Agenda and minutes

To receive any apologies for absence.

Apologies for absence were submitted from Sam Akhtar, Parry Batth, Graham Howe, Chris Johnson and Jackie Rance.

Pauline Helliar-Symons attended the meeting on Microsoft Teams.

To confirm the Minutes of the Meeting held on 20 October 2022.

The Minutes of the meeting of the Council held on 20 October 2022 were confirmed as a correct record and signed by the Mayor.

To receive any declarations of interest.

Declarations of interest were submitted as follows:

Prue Bray submitted a Personal Interest in Item 81 – Statement from Council Owned Companies - as a Non-Executive Director of Berry Brook Homes and WBC Holdings Ltd.

Stephen Conway submitted a Personal Interest in Item 81 – Statement from Council Owned Companies - as a Non-Executive Director of Loddon Homes and WBC Holdings Ltd.

David Hare submitted a Personal Interest in Item 81 – Statement from Council Owned Companies - as a Non-Executive Director of Optalis Ltd.

Clive Jones submitted a Personal Interest in Item 81 – Statement from Council Owned Companies - as a Non-Executive Director of Loddon Homes and WBC Holdings Ltd.

Gregor Murray submitted a Personal Interest in Item 82 – Motions – as a local resident impacted by Motion 495.

To receive any announcements by the Mayor.

The Mayor informed Members of the recent death of Sam Rahmouni, former Borough and Woodley Town Councillor. Stephen Conway spoke in tribute to former Councillor Rahmouni.

The Mayor gave details of the most recent recipients of the Mayor’s Award, viz:

·           Beverley Knight – a key part of the Finchampstead village community. Beverley was an event organiser and fundraiser for local schools and good causes.

·           Dexter Rose – aged only 10, Dexter was involved in fundraising for the Royal Berks Hospital and helped to organise foodbank collections.

·           Link Visiting – the service utilised 400 volunteers to combat loneliness amongst vulnerable and older residents. The service was already making preparations for a busy Christmas period.

Finally, the Mayor thanked all those who had made contributions to the reverse advent calendar.

To answer any public questions

A period of 30 minutes will be allowed for members of the public to ask questions submitted under notice.

The Council welcomes questions from members of the public about the work of the Council

Subject to meeting certain timescales, questions can relate to general issues concerned with the work of the Council or an item which is on the Agenda for this meeting.  For full details of the procedure for submitting questions please contact the Democratic Services Section on the numbers given below or go to www.wokingham.gov.uk/publicquestions

In accordance with the agreed procedure the Mayor invited members of the public to submit questions to the appropriate Members.

Question:

The Football Facility plan is founded on the premise that it needs to be within the Wokingham Borough area. It is stated that teams have to travel outside this area to play.

Wokingham Borough only came about by dissolution of Berkshire County Council and its borders are arbitrary and run through urban and suburban areas.

Residents of Earley and Wokingham Borough will typically travel outside the nominal boundary for work, shopping, leisure, health care and education on a daily basis. Many of these journeys are within walking distance.

In fact, Maiden Erlegh School has two sites in Earley and even these are in separate Boroughs.

The technical appraisal did not initially identify Maiden Erlegh as the most suitable location. In fact, that was Laurel Park recreation ground, now rejected for same reasons which make Maiden Erlegh School an inappropriate site.

So why did the site appraisal deliberately disregard the nearby Sol Joel Playing Fields, which were bequeathed to the Town specifically for sport and leisure use?

The Football Facility plan is founded on the premise that it needs to be within the Wokingham Borough area. It is stated that teams have to travel outside this area to play.

Wokingham Borough only came about by dissolution of Berkshire County Council and its borders are arbitrary and run through urban and suburban areas.

Residents of Earley and Wokingham Borough will typically travel outside the nominal boundary for work, shopping, leisure, health care and education on a daily basis. Many of these journeys are within walking distance. In fact, Maiden Erlegh School has two sites in Earley and even these are in separate Boroughs.

The technical appraisal did not initially identify Maiden Erlegh as the most suitable location. In fact, that was Laurel Park recreation ground, now rejected for the same reasons which make Maiden Erlegh School an inappropriate site. So why did the site appraisal deliberately disregard the nearby Sol Joel Playing Fields, which were bequeathed to the Town specifically for sport and leisure use?

Answer

Sol Joel Park was bequeathed to a trust, the trustees now being Reading Borough Council. Earley Town Council have a 50-year lease from Reading, which started in 2001, and can only operate the park within the terms of their lease. Any building work must be approved by the lessor and must be within the rules of the trust.

Supplementary Question

Why did the consultation recommend a school site that already has sufficient all weather playing areas? Approximately 50% of the school’s available playing areas are already covered in all-weather playing surfaces. The proposed pitch would be unavailable for community use during school hours. The residential setting would almost certainly require mitigation on the hours of use, further restricting community access and making the cost involved unviable. Surely, the money could be better spent on a site which allows unrestricted community use and actually augments existing facilities at Maiden Erlegh?

Supplementary Answer

I cannot tell you why Maiden Erlegh was chosen as it was chosen before we took over control of the Council.

Question:

We are all aware that Wokingham Borough Council is in a dire financial situation, and is seeking to reduce costs wherever possible. The proposed 3G pitch at Maiden Erlegh School in Earley was priced at £800,000 before recent inflation - to be paid for by the Football Association and the council. Bearing in mind building projects can run seriously over budget, and that the school has perfectly adequate sports facilities for all the pupils on roll both on site and at the nearby Sol Joel playing fields, is it wise to press ahead with the plan - and who will be liable for any shortfall if there are unexpected extra costs?

We are all aware that Wokingham Borough Council is in a dire financial situation, and is seeking to reduce costs wherever possible. The proposed 3G pitch at Maiden Erlegh School in Earley was priced at £800,000 before recent inflation - to be paid for by the Football Association and the Council. Bearing in mind building projects can run seriously over budget, and that the school has perfectly adequate sports facilities for all the pupils on roll both on site and at the nearby Sol Joel playing fields, is it wise to press ahead with the plan - and who will be liable for any shortfall if there are unexpected extra costs?

Answer

The school have advised the Council that the facilities provided for students are at capacity. The existing sand-dressed Astro pitch is considered to not be adequate to accommodate the present volume of students, and if the pitch is unsafe due to freezing in colder conditions, the PE curriculum is affected. The grass fields are also not suitable for PE activities according to the Head of the school and a 3G pitch would have benefits for both the school and local partner football clubs.

The Council did make capital provision for the project and would work in partnership with the Football Foundation to arrive at a point where the Council's contribution and the Foundation’s contribution fully cover the build and unexpected costs.

Whilst officers have been in discussion with the Football Foundation in relation to provision of more community football facilities in the local area, no application has been made as full planning permission would first be required. In turn, a planning application will be contingent upon the outcome of the review that we are in the process of conducting. The review will closely examine the financial viability of the project in the worsening economic circumstances of the Council.

Supplementary Question

Since putting the question, I have read the Council’s financial plan from last February, when the preferred location of the pitch was Laurel Park. In that plan, the Council doubled its potential contribution to £600k. That was before this year’s inflation. Laurel Park would not have needed expensive levelling of the playing field, retaining walls, a complicated drainage tank, noise abatement or so many surveys. So, I can only presume that the figure of £300k from the Council for Maiden Erlegh, as quoted at the consultation evening in September, is wildly optimistic.

Councillor Clive Jones recently said that the cost of the 3G pitch was going up and up and up. Then Councillor Ian Shenton said that the weekly refuse collections were costing too much money to continue. He asked “where are we going to find the money?” I would suggest that you start with the pot for the unnecessary 3G pitch.

So, how much is the Council’s current estimate for the pitch and will it be viewed as the Council squandering money at a time when many people are so desperate that they are turning to  ...  view the full minutes text for item 79.2

Question:

Thank you for your previous commitment to closely scrutinise the Business Case for the plastic pitch given the Council’s financial situation. 

