillor Pond also wanted assurances that with the housing depot on the St John’s site impending move to Oakwood Hill, the Housing Portfolio Holder would give the three houses in Marlescroft Way, sympathetic consideration to screening for the residents, for whom the intensification of the site would be of great nuisance.
Councillor Stallan thanked Councillor CC Pond for his comments, alongside the Ward Councillors Murray and Roberts and resident Nicky Fuller who attended that meeting. He felt that everyone who attended were disappointed that Essex Highways representatives had not turned up and ECC had now been advised of the next meeting on 10 September 2014. Regarding the relocation of the Housing Depot, he advised that the application was being considered by District Development Control Committee and Members of that committee could consider those concerns.
(d) Waltham Abbey - Flooding
Councillor Lea advised that with the recent flooding in Waltham Abbey, two of the sewage drains had overflowed. She asked who was responsible because with recently approved Council housing building in Waltham Abbey it was of great concern.
The Housing Portfolio advised the tenders were to be agreed in August 2014 for the Councils House building programme and Councillor Lea was welcome to attend and raise any concerns with the developers. The Portfolio Holder for Environment added that the Councils drainage officers worked very closely with organisation responsible for the sewage, although the sewers were not the responsibly of the Council.
(e) CAB
Councillor Angold-Stephens asked the Leisure and Community Services Portfolio Holder about how the future accommodation for the CAB in Loughton and Epping was progressing.
Councillor Kane advise that she had attended a recent meeting to find out more about the CAB and she was currently pursuing a future meeting with the manager to be updated. Any information that came from that meeting would be emailed onto Councillor Angold-Stephens and placed in the Members Bulletin.
(f) Business Rates
Councillor J M Whitehouse enquired about the new powers the Council had obtained from the Government to vary business rates for local businesses and what progress had been made.
Councillor Stavrou advised that the Cabinet would be looking at this in depth in the budget process and she would keep Councillor J M Whitehouse informed.
(g) 12 Newmans Lane
Councillor Mann asked the Housing Portfolio Holder about 14 Newmans Lane and the subsidence and boarding up of the property.
Councillor Stallan advised that Cabinet had considered how the case would be dealt with previously although he could not recall the decision; he believed that the owner of 12 Newmans Lane was currently in talks to sell the property to the developer.
Councillor Mann advised that the developer had pulled out.
Councillor Stallan advised that he would go back to his officers to see how this would effect the Cabinets decision and advise Councillor Mann in writing.
(h) Chigwell Parish Council
Councillor Mohindra asked the Governance and Management Development Portfolio Holder in the absence of the Planning Policy Portfolio Holder about Chigwell Parish Council being kept updated about the Local Plan and in particular the Green Belt review.
Councillor Philip advised that he was very keen for all Parishes to be kept inform with regards to the Local Plan and he would be happy to guarantee the forward planning officers meet with Chigwell Parish Council.
(i) Winston Churchill
Councillor Girling asked the Leader of the Council about whether he thought it was proper for the Council as freeholder of the Winston Churchill Public House, to permit it to be demolished whilst the Council followed its own processes on considering the building under the Asset of Community Value appeal, Localism Act 2011.
Councillor Whitbread advised that the developer had gone through all the necessary requirements and a number of dates had been suggested for the process before the demolishment date. He felt the Council had done all they could to facilitate the appeal.
(j) Neighbourhood Action Plan
Cllr Surtees asked whether all Parish and Town Councils would be considered equally with regards to the Local Plan, as three local Councils had submitted their Neighbourhood Plan separately.
Councillor Philip advised that all Parish and Town Councils would be treated the same although questions may differ because of the process they had chosen to take.