Agenda item

Please note that Councillors are required to give notice of any such questions in writing to the officer named on the first page of this agenda (acting on behalf of the Corporate Director) not later than 5pm on Tuesday 5 May 2015. Questions may be asked without notice if the Chairman decides that the matter is urgent.

Details of any questions received will be circulated to Councillors prior to the meeting and made available at the meeting and on the Council’s website.

The Chairman reported receipt of questions from Councillors Terry Chivers, Jeff Osborn, Helen Osborn, Chris Caswill and Ernie Clark details of which were circulated in Agenda Supplement No. 1 together with responses where available from the relevant Cabinet member. Details of questions and written responses provided are attached as Appendix ? Verbal responses were also provided as indicated.

Questioners were permitted to each ask one relevant supplementary question per question submitted and where they did so, the relevant Cabinet member responded.

Question 4 – Councillor Chivers – Supplementary question – would provision  be made for payments to be made by direct debit or standing orders?

Councillor Tonge explained that whilst this would not be available for the first payment, the Council was looking at direct debits for subsequent payments. No decision had yet been made, assessing all factors to ensure the process would be cost effective.

Councillor Helen Osborn – Questions 5-8 – Supplementary question – asked why the extra costs were not accounted for such as asbestos and other difficulties encountered and why were the contractors not there rather giving up half way through.

Councillor Thomson explained that the contractors had not given up half way through. The Council wanted to make changes to the contract and the quote from the contractor in place was too high in our opinion and alternative arrangements were made with another contractor.

Question 10 Councillor Chris Caswill – Supplementary question – whether Councillor Sturgis had read all the consultation responses received to the Draft Chippenham Site Allocation Plan

Councillor Toby Sturgis explained that he had not yet read all responses which were currently being itemised. In his opinion a large proportion of the responses suggesting the Plan was unsound, was an orchestrated response.

Question 13 – Councillor Caswill - Supplementary question – asked when will Councillor Sturgis be able to provide written responses to these questions.

Councillor Sturgis explained that these were verbal responses.

Question 14 – Councillor Caswill – Supplementary question – original timetable provided for revised plans to come before this Council meeting so there is therefore a need for a revised timetable and when will this be made public.

Councillor Sturgis explained that the revised timetable could not be made public until such time as we consider the responses.

.

Question 17 – would you agree that this particular part of the Care Act was an example of a government delegating responsibility to local authorities without adequate evidence of the impact of such delegation.

Councillor Humphries explained that prior to the pre-election campaign, there was a lot of lobbying with the government who was in the process of reviewing financial support to councils and we await the outcome of this.

Question 18 – wouldn’t you accept that reports from the CQC stating that on occasions medicines not provided, residents on occasions not given adequate care plans.

Councillor Humphries explained that every care plan produced by Mears has been reviewed, now have a fantastic system in place for dealing with medicines and it was working with pharmacies on a new regime which will be cascaded out to others who needs further support.

Question 21 – Councillor Caswill – Supplementary question - asked whether given the response if Councillor Whitehead was not in favour of councils providing litter bins.

Councillor Whitehead explained that the Council year after year provides more bins and year after year, there is more litter. He provided pictorial evidence which highlighted that negating a little problem was down to education rather than providing additional litter bins.

Question 22 – Councillor Caswill – Supplementary question – asked if Councillor Whitehead would undertake to circulate details to town and parish councils.

Councillor Whitehead confirmed that as soon as the documentation was ready it would be so circulated.

Question 25 – Councillor Caswill – Supplementary question – asked when did Councillor Scott anticipate that the names of the preferred bidders will be available in the public domain.

Councillor Scott explained that this was not a process owned by the Council but a CCG process in which case, Councillor Caswill might like to contact the CCG.

Question 28 – Councillor Ernie Clark – Supplementary question – asked was it the intention of the Council that town and parish councils would be invited to fund minor repairs to play areas rather than simply remove broken equipment and if so, when would this approach commence.

Councillor Jonathon Seed explained that it was adopted this financial year. If any of the play areas need to be repaired with no funds available to do so,  then the relevant town or parish council would be contacted with a cost estimate and asked for its decision.