The Council can’t afford this proposal to become a burden on the public purse with on-going maintenance, administration and £25,000 per annum sinking fund commitment given the threats elsewhere to services. 

I don’t believe you responded to my question on potential Noise Reduction fences previously; but in response to other ‘Noise’ questions, did suggest that Service Level Agreements would apply to people using pitches.

I am familiar with SLA in commercial scenarios where an under-performing supplier is penalised. Can you please elaborate on how SLA’s would work in the Maiden Erlegh setting, giving examples where the Council has applied penalties (and received payment) and at the same time retained their Sports customers over the last 10 years, to demonstrate how this is a successful strategy, as I’m not convinced? 

Thank you for your previous commitment to closely scrutinise the Business Case for the plastic pitch given the Council’s financial situation. 

The Council can’t afford this proposal to become a burden on the public purse with ongoing maintenance, administration and £25,000 per annum sinking fund commitment, given the threats elsewhere to services. 

I don’t believe you responded to my question on potential Noise Reduction fences previously; but in response to other ‘Noise’ questions, did suggest that Service Level Agreements would apply to people using pitches.

I am familiar with SLA in commercial scenarios where an under-performing supplier is penalised. Can you please elaborate on how SLA’s would work in the Maiden Erlegh setting, giving examples where the Council has applied penalties (and received payment) and at the same time retained their Sports customers over the last 10 years, to demonstrate how this is a successful strategy, as I’m not convinced? 

Answer

The Service Level Agreement provides a framework on how the partners will work together to promote and develop football and sport within the community. The SLA also outlines the commitment that key partners must make to support the project from a hiring perspective, such as paying for usage and committing to a Programme of Use. The agreement covers a host of elements that include the operational and management side of the site, the noise management plan, hirer behaviour, code of conduct, school usage, club usage and the no smoking and No Dogs policy.

The Council have not had to deal with any serious issues or introduce penalties at other managed 3G sites due to the guidelines the SLAs set out. Clubs are aware of the scarcity of floodlit 3G facilities and work with their members to ensure that they do not jeopardise their bookings.

Supplementary Question

Do you think that this is a realistic position, that you will not get any complaints at all relating to this pitch and others throughout the Borough?

Supplementary Answer

I can only reiterate that the Council has not had to deal with any situations like that, so far, and has not had to impose penalties. We can’t predict the future.

Question:

In order to create a level base for the proposed 3G pitch at Maiden Erlegh School, an area shown as over 8,500 square metres, it may be necessary to transport and spread over 6,000 cubic metres of foundation material on the School field before the artificial pitch can be laid.

Taking into account the many Maiden Erlegh residents’ strongly voiced concerns to Council members about issues of public safety, environmental damage and health matters relating to this proposal, does the Council believe that such a costly and intrusive project can be justified?

In order to create a level base for the proposed 3G pitch at Maiden Erlegh School, an area shown as over 8,500 square metres, it may be necessary to transport and spread over 6,000 cubic metres of foundation material on the School field before the artificial pitch can be laid.

Taking into account the many Maiden Erlegh residents’ strongly voiced concerns to Council Members about issues of public safety, environmental damage and health matters relating to this proposal, does the Council believe that such a costly and intrusive project can be justified?

Answer

We would retain the base of the existing Astro pitch to minimise the amount of base material needing to be brought in. That material would be checked for adequacy and re-laid in accordance with the new 3G specification.  The project would then bring into the site base material for the remaining 60% of the area of the new 3G pitch, to the same level as the existing Astro pitch.

We recognise that this would potentially be disruptive, but this aspect of the work would take a maximum of two weeks to be completed, which would limit both the environmental and safety concerns.  That this would be part of the work needed to provide a new 3G pitch is one of the aspects being taken into consideration as we review the viability of the project, alongside the financial viability and a detailed analysis of the consultation responses.

Question:

Will Wokingham Council support the Climate and Ecology Bill - A recent report from the Natural History Museum with RSPB rated England as the 7th most nature depleted country in the world.  UK woodland cover is just 13% of land area compared to a European average of 38%. Our bare uplands contribute to lowland flooding. Government plans to plant woodland at a rate that will take 10 years to increase cover from 13% to 14%. 

The new Environment Act is a post-Brexit bill designed to tidy up loose ends, looking at selected issues, but does not tackle the core problems at the heart of the ecological crisis and has nothing whatsoever to do with climate change.

 Climate and nature are inextricably connected, and in the CE Bill, they are addressed together via a joined up, whole of government approach.

The Bill, drafted by scientists, legal experts, ecological economists, requires the UK to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, to actively restore biodiverse habitats, rather than merely protect them and to stop damaging our natural world.

The Bill now has support of MPs across 8 political parties and of 203 Councils, including in Oxford, Oxfordshire, and Henley.  Will Wokingham Borough Council become the 204th?

Will Wokingham Council support the Climate and Ecology Bill?

A recent report from the Natural History Museum with RSPB rated England as the 7th most nature depleted country in the world. UK woodland cover is just 13% of land area compared to a European average of 38%. Our bare uplands contribute to lowland flooding. Government plans to plant woodland at a rate that will take 10 years to increase cover from 13% to 14%. 

The new Environment Act is a post-Brexit Bill designed to tidy up loose ends, looking at selected issues, but does not tackle the core problems at the heart of the ecological crisis and has nothing whatsoever to do with climate change.

Climate and nature are inextricably connected, and in the CE Bill they are addressed together via a joined up, whole of government approach. The Bill, drafted by scientists, legal experts, ecological economists, requires the UK to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, to actively restore biodiverse habitats, rather than merely protect them and to stop damaging our natural world.

The Bill now has support of MPs across 8 political parties and of 203 Councils, including in Oxford, Oxfordshire and Henley. Will Wokingham Borough Council become the 204th?

Answer

The UK has failed to meet 17 of the 20 Aichi biodiversity targets and has gone backwards on six of them. We are the most nature-depleted G7 country which is truly shocking.

I am aware that this question has previously been raised at a Council meeting in September 2021. The response had been, that even though the Council did recognise the intrinsic link between climate change and ecology, and the relevance of the Bill, the Bill itself would have not provided the Council with the statutory powers and responsibilities we needed to address the climate and ecological emergency. In addition to this, it was felt at the time that the Council had multiple plans already in place to address the climate and ecological emergency - including the Climate Change Action Plan, and the Biodiversity Action Plan - and would have imminently been subject to additional legislation on this, including the Environment Bill. In consideration of this, it was decided that Wokingham Borough Council would have not committed its support to the Bill.

As things stand, there is a new administration in front of you. The Biodiversity Action Plan has, sadly, been collecting dust for some time, with many actions not happening. My colleague, Ian Shenton, is working on rectifying this, making action on improving nature a priority.

We still believe that more statutory powers need to be given to Local Authorities to address the climate and ecological emergencies. However, the Bill aims to set binding targets for Central Government. If approved, this would require additional powers, as well as funding, devolved to Local Authorities, to ensure the delivery of those targets. Supporting the introduction of legally binding targets sends a clear message that Wokingham Borough Council takes the climate and ecological emergency seriously. Therefore, I agree to commit  ...  view the full minutes text for item 79.5

Question:

Having declared a climate emergency and announced a black hole in the finances it is perplexing that every night for the past year the Council has floodlit the white elephant unopened can’t park, can’t ride facility at Coppid Beech. Indeed, the flashing electric charge points are switched on 24/7 but also can’t be used due to large blocks of concrete in front of them.  At such a prominent spot adjacent to the principal approach route to the town this sends out completely the wrong message and is both highly embarrassing and costly.

With no publicly announced plan to ever open the P&R and with the green gap destroyed the Council needs to consider repurposing the site.  A high-rise block of flats would make a significant contribution to the housing target imposed on the Borough and reduce the amount of virgin countryside that needs to be concreted over.  Unlike most of the new housing developments around the town there are road links directly onto the motorway network and direct bus links to the town and Bracknell.  As a brownfield site this clearly makes for a better development location than a greenfield location.

