Agenda item

Minerals and Waste Development Plan - Consultation (Minute 6)

Councillor Mrs CA Hunt referred to the fact that there was no mention in the Minutes of Site 26, the proposals for which were not in tune with the Cambridge East Area Action Plan. 

Cambridge Citizens’ Advice Bureaux Grant  (Minute 7)

Councillor Hockney thanked the Leader for attending the Community, Arts and Sports Advisory Group and having constructive input.

Melbourn: High Street – Sale of SCDC Car Park to Melbourn Parish Council (Minute 9)

Councillor Wherrell declared an interest as a parish councillor, but there was no discussion.

IEG Statement  (Minute 15)

Councillor Hockney drew attention to further questions which had been asked but were not minuted.

Travellers’ Issues – Update on Spending  (Minute 16)

Councillor Hockney commented that there had been much discussion on this item, which had not been recorded.

It was noted that the accuracy of the minutes was a matter for Cabinet, not Council.

Quarterly Monitoring Report and Prudential Indicators (to 31 March 2006)

(Minute 18)

Councillor Mrs Hatton thanked Cabinet for discussing the suggestion that the £327,000 underspend should be used to support the concessionary fares scheme and urged Cabinet to adopt a county-wide scheme from that source as it should be sufficient until the proposed national scheme came into being.  The Chairman reported that an emergency motion had been requested but had been rejected as it was not yet possible to estimate the cost.  The problem, which was particularly acute for South Cambridgeshire, had not been forgotten.

The Planning and Economic Development Portfolio Holder reported that more detailed figures from the County Council now indicated that an additional £533,000 would be required for a fully free scheme, but that he was anxious to support a county-wide scheme when this was possible.

Councillor Mrs GJ Smith expressed concern at the prospect of this Council, as a capped authority, putting more money into the scheme when this would help support other authorities.  She understood the issue to be one of distribution of Government funds and something which should be dealt with throughout the county.  Councillor Mrs Heazell added her particular concern: the continued viability of park and ride as people were finding it cheaper to drive into Cambridge.

The Leader referred to uncertainties about the distribution of funding and advised his intention to submit Freedom of Information requests for evidence of Government rural proofing for South Cambridgeshire and for the distribution of funding for concessionary fares schemes

During extensive discussion Members outlined examples of the anomalies of the current scheme and all agreed that the scheme was highly unsatisfactory.  However, many Members advised caution about committing an underspend from the previous year so early in the financial year and about trying to amend the scheme unilaterally without commitments from other authorities. 

The Planning and Economic Development Portfolio Holder had given press interviews on the subject and a County Council leaflet setting out the details of the current scheme was available.

Members were offered opportunities to add their names to the petition to be presented to the Government on 2 May by Andrew Lansley MP.

Grounds Maintenance Reorganisation  (Minute 23)

Councillor Hockney again raised the question he had asked the Housing Portfolio Holder earlier at Minute 2.  Councillor Mrs Heazell stated that she could not give a full answer today as three interviews were being conducted that afternoon.  There had been delay through illness, but the staff knew this.  She encouraged Councillor Hockney to encourage dissatisfied staff to talk to their manager or to her. 

The Chairman, pointing out that the Minutes under discussion related to grounds maintenance, not sheltered housing schemes, asked Members to bring any complaints to the appropriate Director or the Portfolio Holder with specific information, otherwise no answers could be given.

Councillor Scarr suggested that Council was not the best forum in which to raise individual issues and asked the Chairman of Council, Chairman of the Constitution Working Party and the Chief Executive to look at suitable mechanisms.  Councillor Mrs Heazell echoed these views and stated that input when the sheltered housing review had been taking place would have been very welcome; asking Members to comment at the appropriate time in future.