This is an opportunity for Members of Council to ask the Mayor, Members of the Executive or the Chairman of any Committee or Sub-Committee a question on notice under Procedure Rule 10.2.

The Mayor reported that 5 questions had been submitted under Procedure Rule 10.2, however, a question from Councillor Freeman that concerned Education, Health and Care Plans was not permitted since the matter was currently under review by the Scrutiny Committee.

(a)        Councillor Baugh asked the following question for which she had given notice:

In the budget 2016/2017, the proposal is to consult with schools on funding their school crossing patrol service. Would you confirm that two documents appear to make it very difficult for schools to actually pay for the crossing patrol service. Schools receive their money via the Dedicated Schools Grant. This references another document - The Schools and Early Years Finance (England) Regulations 2014. In this document, the government sets out the legal responsibility for schools to spend their budgets only on certain agreed ring-fenced matters. In Part 2 of the Law, Chapter 1, Pages 10 and 11, schools and local authorities are told exactly what this ring-fencing means. In addition, under the heading 'Exceptions' it states:

“A local authority's non-schools education budget or school budget must not include the following classes or descriptions of expenditure – “

there are two items and then the third point states the following:

“(c) expenditure for the purposes of section 26 of the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984 (a) (arrangements for patrolling school crossings).”

Would you confirm this information is correct?

Councillor Mrs. Evans, Executive Member for Transformation and Resources advised that the Council was actively seeking avenues of funding to support the retention of school crossing patrols across the Borough and dialogue had been opened with schools alongside businesses and community groups to seek a funding resolution. There were examples from across the country where schools had supported the retention of patrols and the Council was working in collaboration with Head Teachers to consider the options available within the framework of the regulations. Councillor Mrs. Evans hoped Members would support efforts to explore every possible avenue to retain the services rather than immediately move to disband them in their entirety.

Councillor Baugh asked as a supplementary question whether the Executive Member would, as a matter of courtesy and at her earliest convenience, confirm to schools that it would be illegal for them to fund the school crossing patrol service. Councillor Mrs. Evans reaffirmed that the Council recognised the Dedicated Schools Grant framework and would continue to work to find a solution. The Executive Member also indicated that Councillor Baugh could invite Head Teachers to contact her with any concerns. 

(b)        Councillor Mrs. Brophy asked the following question, the first of three for which she had given notice:

Just last week residents in Trafford and across Greater Manchester were hit with extreme weather causing disruption to transport, risking family homes and potentially putting lives in danger. What measures have been put in place since these floods to ensure our residents are not put at risk again?

Councillor John Reilly, Executive Member for Economic Growth, Environment and Infrastructure explained that he would respond in writing to Councillor Mrs. Brophy as the question was similar to one she had asked in January 2016 and that nothing material had changed since then. The Executive Member just added that last week’s weather caused flooding on Carrington Road, Flixton but no properties were threatened. Working with the Environment Agency, One Trafford responded quickly to remove surface water from the carriageway demonstrating that response procedures were in place and clearly worked well.

As a supplementary question, Councillor Mrs. Brophy asked for an update on the measures being put in place as climate and weather conditions become more severe and sought an assurance that they were constantly reviewed. Councillor John Reilly confirmed that officers constantly work with the Environment to monitor and update procedures and suggested that should Councillor Mrs. Brophy require anything specific he would be happy to intervene.

(c)        Councillor Mrs. Brophy asked the following question, the second of three for which she had given notice:

Homelessness is a crisis facing our local community today. What measures are being put in to place to ensure that homeless people in Trafford are being effectively helped?

Councillor John Reilly, Executive Member for Economic Growth, Environment and Infrastructure explained that a similar question had been asked at the previous meeting on 6 September 2016 and referring Councillor Mrs. Brophy to the answer he had given then (Minute No. 30(a) refers), indicated he would be happy to address anything additional outside of the meeting.

Councillor Mrs. Brophy mentioned that she had become aware of an emergency facility run by volunteers with restricted operational hours that was under review and asked as a supplementary question what more was being done. The Executive Member repeated that he was happy to address anything additional and invited Councillor Mrs. Brophy to send him a list of questions and he would ensure that they were answered.

(d)        Councillor Mrs. Brophy asked the following question, the third of three for which she had given notice:

What plans have been put in place to ensure that brownfield sites, derelict buildings and disused sites are built on first before dismantling Trafford¹s green spaces?

Councillor Shaw, Deputy Executive Member for Economic Growth, Environment and Infrastructure advised that the Greater Manchester Spatial Framework (GMSF) identified the need for 227,000 homes over the next 20 years. Across Greater Manchester 70% and in Trafford 50% of the land supply to meet this need would come from sites within the existing urban area not green belt sites.

Greater Manchester was helping developers to kick start housing projects through the Greater Manchester Housing Fund. The £300 million fund was helping to free up land, regenerate housing and build new homes. To date over £97 million had been committed to build 1184 units at 9 sites across Greater Manchester. In addition, in 2016 the Greater Manchester authorities joined a government funded pilot scheme to develop a Brownfield Land Register.

As part of work to prepare the next version of the GMSF, officers would revisit urban sites to ensure that all possible brownfield sites had been identified and that the land was being used as effectively as possible.

Regarding the part of the question on derelict properties, the Council had worked with landowners in recent years to bring buildings back into use or redevelop derelict sites, an example being Cross Street, Sale. Similar work would continue at local level through planning briefs and the Local Plan. Additionally, the Greater Manchester Combined Authority (GMCA) had committed to review existing employment sites to ensure they were fit for purpose and where they were not, consideration would be given to the potential re-use of derelict or unused buildings for residential redevelopment to minimise the need to release green belt sites. As these sites were likely to be in the urban area they would be outside the scope for the allocation within the GMFS but instead would be taken through the Trafford Local Plan process. The Council would continue to consider the use of Compulsory Purchase Orders (CPOs), as required to enable regeneration and the GMCA had additional CPO powers, which would ultimately become the Mayor’s, which would also be considered.

Reasoning that existing legislation favours larger brownfield sites, Councillor Mrs. Brophy asked as a supplementary question what the Council was doing to influence the government to encourage the use of smaller brownfield sites for house building. Councillor Shaw ensured Councillor Mrs. Brophy that he would provide a response in time.