Does the Council have a view on this?

Having declared a climate emergency and announced a black hole in the finances it is perplexing that every night for the past year the Council has floodlit the white elephant unopened can’t park, can’t ride facility at Coppid Beech. Indeed, the flashing electric charge points are switched on 24/7 but also can’t be used due to large blocks of concrete in front of them. At such a prominent spot adjacent to the principal approach route to the town this sends out completely the wrong message and is both highly embarrassing and costly.

With no publicly announced plan to ever open the P&R and with the green gap destroyed the Council needs to consider repurposing the site. A high-rise block of flats would make a significant contribution to the housing target imposed on the Borough and reduce the amount of virgin countryside that needs to be concreted over. Unlike most of the new housing developments around the town there are road links directly onto the motorway network and direct bus links to the town and Bracknell. As a brownfield site this clearly makes for a better development location than a green-field location.

Does the Council have a view on this?

Answer

The Park and Ride site was allocated as part of the planning for all of the housing for the area and was paid for by a combination of the developers and the Berkshire Local Enterprise Partnership (LEP).  A business case was approved by the LEP, however, Covid has changed travel patterns, and has particularly impacted Park and Ride sites which have yet to show any signs of recovery in the short term.

We are looking at options for use of the site, including those wishing to use the charge points, or to park and share a journey, for instance. However, with bus use at park and ride sites as it currently stands, we will not be funding a bus at this time.  We continue to monitor Park and Ride usage in the area, as well as nationally, to determine how things are changing as we emerge from Covid-19.

The lights are ‘dimmed’ at the site and are activated during hours of darkness for both safety and security.  They are LED and are designed to meet the minimum illumination level required for the site to enable CCTV to operate, as well as being energy efficient.

Supplementary Question

They may well be dimmed at night but, compared to the pub car park next door, they are significantly brighter. As for security, there is nothing to destroy, just a load of tarmac. So, surely the Council should cut its losses now, with the financial black hole, and make better use of the site. For instance, the 3G pitch that everyone has been talking about tonight, or the housing that I suggested?

Supplementary Answer

Thank you for your suggestions. We will take them into account. As I said, watch this space.

Question:

During the recent consultation evenings at Maiden Erlegh School regarding the 3G pitch, it was explained to us that the ground level close to residential properties would be raised to create a level surface since the current ground slopes towards the properties. It has also been explained that acoustic fencing will be put in place in an attempt to reduce noise levels.

Can you please explain a) how high the ground will be raised by b) how high the fencing will be and c) how close it will be to residential properties?

During the recent consultation evenings at Maiden Erlegh School regarding the 3G pitch, it was explained to us that the ground level close to residential properties would be raised to create a level surface since the current ground slopes towards the properties. It has also been explained that acoustic fencing will be put in place in an attempt to reduce noise levels. Can you please explain a) how high the ground will be raised by b) how high the fencing will be and c) how close it will be to residential properties?

Answer

The ground would be raised to the same height as the existing Astro pitch, which is approximately 1.5 metres higher than it currently is at the lowest point. This would be confirmed in the design stage of the project.

The acoustic fencing height for the pitch would be 3 metres, in addition to which there would be a strong mesh fence of 4.5 metres with the purpose of ball retention as well as supporting the security of the pitch from unauthorised entry. Finally, the exact location would be confirmed if the project were to proceed to the detailed planning and design stage, but it would be approximately 8 metres to the rear boundary of the closest residential properties.

Supplementary Question

Thank you for your answer, which leads to the following observations:

1.     The Committee report of 12 October 2018, for the Emmbrook 3G pitch, states that it is 33m from residential garden boundaries compared with the much closer 8m stated for Maiden Erlegh.

2.     Sound propagation follows an inverse square law which means that the outdoor sound level in residential gardens, in Maiden Erlegh, will be a factor of 17 or 12 decibels higher than at Emmbrook.

3.     The Committee report for Emmbrook stated that the outdoor sound levels would only be one decibel below the World Health Organisation (WHO) sound limit. This means that at Maiden Erlegh it will be at least 11 decibels higher than the WHO limit.

How can the Council justify spending public money on a proposal that is at high risk of failure at the planning stage due to the impact on residential amenity (for example visual amenity) and outdoor noise levels which are much higher than the limits set by the WHO?

Supplementary Answer

Factors like that are being highlighted as a result of the consultation and are going to be looked at very closely. We are looking at every aspect – I can’t say any more than that. We are concerned and are considering every aspect that the consultation has raised, the responses and your own questions.

Question:

We are told the Football Foundation identified 524 football teams in the borough, but we have not seen this mysterious list. Apparently, footballers will be encouraged to walk or cycle to Maiden Erlegh school, but we have no idea how many live close enough for this to be realistic.  We are told the remainder will be within a 45-minute drive to Maiden Erlegh, which means they will be coming from far and wide.

When will you publish the full list of teams, detailing what facilities they have already, whether the same players are included in multiple teams, what ages they are, why their needs cannot be met more locally and how often they play?

We are told the Football Foundation identified 524 football teams in the Borough, but we have not seen this mysterious list. Apparently, footballers will be encouraged to walk or cycle to Maiden Erlegh school, but we have no idea how many live close enough for this to be realistic.  We are told the remainder will be within a 45-minute drive to Maiden Erlegh, which means they will be coming from far and wide. When will you publish the full list of teams, detailing what facilities they have already, whether the same players are included in multiple teams, what ages they are, why their needs cannot be met more locally and how often they play?

Answer

The Football Foundation prepared a Local Football Plan in 2019 and found that Wokingham Borough had a total of 524 teams at that time. This plan is readily available on the Football Foundation website by clicking “Find Your Local Plan” and searching for Wokingham. The 524 included 83 adult male teams, 14 adult female teams, 144 male youth teams, 50 female youth teams, 3 disability teams and 230 mini soccer teams. Some clubs already benefit from our investment in modern floodlit 3G pitches to train on midweek and to host games at weekends. However, many teams still train in environments such as noisy indoor halls, sand-dressed Astro pitches, school courts or expensive commercial sites.

Local to Maiden Erlegh, Laurel Park FC has 33 teams, 46% of their members being female. They train at the school and use the grass pitches at Laurel Park to play league fixtures on Saturdays. Whiteknights FC have 18 teams defined by age. They train in indoor halls, hockey Astro pitches, school courts and commercial sites. From September to April, our teams are likely to train once a week and play a fixture at weekends. Team players are mostly local, as I can attest from the number of emails I have received from parents of children in the teams. Teams visiting for fixtures will be traveling from further away.

Supplementary Question

How many 3G pitches will be required to keep the Football Foundation happy and how much land are you prepared to cover in rubber to placate them?

Supplementary Answer

We are carrying out a full analysis at the moment. Officers have been tasked to do this. This will itemise every single sport asset that we have, their position within the Borough and proximity to population centres. When that is done, we will know where there are shortfalls and where there aren’t.

To receive any petitions which Members or members of the public wish to present.

The following Members presented a petition in relation to the matter indicated.

The Mayor’s decision as to the action to be taken is set out against each petition.

The following petition containing in excess of 1,500 signatures, which is the threshold to trigger a debate at Council, was submitted at the Council meeting held on 20 October 2022:

‘From January 2023 Wokingham Borough Council will double most car parking charges. It will also start charging for parking on Sundays, Bank Holidays and in the evenings up to 10pm.

We call on the Council to drop these punitive increases for the following reasons:

-        Residents face significant cost increases in every part of their lives due to the Cost of Living crisis. It is wrong to raise charges at this time.

-        Retailers in our town centre are recovering from the effects of Covid. They do not need their trade damaged by punitive car parking charges.

-        It is in the interests of every resident that we have a vibrant and active town centre which draws people to visit. These charges will be a disincentive to visiting your local town and damaging to the local economy.’

