Agenda item

In accordance with Council procedure rule 8, to receive reports from Cabinet Members to be moved en bloc.  Members of the Council may ask up to four questions of Cabinet Members on their reports and portfolio areas.

 

The order of putting questions shall commence with a Member from the largest opposition group, proceeding in descending order to the smallest opposition group, then non aligned members, followed by a Member from the ruling group. This order shall repeat until the time for questions has elapsed or there are no more questions to be put. 

 

The period of time for putting questions and receiving responses shall not exceed 60 minutes for all Cabinet Members and the Leader

 

Climate Change and Biodiversity – Councillor M de Whalley

Culture and Events – Councillor S Lintern

Planning and Licensing – Councillor J Moriarty

Environment and Coastal - Councillor S Squire

Finance – Councillor C Morley

People and Communities – Councillor J Rust

Deputy Leader and Business – Cllr S Ring

Leader - Councillor A Beales

 

Minutes:

Click here to view the recording of this item on You Tube.

 

Councillor Beales moved the Cabinet Members Reports.

 

Councillor Kunes asked about the Electric Vehicle Charging points at the Depot and asked if proper charging points would be installed.  Councillor de Whalley confirmed that dedicated charging points for the Council’s Electric Vehicle fleet were to be installed, funded by grants, to improve efficiency and data collection, with ongoing upgrades to support future fleet requirements.

 

Councillor Heneghan stated that the River Ouse area was underutilised and regeneration in this area was overdue.  She asked for timescales on the Regeneration plans for this area and how it would be funded.  Councillor Ring referred to the recent Masterplan Stakeholder Meeting where good feedback had been provided to the consultants.  Councillor Ring explained that work had been commissioned for the Quay dryside area as part of the Town Deal Board funding and work was due to start in the New Year.  Improvements to the Custom House would be subject to Planning Permission and it was hoped that the process would commence in April 2026.  With regard to the Devils Alley and King Staithe Square area, Council was informed that this was in the early design phase and would be subject to public consultation.

 

Councillor Kemp asked for an update on the Ferry and Councillor de Whalley explained that new ferry infrastructure plans were nearing completion and would be shared with stakeholders in due course.

 

Councillor Squire responded to a question from Councillor Parish regarding Water Quality, explaining the complexity of pollution sources, ongoing investigations, and the need for year round testing and real time date.  Councillor Squire agreed to keep Council updated on progress.

 

Councillor Dark referred to the Notice of Motion relating to climate change, which had been withdrawn earlier in the meeting and stated that if this was approved it would undermine the long standing work of Councillor and Officers committed to improving the environment.  Councillor Beales reaffirmed the Council’s commitment to its climate emergency declaration and carbon action plans, assuring that there were no plans to reverse these policies and highlighting ongoing support for climate and biodiversity initiatives.

 

In response to a question from Councillor Sayers, Councillor Squire outlined the risks of lithium battery fires in waste streams due to incorrect disposal, the need for public awareness, and the forthcoming allocation of extender producer responsibility funding to enhance recycling services.

 

Councillor Spikings referred to the recent changes to Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) funding Governance arrangements.  She requested that the one year review of the new scheme be brought forward to take place after the first funding round.  Councillor Moriarty explained the recent changes to the CIL funding, the review process, and efforts to make the application process easier for parishes.

 

In response to a question from Councillor Everett, Councillor de Whalley confirmed that the transition to LED street lighting was ongoing, with improvements in energy efficiency and maintenance.  He asked Councillor Everett to provide him with detail of specific units which had issues.  Councillor de Whalley also invited feedback from Councillor Everett on how the website could be improved.

 

Councillor Blunt thanked Councillor Beales for his welcome to himself as new Leader of the Conservative Group and Councillor Sandell as Deputy Group Leader.  Councillor Blunt asked about the working relationship between the Borough Council and Norfolk County Council as significant work was required in the lead up to Local Government Reorganisation and Devolution.  Councillor Beales provided an overview of the different approaches taken by the Borough and the County and stated that there were good officer working relationships which were vital in the lead up to Local Government Reorganisation.  Councillor Beales highlighted the cultural issues and that relationships would be important for whatever came next.  Councillor Beales highlighted the huge amount of work required in the lead up to Local Government Reorganisation and the potential for increased Member and Officer resources.

 

In response to a question from Councillor Kemp, Councillor Beales stated that the permit and planning permission had now been granted for the Wisbech Incinerator.

 

Councillor Ratcliffe referred to work planned on the Hunstanton Sea Defences, the significant rainfall recently and asked for detail of properties in the Borough that were at risk of flooding.  Councillor Squire explained that the Borough was a vulnerable area and approximately 25 homes were flooded each year, but over 25% of properties in West Norfolk were at risk of flooding.

 

Councillor Sandell referred to Councillor Rust’s Council report and the number of unauthorised encampments in the area.  Councillor Rust explained that the Borough was listed on ‘van life’ website encouraging people to the area.

 

In response to a question from Councillor Ryves, Councillor Ring provided detail of the Guildhall CIO and the work that would be carried out to look at funding opportunities to bridge the funding gap. 

 

In response to a question from Councillor Blunt, Councillor Beales acknowledged the recent Scrutiny Governance Review which had been considered by the Joint Panel, and the Joint Panel preference to maintain the status quo in terms of Governance arrangements, and focus on strengthening training, work programming and the relationship with the Executive.  Councillor Beales agreed that the Constitution Informal Working Group would be the correct forum to consider issues.

 

In response to a question from Councillor Collop, Councillor Ring provided detail of the Football Foundation Study which had concluded that the area was six 3G pitches short of meeting need and potential funding opportunities were now being looked at.

 

In response to a question from Councillor Sayers, Councillor Squire provided detail of the Extended Producer Responsibility and the grant funding which would be available, noting that this did not over costs.  Joint initiatives were being considered by the Norfolk Waste Partnership.

 

Councillor Long referred to Councillor Morley’s Report and the source of information relating to the Internal Drainage Board funding.  Councillor Morely explained that information had been made available from the Association of Drainage Board Authorities and encouraged those Members that sat as Council representatives to feedback any information available relating to finances and funding to assist in preparation of the Council’s Budget setting process.

 

Councillor Devulapalli referred to the Asset Management review and asked if consideration could be given to alternative uses to sites rather than disposal, for example creating green spaces.  Councillor Ring explained that all assets that were to be sold would be available for all to purchase.  He explained that ideas for repurposing would be considered if appropriate, but it was critical that the historical portfolio underwent review.

Supporting documents: