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

The Mayor reported that 10 questions had been received under Procedure Rule 10.2.

 

(a)     Councillor D. Western had given notice of a question and asked:

 

“Please could the Leader of the Council advise what steps the Council are taking to support and engage with women to improve their safety following the murder of Sarah Everard and the series of shocking sexual assaults seen here in Trafford in recent weeks, including several in my own ward of Broadheath, and furthermore does the Leader consider it appropriate given these issues to continue with proposals to dim street lights overnight across the Borough?”

 

Councillor A. Western, the Leader of the Council responded to the question indicated that the proposals had been included as part of the budget setting process, however, following representations from several Members, particularly, the three Broadheath Ward Councillors, the Council had been able to offset the saving it would had produced in a concurrent manner, which enabled him to confirm that there would be no cut to street lighting that year or in the future. Responding to the important issue of the personal safety of women, the Leader reported that he had asked Councillor Slater, the Executive Member with responsibility for equalities to lead a series of workshops open to all women after the elections and over a period of six months to allow for as much engagement and to look at the interventions the Council and working partners, including the police, could take. Councillor A. Western was confident that by prioritising based on the feedback received, positive steps and proactive interventions could be taken to improve women’s safety moving forward.

 

Councillor D. Western did not have a supplementary question but asked to be joined in thanking the police for resolving the recent issues in Trafford and for the successful arrest of the person responsible. On behalf of the Council, the Mayor wholeheartedly agreed and thanked the police for their work on this serious matter.

 

(b)     Councillor Hartley had given notice of a question and asked:

 

“Some residents will have read alarming posts and information that there might not be sufficient school places in Sale.  Would the Lead Member for Education like to comment on this?”

 

Councillor Carter, Lead Member for Education was grateful for the question and the opportunity to address the misinformation. The matter had been discussed at the Children and Young People’s Scrutiny on 16 March 2021 at which an officer clearly stated that this was not the case and that there were enough school places in Sale. Councillor Carter recommended that all Members that had an interest read the School Place Planning for New Developments paper which was available on the Council’s website which explained how new school places were calculated and allocated.

 

As a supplementary question, Councillor Hartley asked whether the Council’s expansion plans for schools have taken account of new developments in the Sale area, like the development at Trafford Magistrates Court and would there be sufficient capacity as a result.

 

Councillor Carter explained that over the last 10 years 29 schools had been expanded creating an additional 3,681 new places throughout the borough and it was important to create the right balance between sufficient places and over provision. When calculating for how many places were necessary the Council’s team had been accurate to 0.1% for primary children and 0.9% for secondary. Appreciating that not everyone will always be allocated the school of choice and that good conclusions had been reached with those families where there were such anomalies, the Council had to recognise that Trafford’s secondary provision was extremely popular and more Trafford applications meant less places for out of borough pupils as Trafford children were prioritised. Responding specifically to the question of Sale, the Lead Member outlined current provision and the levels of surplus places, the impact of the 32 developments planned and the expansion plans for schools in the area and considered that there had been good estimation of the number of places needed.

 

(c)     Councillor Jerrome had given notice of a question and asked:

 

 “The A56 from Sylvan Grove, Altrincham, down to Navigation Road has a number of potholes or defects. These cause vibrations, noise and tremors to houses that bring great aggravation to residents on a 24 hour basis. Would it not be possible for Trafford to prioritise these problems and spare affected householders considerable pain across 365 days a year?”

 

Councillor Adshead, Executive Member for Environmental and Regulatory Services had responded to the question in advance of the meeting and his response had been circulated to Members and been published on the Council’s website.

 

Councillor Jerrome asked as a supplementary question whether the Executive Member could explain to those residents that repeatedly appeal for a 20 mph speed limit to slow speeding vehicles hitting the defects on this dangerous and winding stretch of road, why it was not possible. In his experience, Councillor Adshead believed that highway issues could always be resolved and that a site visit with officers and residents might be required should there be concerns after action has been taken. Highway officers were always happy to try and support residents with such problems.

 

(d)     Councillor Butt asked the following question for which he had given notice:

 

“The government recently announced a doubling of the Safer Streets fund to £45 million in order to provide better lighting and the greater use of CCTV in parks. Can the Executive Member for Environmental and Regulatory Services state if the council has received details of its allocation of its share of that funding?”

 

Councillor Adshead, Executive Member for Environmental and Regulatory Services had responded to the question in advance of the meeting and his response had been circulated to Members and been published on the Council’s website.

 

Understanding that the other Greater Manchester authorities would not be reducing their street lighting, Councillor Butt asked as a supplementary question whether the Community Safety team, in their conversations with the Greater Manchester Combined Authority, could emphasise that, despite having lower crime rates than other districts, Trafford would have more poorly lit streets and therefore, should be looked upon more favourably for the funding. In response, Councillor Adshead referred Councillor Butt to the Leader of the Council’s confirmation in respect of the question asked by Councillor D. Western, that the Council would not be dimming street lighting, on an ongoing basis (Minute No. 57 (a) refers).

 

(e)     Councillor Mrs. Haddad had given notice of the following question:

 

“First may I offer, on behalf of the full Council, my deepest sympathies to Sarah Everard’s family as they mourn her tragic death. As the Council are aware there are current campaigns, with wide support, to make our streets safer for women. In view of this, will the Council reverse its recent budget decision to dim Trafford lights to save money?

 

In addition, will the Council please inform me when the new WIFI operating system for CCTV Security cameras is expected to be installed and become operational? I ask this because my residents feel let down by recent failures in the CCTV system. This has given thieves the upper hand and hindered the police’s ability to investigate crime. The new operating system is also necessary for the expansion of the CCTV system?”

 

Councillor Mrs. Haddad acknowledged that the Leader of the Council’s response to Question 1 (Minute 57 (a) above) answered the first part of her question and was also grateful for the written response of Councillor Freeman, Executive Member for Covid-19 Response and Recovery, in respect of the second part of her question, which had been circulated to Members and published on the Council’s website in advance of the meeting. Content with both replies, Councillor Mrs. Haddad confirmed that she did not wish to raise a supplementary question.

 

(f)      Councillor Welton had given notice of a question and asked:

 

“Residents in Altrincham tell us that the year round use of loud and polluting petrol-driven leaf blowers by commercial grounds maintenance companies is blighting their quiet enjoyment of their homes and gardens. Leaf blowers are also catastrophic for our populations of insects and small mammals, and the dust and pollen they produce add to the discomfort of allergy and asthma sufferers. Is it time to regulate their use in Trafford?”

 

Councillor Adshead, Executive Member for Environmental and Regulatory Services had responded to the question in advance of the meeting and his response had been circulated to Members and been published on the Council’s website.

 

As a supplementary question Councillor Welton asked whether the Executive Member would consider holding a consultation about the creation of a voluntary code of conduct on leaf blower use in Trafford. In response, Councillor Adshead believed that without legislation or regulation on their use, the best course of action would be to raise matters of noise pollution and any other associated issues of concern in his ward with the Council’s pollution control officers. 

 

(g)     Councillor Evans had given notice of 2 questions and asked as the first:

 

“Residents are being told that expected service levels for some services cannot be met because of an ongoing ‘Ransomware’ incident. They have also been told that certain documentation and drawings can no longer be accessed because of the same issue. Given that the ‘Ransomware’ incident was reported in the press some 3 months ago can the council tell us when they expect service levels to return to normal?”

 

Councillor Adshead, Executive Member for Environmental and Regulatory Services had responded to the question in advance of the meeting and his response had been circulated to Members and been published on the Council’s website.

 

Councillor Evans asked as a supplementary question that once the Council’s partner had recovered would the Council’s audit team conduct an audit on the robustness of their procedures and whether since the attack the Council’s other partners been audited and also wondered, given that the Council was vulnerable through the actions of its associates, whether audit checks should form part of the performance monitoring process the Council expected of its partner organisations. In response, Councillor Adshead indicated that he would willing to investigate the concerns around process between the Council and its partners and invited Councillor Evans to forward to him the detailed points of his supplementary question so that a full written response could be provided.

 

(h)     Councillor Brophy had given notice of a question and asked:

 

“A study by the Research Institute for Disabled Commuters in 2019 concluded that little effort had been made to make existing electric charging points as accessible as possible for disabled users. The report highlighted practical steps that can be taken including the dropping of curbs, user experience testing with disabled motorists as well as improvements to design and location choices for charging sites. The report also rightly highlights local authorities as a vital stakeholder in driving change.

 

So can the Executive Member tell me what this Council is doing to ensure that electric vehicle charging points are made accessible for all?”

 

Councillor Adshead, Executive Member for Environmental and Regulatory Services had responded to the question in advance of the meeting and his response had been circulated to Members and been published on the Council’s website.

 

Councillor Brophy asked as a supplementary question could the Executive Member detail what contributions the Council had received from the Government’s On-Street Residential Chargepoint Scheme. Whilst Councillor Adshead did not have the information to hand he understood that the information was included in the last report to the Executive concerning electric vehicle charging. Councillor Adshead invited Councillor Brophy to email him and he would endeavour to provide the information requested.

 

(g)     Councillor Evans had given notice of a question and asked:

 

“Yesterday Trafford committed to support The GM Mayor to franchise the buses within Greater Manchester the immediate cost to our council is £1.5 million.  Given the current budgetary pressures could the Executive Member for Finance explain where this £1.5 million will be found?”

 

Councillor Ross, the Executive Member for Finance and Governance advised that in 2019/20 the Council received a windfall from the Greater Manchester Waste Disposal Authority of £2.7 million which was moved to Reserves and £1.5 million of that was earmarked to support the Council’s share of the costs of bus reform.

 

As a supplementary question, Councillor Evans sought clarification that the £1.5 million had not been spent on Covid support and whether the Council had a guarantee from the Greater Manchester Combined Authority that Trafford would not be called upon for any further contributions towards the potential ongoing costs, which could range from between zero to £292 million. Councillor Ross confirmed that a review of the reserves was undertaken and as the Council was projected to add to the reserves by the end of the current financial year it had been possible to retain the ring-fenced money that was to go towards the bus reform, an initiative willingly supported by the controlling administration.

 

(h)     Councillor Miss Blackburn had given notice of a question and asked:

 

“Residents on Lostock Road, Davyhulme have been awaiting a response from the Council since the bollards were installed late last year. Can the Executive Member clarify what the legal status is regarding the whole northern side of the highway of Lostock Road and when can residents expect an answer?”

 

Councillor Adshead, Executive Member for Environmental and Regulatory Services had responded to the question in advance of the meeting and his response had been circulated to Members and been published on the Council’s website.

 

As a supplementary question, Councillor Miss Blackburn asked whether the Executive Member was willing to visit and listen to the concerns of residents on the south side of Lostock Road, Davyhulme, as there were still serious safety issues with reports of near misses and one actual accident whilst a resident was exiting their home due to the installation of bollards along the cycle track, could he also comment on why residents had not received responses to emails which had caused dissatisfaction and mistrust following the 2020 consultation and would he like to rebut claims that the Council ignored residents wishes. Councillor Adshead confirmed that he had already met with residents on a number of occasions and was happy to meet with them further and assured Councillor Miss Blackburn that a formal response was being prepared to residents emails and would be issued in the near future. As previously communicated, it was still the case that residents were invited to contact the Council if they still had concerns.