The Council considered a petition which had been submitted to the meeting on 20 October 2022. The petition, which contained over 1,500 signatures stated:

“From January 2023 Wokingham Borough Council will double most car parking charges. It will also start charging for parking on Sundays, Bank Holidays and in the evenings up to 10pm.

We call on the Council to drop these punitive increases for the following reasons:

·           Residents face significant cost increases in every part of their lives due to the Cost of Living crisis. It is wrong to raise charges at this time.

·           Retailers in our town centre are recovering from the effects of Covid. They do not need their trade damaged by punitive car parking charges.

·           It is in the interests of every resident that we have a vibrant and active town centre which draws people to visit. These charges will be a disincentive to visiting your local town and damaging to the local economy.”

Keith Baker presented the petition and addressed the Council as follows.

The Liberal Democrats have gone on record to say that they are the listening party and will operate in an open and transparent way. So, how are they doing to date? One of the most important Key Decision principles is consultation. Normally, consultation takes place before a decision is made. The results of that consultation are then used to shape the decision. The Conservative administration carried out consultation in 2018 over a small price change. The Liberal Democrats did it over the Woodlands Avenue cycleway proposals, the LCWIP plans and waste collection. So, they do know how to do consultations.

Why did the Liberal Democrats not consult over these exorbitant increases? Who knows? Maybe they knew what the result was going to be. So, we did it for them. The petition, with over 4,000 signatures is one of the largest expressions of disagreement on a change ever received. A new petition (not submitted) signed by 40 businesses in Woodley town centre highlights the impact of the proposed changes on them. These businesses include independent retailers, the hospitality sector and nationals like Waitrose, LIDL and Boots.

So, how did the Liberal Democrats wriggle out of this requirement? At the Overview and Scrutiny Committee meeting, the Executive Member stated that the Traffic Regulation Order (TRO) would satisfy the consultation requirement. A TRO has never been used like this before. A TRO is the legal process to implement changes and includes a 28 day period when comments can be made. No date has been provided for the publication of the TRO. I do hope that they are not trying to sneak it out to minimise comments. I wonder if they will ignore those comments as well.

No business case in support of the decision has been made available to Councillors or the public. The only financial statement available refers to a shortfall of £600k in the parking services income. We will probably hear this about 20 times when the Liberal Democrats speak. Part  ...  view the full minutes text for item 81.

To answer any member questions:

A period of 30 minutes will be allowed for Members to ask questions submitted under Notice.

Any questions not dealt with within the allotted time will be dealt with in a written reply.

In accordance with the agreed procedure the Mayor invited Members to submit questions to the appropriate Members

Question:

The Park and Ride on Thames Valley Park is an expensive white elephant.

And worse still it attracts ASB in the form of illegal car meets. The likelihood of the MRT rearing its head again is extremely unlikely in the post-covid environment, where far fewer work-related journeys are being made. The car park should be put to an alternative use, and I would suggest turning it into a solar farm. Please can officers be instructed to carry out a feasibility study into this at the earliest opportunity?

The Park and Ride on Thames Valley Park is an expensive white elephant.

And worse still it attracts ASB in the form of illegal car meets. The likelihood of the MRT rearing its head again is extremely unlikely in the post-Covid environment, where far fewer work-related journeys are being made. The car park should be put to an alternative use, and I would suggest turning it into a solar farm. Please can officers be instructed to carry out a feasibility study into this at the earliest opportunity?

Answer

Thames Valley Park and Ride is currently being used by the hospital as a Park and Ride for staff, operating between Thames Valley Park – Royal Berkshire Hospital and the Mereoak Park and Ride site. Income from the hospital will allow the site to break even under the current arrangement. Discussions are taking place to grow this use further next year.

We are continually reviewing options for encouraging greater use or increasing revenue to ensure that the site is not costing the Council any money. The site could have the potential for some renewable energy generation, which could include solar, but this would be subject to detailed feasibility assessment and funding availability.

As I said in a response to an earlier question, officers are also looking at options for the Coppid Beech Park and Ride.

Supplementary Question

Are you saying that there will be a feasibility study on the park and ride at Thames Valley Park?

Supplementary Answer

As I stated, we are currently in an arrangement with the hospital. It is breaking even. We are looking at expanding that.

Note: Pauline Jorgensen raised a point of order under Rule 4.2.13.15 and requested that an officer confirm where the income from the arrangement with the NHS appeared in the Budget. Paul Fishwick confirmed that the income appeared in the budget line for parking services and park and rides.

Question:

What steps has the Council taken to reduce the carbon footprint of Council properties?

What steps has the Council taken to reduce the carbon footprint of Council properties?

In Councillor Akhtar’s absence, Sarah Kerr provided the following response.

Answer

As stated in our Climate Emergency Action Plan, the Council aims to retrofit to carbon neutral standards all Council commercial buildings. We are taking a fabric first approach whereby we aim to reduce energy consumption on each site as much as possible, through a wide range of energy efficiency improvements. We then aim to move towards energy self-sufficiency, through on-site generation of renewable energy, such as solar panels. This not only is better from a carbon reduction point of view, but it reduces our ongoing costs and provides energy security. 

At present, around 15% of our buildings have been retrofitted to carbon neutral standards. There is money allocated for some of these works within our current capital programme, but the future implementation programme for our whole estate will be subject to the availability of funding in future years.

With regards to our social housing, the Council aims for all houses to have an energy performance certificate (EPC) type C by 2025, five years ahead of the Government target of 2030.  The first tranche of an EPC stock survey has been undertaken this year. We have around 2,600 properties and were able to access and survey around 80% of them in the first tranche. The information we have received so far indicates that:

·           Over 2,200 properties already have an EPC type C;

·           Around 350 properties have an EPC type D;

·           Five properties have an EPC type E or F. 

For the type E and F properties, these are already being retrofitted to bring them up to EPC C.  For the type D properties, we are aiming to fund and deliver some of the improvements through the Social Housing Decarbonisation Fund, which we are in the process of applying for this month through the Department for BEIS.

In short, we have a plan and we’ve identified potential funding sources for that plan.  Our plan could be even more ambitious if government was prepared to further invest. Not only would it help with carbon reduction but would significantly help with the cost of living crisis and provide energy security. I am hoping that everyone here will help us to lobby the Government on this matter.

Question:

On the 1st of October a Thames Water lorry fell into a sinkhole caused by a collapsed sewer in Evendons Lane. This has caused significant disruption to the residents of the whole area. In addition, Evendons school, the teachers, pupils, parents and carers have been disrupted.

This is not the first time that a Thames Water lorry has fallen into a sinkhole. In November 2021 a similar lorry fell into another sinkhole in Elms Field for the same reasons. I understand that the Elms Field situation is still not fully resolved by Thames Water.

Please can the Executive member for Highways confirm that Thames Water is doing all it can to resolve the Evendons Lane disruption?

On the 1st of October a Thames Water lorry fell into a sinkhole caused by a collapsed sewer in Evendons Lane. This has caused significant disruption to the residents of the whole area. In addition, Evendons school, the teachers, pupils, parents and carers have been disrupted.

This is not the first time that a Thames Water lorry has fallen into a sinkhole. In November 2021 a similar lorry fell into another sinkhole in Elms Field for the same reasons. I understand that the Elms Field situation is still not fully resolved by Thames Water.

Please can the Executive Member for Highways confirm that Thames Water is doing all it can to resolve the Evendon's Lane disruption?

Answer

The work to repair the collapsed sewer – which caused the sinkhole – is ongoing and difficult due to the ground conditions in Evendons Lane and the depth of the sewer (4.3 metres). The first excavation only found remnants of the sewer so a second deep excavation is required but to do this safely the ground water level needs to be reduced so that the sides of the excavation do not collapse and cause more damage to the surrounding area.

To achieve this, Thames Water have sunk 16 individual boreholes and hope now to commence digging the second excavation and then to commence the repairs to the sewer.

Thames Water are working on site 7 days a week to complete the repairs as quickly as possible and the Council’s Streetworks Team are having weekly progress meetings as well as regular on-site meetings to make sure progress continues positively. WBC and Thames Water continue to liaise with Evendons Primary School and are working to ensure that the community is fully informed via direct communication and via social media channels.

Supplementary Question

I regard this as a maintenance issue. Can the Executive Member request that a survey be carried out by Thames Water on the sewers in the whole area so that we don’t get a third lorry falling down another sinkhole?

Supplementary Answer

It is not our apparatus, it belongs to Thames Water. Thames Water is a private company. We can ask the question, but I do not know what answer we will get.

Question:

What is the meaning of the term ‘ON BALANCE’ used by the Borough Council’s Planning Officers regularly at Planning Committee Meetings?

What is the meaning of the term “on balance” used by the Borough Council’s Planning Officers regularly at Planning Committee Meetings?

Answer

Planning law requires that applications for planning permission be determined in accordance with the development plan, unless material considerations indicate otherwise.

The term ‘balance’ is shorthand for this requirement, simply reflecting that the decision maker must consider how a proposed development sits with regard to the development plan and then proceed to consider other material factors, both the adverse impacts and any benefits that might arise.

Officers will often use the term ‘on balance’ before concluding their analysis.

Supplementary Question

Under the Council’s Constitution, Members are instructed, when making decisions, to only consider planning merits and to exercise their judgement solely based on planning merits. Yet this does not appear to apply to Planning officers in these cases. There are many examples of this, but it is not just slight variations, as the following example will show. When officers were recommending a planning applications and using the “on balance” words, so that the proposal was considered not to fully accord with the development plan due to conflict with countryside policies. However, on balance the scheme was recommended for approval as the harm to the rural character and the impact on the designated countryside was considered to be outweighed by the special circumstances and needs of the applicant. Does such a system, which ties that hands of Committee members and ward members (at the same time as it gives Planning officers a free hand) imply that the Council’s Planning Department is not fit for purpose?

Supplementary Answer

What I can say, based on my time on the Planning Committee a few years ago, where we had a number of planning applications which included “on balance”, is that it allowed members of the Planning Committee to decide whether they should accept the planning position or not. I remember on a number of occasions we actually refused applications where “on balance” was used. I’m not sure if there have been changes since I was on the Planning Committee but I will come back to you if there is anything further.

Question:

What has exacerbated the higher increase is that there hasn’t been an increase in car parking charges in Wokingham for nearly five years. Had there been then the increase would not have been such a shock.” Said Cllr Fishwick in his “From the Chamber” article in the Wokingham Today paper on 27th October. This mantra has been repeated many times by Councillor Fishwick and others at meetings, the press and social media.

Using the Bank of England Inflation Calculator, applying accumulative inflation from 2018 until September 2022,  you get this data.

                Inflation adjusted            New Charges

1 hour   £0.97                               £1.30

2 hour   £1.45                               £2.50

4 hour   £2.34                               £4.50

6 hour   £3.51                               £6.50

0ver 6 hour  £4.67                       £9.00

It is clear from this chart that the actual inflation adjusted charges are significantly lower than the charges the Liberal Democrat Executive are imposing on our residents and businesses.  Apart from the 1-hour rate which is a 34% increase all the others are between 72% and 92%. Clearly your statement about the regular increase not being such a shock is totally wrong. Could you explain how you have got this so dramatically wrong?

“What has exacerbated the higher increase is that there hasn’t been an increase in car parking charges in Wokingham for nearly five years. Had there been then the increase would not have been such a shock.” Said Cllr Fishwick in his “From the Chamber” article in the Wokingham Today paper on 27th October. This mantra has been repeated many times by Cllr Fishwick and others at meetings, the press and social media.

Using the Bank of England Inflation Calculator, applying accumulative inflation from 2018 until September 2022, you get this data.

                Inflation adjusted            New Charges

1 hour            £0.97                               £1.30

2 hour            £1.45                               £2.50

4 hour            £2.34                               £4.50

6 hour            £3.51                               £6.50

0ver 6 hour    £4.67                               £9.00

It is clear from this chart that the actual inflation adjusted charges are significantly lower than the charges the Liberal Democrat Executive are imposing on our residents and businesses. Apart from the 1 hour rate which is a 34% increase all the others are between 72% and 92%. Clearly your statement about the regular increase not being such a shock is totally wrong. Could you explain how you have got this so dramatically wrong?

Answer

On a point of clarification – the figures you have quoted are for Wokingham town, not outside of Wokingham, for example Woodley, which has a lower charge.

The cost of the parking service is around £2.5m. The Council needs to cover the cost of the service by raising revenue funding that will come from parking fees and any shortfall will need to come from other revenue raised, including through Council Tax.  A simple increase over the past years in line with inflation, which has not been done, will not cover the costs of operation.  Therefore, the service must cover its own costs. 

The council finds itself under the severest of financial pressures as do most other local authorities and must look at all aspects to balance its books, which includes parking charges above standard inflation rates.  Without these increases, essential services would need to be cut, and we are trying to find ways to protect the most vulnerable in our community.

If the previous administration had raised the car parking charges along the lines that it had proposed to the Community and Corporate Overview and Scrutiny Committee on the 24^th November 2021 and looking to raise circa £500,000 in this financial year that would have helped towards covering the majority of the financial hole in the car parking budget that we now have.

Supplementary Question

You have stated that these increased charges will be similar to neighbouring areas which have increased their charges every year and are competitive. There is a new shopping centre in Bracknell called the Lexicon. This complex is massive. Wokingham has nothing remotely like this. The Lexicon runs the car park associated with this complex, called Princess Square. Would it surprise you to know that the charges at Princess Square are all lower than the new charges in the Borough, ranging from 25% to  ...  view the full minutes text for item 82.5

Question:

How has the Council ensured that everyone entitled to the £150 rebate to help with the cost of energy bills received it before the September deadline?

How has the Council ensured that everyone entitled to the £150 rebate to help with the cost of energy bills received it before the September deadline?

Answer

There have been two Council Tax Energy Rebate schemes.  The first was for those who live in property in bands A-D.  This is the scheme which initially ended on the 30^th September 2022. The Government has now allowed an extension of this until 30^th November, but Wokingham Borough Council made payments to all eligible persons on our records before the 30^th September deadline. There is another scheme for discretionary payments which ends at the end of this month, but I’m assuming that you’re asking here about the Band A-D scheme.

Wokingham Borough Council made over 36,000 payments for residents via the scheme for those living in properties banded A-D.  In the majority of cases these payments were made directly into the bank accounts of those who pay their Council Tax by direct debit, as this is the quickest and simplest way of getting the money to them.

Where the Council Tax payer does not pay by direct debit, we had to get proof of identify and bank details so that we could make the payment. 

To reach these residents,  we sent leaflets to 9,000 eligible households as well as publicising  this extensively on both social and traditional media sent out to   Because of this we were able to make payments to a further 4,184 people. 

Where we were still unable to reach people despite these efforts, we directly credited the £150 payment to their council tax account and issued revised bills.  We have made council tax credits to 4636 households. This was not our preferred way of getting the money to residents, as it’s faster to get them the money via as a transfer of funds, and so was our last resort where we were unable to reach residents in other ways. This means that everyone who was on Wokingham Borough Council’s records as eligible for the payment, has now been paid the money.

Supplementary Question

Do you have a figure for the number of people, without access to the direct debit system, who have been paid?

Supplementary Answer

Yes we do. It was paid in payments to two different groups of people. Firstly, those we were able to reach – 4,184 people. Secondly, those we were unable to reach, where we paid directly into the Council Tax accounts – 4,636 people.

Question:

Residents in my ward are concerned about the increases in cost of off-street parking. Does the Leader of the Council agree that the following statement should apply to the policies of this Council, “trust individuals to make their own decisions about how they live their lives?

Residents in my ward are concerned about the increases in cost of off-street parking. Does the Leader of the Council agree that the following statement should apply to the policies of this Council, “trust individuals to make their own decisions about how they live their lives?”

Answer

Yes.

Supplementary Question

That is a quote from a Liberal Democrat publication in 2021, entitled “What Liberal Democrats Believe”. How do you square that with the Council’s policy of discouraging inappropriate car journeys, as described in the September Executive report on the off street car park charges? Why is the Council better placed to make this judgement rather than our residents, who have felt their budgets squeezed, including when filling their cars.

Supplementary Answer

Car parking charges have not gone up for the past five years. They weren’t increased in 2018, 2019 or 2020. They clearly weren’t going to go up in the Covid years. We have got to do something about the deficit of £600k to £800k in the car parking budget.

Question:

Please can you tell me how much Wokingham Borough Council paid for emergency accommodation for residents in the last year? 

Please can you tell me how much Wokingham Borough Council paid for emergency accommodation for residents in the last year?

Answer

The final spend outturn for 2021/22 was £975,000, as compared with the projected spend of £1.2 million at the start of the year. To have contained the spend is a major achievement of our very committed housing team, which was able to finalise the lease of Crown House to expand our temporary accommodation, and otherwise manage the pressure on emergency costs. Their work has led to a fall in the number of people in emergency bed and breakfast accommodation from 47 at the start of the year to 25 now.

Supplementary Question

Thank you for your response, it is a huge figure. In light of that, I wanted to know if you think it wise for your administration to explore cutting the number of Wokingham Borough Council News editions to residents. This is the publication that goes to all households in the Borough and frequently tells people about how to get support when they are struggling. This can potentially prevent people from falling deeper into crises. All for the sake of saving £30k per year.

Supplementary Answer

I am slightly puzzled as to how you make a connection between the emergency accommodation costs and the Council’s Borough News. The Borough News is read by many people who are in very little, if any, danger of requiring emergency accommodation. We do need to find savings. This has been a theme throughout the evening. If that requires us to reduce the number of issues of the Borough News, we will have to think about doing that. No decision has been made on that, but it is something we have to contemplate.

Question:

Nationally the Liberal Democrat Party has pledged to build 300,000 houses per year, the same amount as the Government, why should residents believe that the administration will be able to reduce the numbers of houses when they have made no progress so far?

Nationally the Liberal Democrat Party has pledged to build 300,000 houses per year, the same amount as the Government, why should residents believe that the administration will be able to reduce the numbers of houses when they have made no progress so far?

Answer

All political parties recognise there is a national housing crisis and support significant house building to address it. The crucial matter for consideration here is where and how those new homes should be delivered.

The Government’s current method to calculate where housing should be built is, in my opinion, flawed. There is no consideration as to where housing could be best delivered to support the levelling up of opportunity for northern communities that are crying out for investment. There is no consideration of what the environmental impact or infrastructure consequences might be for an area such as ours. There is no consideration of the level of change communities have experienced in the recent past.

I know that the previous administration here at Wokingham, of which you were a member, lobbied for a reduction in the housing allocation for the Borough without success. But there are good reasons to make a renewed effort now.

Our own lobbying efforts have been hampered by the rapid turnover of secretaries of state in a period of chaos and dysfunction at national government level. But I believe that the Government, now that we seem to have a permanent Government, has started to understand, with the newly restored Secretary of State, Michael Gove, recently referring to the need for a fairer way of allocating housing that takes account of changes in population.  He has also acknowledged that some of the calculations that have been made in the past have been wrong.

In this context, it is imperative that we continue to raise our residents’ concerns over the scale of housing in the Borough required by the Government. I would hope that Members of all political parties would support our efforts, just as we supported yours.

Supplementary Question

Thank you for that. I completely agree with you. I would like to offer the support of the Conservative Group, as you did with us (unlike Labour) when we were trying to get the numbers reduced. Actually, we were successful, thanks to our Leader. We would be happy to accompany you to lobby Government ministers. I have already talked to all the MPs in the area and I would be very happy to join you if you would be happy to have our support.

Supplementary Answer

I would be delighted to have your support. We have been asking for constructive engagement with the Opposition and, if you are prepared to help us on this, I am sure that help will be gratefully received.

Question:

Wokingham Without Parish Council members and the Police strongly agree that the current speed limits on Honey Hill in Wokingham Without ward are excessive and dangerous to road users including pedestrians.  Would the executive member be willing to attend a site visit with local Borough and parish councillors to apprise him of the perceived problems?

Wokingham Without Parish Council members and the police strongly agree that the current speed limits on Honey Hill in Wokingham Without ward are excessive and dangerous to road users including pedestrians.  Would the Executive Member be willing to attend a site visit with local Borough and Parish Councillors to apprise him of the perceived problems?

Answer

As you may be aware the Council’s Traffic Management team have been involved in discussions regarding Honey Hill for some time now.  We are deeply surprised at the comment you have made regarding the statement ‘the police strongly agree that the current speed limits on Honey Hill in Wokingham Without ward are excessive and dangerous to road users including pedestrians’, and we would welcome seeing any correspondence you have from the police advising of this.

As you are aware the enforcement of traffic speed is a police function.  At present, there is no evidence, by way of speeding or personal injury accidents that would indicate there to be a speeding or safety issue on this road.

However, I am happy to meet local ward and parish Councillors on site.

Supplementary Question

I understand that at Church Lane, in Shinfield, the speed limit was reduced to 30mph from 60mph in anticipation of growth in traffic from the SDL housing. We have a similar situation in Honey Hill with the South of Wokingham 1,800 houses yet to be built. Would you take that into account when you arrive at your final decision?

Supplementary Answer

Yes, I certainly will.

Question:

The Conservatives are trying to disenfranchise many people in the Borough by making it harder to vote.

The ID restrictions, and allowable IDs, have been described as worse than voter suppression measures seen in parts of the United States.

What steps will Wokingham Borough Council be taking to ensure not a single resident is deterred from exercising their democratic right to vote the next time they go to the polling station?

The Conservatives are trying to disenfranchise many people in the Borough by making it harder to vote.

The ID restrictions, and allowable IDs, have been described as worse than voter suppression measures seen in parts of the United States.

What steps will WBC be taking to ensure not a single resident is deterred from exercising their democratic right to vote the next time they go to the polling station?

Answer

I agree with you that we need to take every step to ensure that residents are informed of this new requirement and are not deterred from voting.  

I think it's very sad that the Government are forcing these changes upon us. We therefore have to make this work as best we can. 

We are already publicising these changes on the Council’s website in advance of the Electoral Commission’s national publicity campaign that will start in January 2023.  

The voter ID provisions are due to be in place for local elections in England in May 2023 and at any UK Parliamentary election held after that date. The types of ID to be allowed are set out in the Elections Act 2022 and include passports, photographic driving licences, biometric immigration documents and some concessionary travel passes. Free voter cards, to be called a Voter Authority Certificate, will be made available for those without any other form of photographic ID. People are likely to be able to apply for these from January 2023. I would have liked to have seen ID used by younger people also accepted. 

Officers are working closely with the Electoral Commission to ensure a successful implementation of this new requirement and to mitigate the risk of any voter in Wokingham Borough being disenfranchised, but it would be better if we didn’t need to do this. 

Supplementary Question

I am sure that none our local Conservatives would support this rather Trumpian attempt to interfere with the hard won democratic right to vote. So, would you consider writing a letter from all the Group Leaders to all of the Borough’s MPs to make it clear that every single one of us here supports democracy and is opposed to the introduction of mandatory voter ID?

Supplementary Answer

I would be delighted to write such a letter and would hope that the Group Leaders would support that.

Question:

The previous Conservative administration allocated £20 million some years ago into an anti congestion budget. The purpose of this was to improve vehicle flow through key road bottlenecks to ease congestion. Officers had worked up a scheme to improve traffic flow on London Road and were planning to move onto several other schemes across the borough. It is my understanding that £12 million was unallocated at the time of the May election and available for this work. I have been advised by officers that this budget has been renamed the active travel budget. Can you tell me which of the original schemes planned at the time of the local election are still progressing and which new active travel schemes have been incorporated in this programme.

The previous Conservative administration allocated £20 million some years ago into an anti-congestion budget. The purpose of this was to improve vehicle flow through key road bottlenecks to ease congestion. Officers had worked up a scheme to improve traffic flow on London Road and were planning to move onto several other schemes across the Borough. It is my understanding that £12 million was unallocated at the time of the May election and available for this work. I have been advised by officers that this budget has been renamed the active travel budget. Can you tell me which of the original schemes planned at the time of the local election are still progressing and which new active travel schemes have been incorporated in this programme?

Answer

Whilst £20m may have been allocated by the previous Conservative administration the money is not available without furthering the Council’s borrowings.  As such the value being referenced is not available and a significantly lesser amount is now being worked with under the new heading ‘Active Travel and Bus Priority’ 

Schemes that had previously been identified and which we believe will serve the best benefit to all users of the highway network, is by targeting the Department for Transport’s own findings that nearly 60% of short journeys are taken by car and could be taken by active travel (walking and cycling) linking to this Council’s emerging Local Cycling and Walking Infrastructure Plan or public transport bus and rail linking with this Council’s Bus Service Improvement Plan which is currently being amended.

With a good standard of infrastructure in place many of these short journeys can be transferred from the car leaving spare capacity on the network for essential journeys such as freight as well as car journeys that cannot be transferred to active travel or public transport.

However, some schemes can be revised and converted to the active travel and bus priority and these include the likes of Active Travel (Walking / Cycling) on London Road between Binfield Road and Seaford Road junctions, and also Active Travel and bus priority measures at the Binfield Road junction with improvements to the signals.  Measures are also being considered at Winnersh Crossroads with a signal optimisation scheme to reflect the new traffic patterns as a result of the Winnersh Relief Road, these measures could also including bus priority and improved pedestrian and cycle connectivity.

As highlighted already tonight, the Council finds itself under the severest of financial pressures as do most other local authorities and must look at all aspects to balance its books. 

Supplementary Question

You mentioned a different amount to the amount I quoted, I wonder if you could clarify what the amount was? You also mentioned some schemes which were moving forward, one at the Twyford crossroads. It was confirmed to me by an officer in June as being considered – is that on? And, when can we expect a formal announcement on this?

Supplementary Answer

As I said previously, the amount of money which you  ...  view the full minutes text for item 82.12

This Agenda includes public questions, member questions, motions, and a petition on the increase in parking charges brought by the Conservative Group. Why, when there is not another meeting until January, has the administration brought no business to this meeting?

Due to time constraints, the following written answer was provided.

Answer

The simple answer is that there are no business items scheduled or due for November Council. However, as you state, the Agenda includes other significant items allowing residents and members to fully participate in the work of the Council. Not least are the three Motions at the end of the Agenda, two of which are from your Group which have been on previous Agenda but have not been debated due to running out of time. I would have thought your Group therefore would be pleased to see a slightly shorter Agenda.

I am very happy that we are able to devote time to a proper debate about car park charges. I would have thought you shared that view. I am also pleased that we should be able to get through all the public and Member questions. We should also be able to get through all the Motions, something that failed to happen time after time under the previous Conservative administration. That clearly didn't bother you and your colleagues because you continually voted against extensions to the time allowed for Council meetings.

I very much hope this evening that we get the opportunity to debate these Motions and that your question does not unduly delay us.

At this point in the meeting (10.01pm) in accordance with Procedure Rule 4.2.12 (m), the Council considered a Motion to continue the meeting beyond 10.30pm for a maximum of 30 minutes to enable further business on the Agenda to be transacted. The Motion was proposed by Prue Bray and seconded by Stephen Conway.

Upon being put to the vote, the Motion was declared by the Mayor to be approved.

Note: It was confirmed that, following a recent rule change, future meetings would run through to 11.00pm without the need for a continuation Motion.

A period of 20 minutes will be allowed for Members to ask questions in relation to the latest circulated volume of Minutes of Meetings and Ward Matters

At the Overview and Scrutiny Committee call-in, which was minuted, we were told that the official consultation on the increase in car park charges would be the Traffic Regulation Order (TRO). I have asked when this TRO will be published and promoted to our residents so that they are aware that they can comment. As of now, I have not had any suggested dates from officers. With the Xmas period coming up, when residents are not particularly interested in responding to consultations, I fear for the value of such a consultation. Bearing in mind that there is a window of 28 days to comment, it would be unfortunate if that period included the Xmas break. I am assuming that you will want to complete this consultation and get the new charges implemented. So, I would expect that you would have some idea of a target date, not the actual date, for the publication of the TRO. Can you let Councillors know what that date might be? Also, it is essential that residents are aware of this consultation. So, can you tell me what plans you have to promote this TRO on social media?

Answer

Our target date is the end of next week. There will be communications to the media, social media and on the WBC website next week.

There is a school in my ward, now part of the Trust for the Chiltern Way Academy. In previous years it was a failing school. I am interested to hear of any progress following the change of the Trustee Board.

Answer

It was a failing school. Councillor Mickleburgh and I were part of the Emergency Board which tried to keep it going, succeeding until Chiltern Way took it over. It has been my great pleasure to visit the school quite recently and it is transformed. They are doing a really good job. They have had visits from the office of the Regional Schools Commissioner as well. Everyone is delighted with the progress. What I saw was a completely different environment to what was there before and I am really looking forward to us being able to work with them for the benefit of all our children. They have a nearly full school. All the children are in school. Their attendance record has shot up. They are doing qualifications now which they were not doing before. It is showing great signs of improvement. I was really pleased to see it.

There is a lake, which has become a permanent feature, on the corner of Langley Common Road and Eversley Road. I think that it may be partly in Gary Cowan’s ward. It is very dangerous. We have not had any ice yet but, if we do, it will become even more dangerous. Can you please get it sorted out?

Answer

The number of lakes are growing by the sound of things. Yes we are aware of it. I will do my utmost to get it sorted as soon as possible. I do understand the concerns you have with the cold weather coming.

The Coalition undertook to protect the Green Belt in 2022. Can you confirm that this is still true and that no discussions are being held by officers or Members which would make this untrue?

Answer

I seem to recall when I asked a similar question of you, when we were in opposition and you were running the Council. You replied, quite correctly, that it was not appropriate to say anything that would pre-judge a process that is complicated and involves many parties. It is imperative that we bear in mind that when the Local Plan comes forward for the inquiry in public, no opportunity has been given to any developer to say that their proposals were not treated fairly. So that is the position you outlined when you were Leader of the Council and it is the position now. You explained the situation when you were Leader of the Council. I am explaining the situation now. I am not the Leader of the Council but, for some reason, you have asked me this question. You seem to assume that I am responsible for the Local Plan which is flattering but wrong, just as Pauline Jorgensen seems to assume that I am responsible for the Local Plan. My colleague Lindsay Ferris is responsible for the Local Plan. I am responsible for Affordable and Social Housing, but I am happy to try to answer your question.

My question relates to the California Crossroads. At the last Council meeting my colleague, Peter Harper, asked you whether you would consider running this consultation again. It was previously done in 2018/19. We have had quite a bit of correspondence from some of the traders at California Crossroads since then. The dentist, who wasn’t even in Finchampstead then said “I was completely unaware of these changes. The Council have not communicated them or consulted with me”. Cresswells Garage stated “we had a visit from an officer in March with a new and revised plan, asking to buy land. We have heard nothing since”. The owners of the convenience store and fish and chip shop stated “I had no idea that this was progressing. I had no contact from the Council. They have not asked my opinion”. The Co-op stated “this is the first time that we have heard about this scheme. It is of no benefit to the area and we have not been consulted”. I realise that this was before your time, when the scheme was proposed and that you had nothing to do with its development. It is a request that many things have changed since 2018/19. Would you consider these facts and another consultation in order to make sure that the scheme that does go ahead reflects the views of the world in 2022, not the views of the world in 2018/19?

Answer

Yes, it was some time ago when the consultations were undertaken. On the back of those consultations, detailed designs have been undertaken and completed. A lot of money has been spent and I do not want to go down the road of opening it up and having redesigns done. We are now going out to tender for the works and everything is now finalised. So, that is where it stands.

You may remember the last full Council meeting when I asked you about the Council’s consultation which included potential proposals to remove the roundabouts in Nightingale Road in Woodley. I would like to know when the outcome of that consultation will be published so they know if the Council does plan to remove the roundabouts or not?

Answer

That was all part of the LCWIP consultation. They were high level ideas. They are not concrete at all. We are currently analysing all the results, which is a large number. There will be a report to the Overview and Scrutiny Committee on 29 November, which I believe you sit on. So you will get some information there. Once we have gone through that we will go for adoption of the LCWIP, with prioritisation of the main routes, which we will then be bidding on. If Nightingale Road is one of those then we will go out to consultation again on a design for that particular road.

There are two potential crossings that have been requested multiple times over the years when I have been involved in campaigning, before I was elected. One across Warren House Road which joins the Mulberry View estate into Ashridge. One on Keephatch Road which joins Dowles Green estate into the Ashridge area. Both of these estates have been built outside of the main hub of Ashridge but both contain numbers of children who travel to school every day in the centre of Ashridge. Particularly, those two areas are highly dangerous to cross because of the bends and difficulty in seeing cars. Could you confirm that these two crossings are still on the list for consideration and, if so, when we might expect some action on them?

Answer

I can confirm that they are on the list. Warren House Road is the location where surveys were going to be undertaken but SGN have been undertaking utility works. Therefore, traffic patterns have been different. So, that has been postponed until next year, once SGN have gone. The second location, I will need to find out that status and where that has got to.

Thank you for your latest update, received yesterday, on the funding issues for the 6^th form at Bohunt School. Potential parents in Finchampstead are genuinely concerned about this for the children who could, potentially, go to this 6^th form. They are worried that their children may be taught in temporary classrooms from September next year. Can you confirm if this is true?

Answer

The genuine answer is that we do not know how quickly we can get this done. The aim is still to have everything done for September opening but, as you will have recognised over the past six months, costs have changed slightly. We are working as hard as we can to deliver it. There is no backing off by anybody, but it is a tight financial squeeze and we will do our best to do it.

To receive any statements by the Leader of the Council and Executive Members.

In accordance with Procedure Rule 4.2.23 the total time allocated to this item shall not exceed 20 minutes, and no Member shall speak for more than 5 minutes.

Prue Bray – Executive Member for Children’s Services

I think that we all know by now that Wokingham Borough Council is the lowest funded unitary authority in the country. What you may not know is that our schools are in a similar situation. Schools in our area are the third worst funded in the country, behind only Rutland and Leicestershire. Before today’s autumn fiscal event/statement, teaching unions and Tory MPs (a rather unlikely alliance) were calling on Jeremy Hunt not to further cut education funding as previous decisions were leading to cuts in school budgets in 2023. The exact impact of these varies from school to school but, on average, schools in Wokingham were being predicted to lose £176 per pupil next September. That is a bigger drop than any other area in Berkshire except Slough and a bigger drop than Buckinghamshire, Oxfordshire, Surrey and Hampshire. This would make the funding gap between our schools and our neighbours’ schools even worse.

I have not had time to digest the impact of what was said today, but more money does seem to have been promised for schools for the next two years. We do not know what that will mean for our schools locally, but perhaps it means a slight easing of the position. So, our Borough’s schools deliver amazing education with lower funding than almost everyone else. We need to do what we can to support them. That is why I am pleased to announce that, today, we have joined F40, an organisation which is lobbying for fairer schools funding. It gets its name from the 40 authorities with the lowest funded schools. Despite having been at the bottom of the funding table for the entire time they were in charge, the Conservatives chose not to participate in this organisation. For the princely sum of less than £400 for the rest of the financial year, we have now put that right. I look forward to us doing whatever we can to support fairer funding for all the Borough’s schools.

Clive Jones – Leader of the Council

We have a cost of living crisis. Much of it is the responsibility of Downing Street. It is estimated that the Truss/Kwarteng/Redwood Budget of a few weeks ago added £30bn to the black hole, or what is now often referred to as the “blue hole” of £30bn that was already there. I include John Redwood with responsibility as he was clearly fully behind Liz Truss. He was the only MP prepared to defend her on TV and radio. Only this week, we have heard from the leaders of two of the largest county councils in the country – Kent and Hampshire, both currently controlled by the Conservatives. Their leaders said that whilst they recognised a very difficult national picture, they were calling on the Prime Minister to fund councils properly. Both leaders said that they faced budget deficits in coming years of a scale they had never seen before. If Ministers do not step  ...  view the full minutes text for item 85.

To receive any statements from Directors of Council Owned Companies.

In accordance with Procedure Rule 4.2.24 the total time allocated to this item shall not exceed 10 minutes, and no Director, except with the consent of Council, shall speak for more than 3 minutes.

Stephen Conway – Loddon Homes

This morning, we held the first, and very successful, Common Purposes meeting for the Council-owned housing companies. The aim is to share perspectives, discuss common concerns and create greater strategic alignment, to ensure that we are all working to the same common objectives. Separate meetings also took place today of the boards of Loddon Homes, Berry Brook Homes and Wokingham Housing Ltd.

To consider any motions

In accordance with Procedure Rule 4.2.11.2 a maximum period of 30 minutes will be allowed for each Motion to be moved, seconded and debated, including dealing with any amendments.  At the expiry of the 30-minute period debate will cease immediately, the mover of the Motion or amendment will have the right of reply before the Motion or amendment is put to the vote

‘Wokingham Borough Council congratulates the England Lionesses on their incredible achievement of becoming European Champions. Many of these women were not offered the opportunity as children to play football at school and the only reason for their success was they were prepared and able to travel great distances to pursue their dream. Wokingham Borough Council believes all children should be offered the opportunity at school to play football and calls on all primary schools in Wokingham Borough to ensure that football is offered to every child who wishes to play.’

Statement from the Chief Finance Officer

There are no financial implications arising from this proposal.

Due to time constraints, this item was not considered.

‘This Council asks the Constitution Review Working Group to review the Council’s Constitution with the aim of making it fit for the 21st century by attempting to reflect the needs of Councillors, Officers and Residents.   To achieve that aim we ask the LGA to work with us in putting into place a modern, fit for purpose, new Constitution.’

Statement from the Chief Finance Officer

No direct Financial Implications, it is assumed the required activities will be undertaken within existing resources which may require a diversion from other priorities.

Due to time constraints, this item was not considered.

Residents who live of William Heelas Way in Wokingham have raised significant concerns with me about the speed of traffic and the lack of protection for parents and young children accessing Floreat Montague Park Primary School. The link road between London Road and the future Southern Relief Road has a 30mph speed limit and traffic levels which will only get busier when the Southern Relief Road opens. At the last council meeting residents handed in a petition signed by over 500 people calling for a 20 mph speed limit outside the school, the provision of barriers around the pavements and full reinstatement of a pedestrian crossing on William Heelas Way. Wokingham Borough Council believes it is of vital importance that young children can travel to this school on foot or by bicycle in complete safety. To ensure children can walk and cycle safely to school Wokingham Borough Council agrees to meet the requests of the petition without further delay.

Statement from the Chief Finance Officer

Wokingham Borough Council, in line with all Council’s, is currently facing some of the most financially challenging times it has ever faced, primarily due to inflationary linked aspects of the global economic landscape as well as unprecedented demand for service. In this context the council is not predicting an underspend position for 22/23, unfortunately there is no additional money that can be allocated to this proposal.

Due to time constraints, this item was not considered.