3

Subject: Island Roads - Core Investment Period

Can the Cabinet member outline for Island residents in urban areas like my Newport East ward what the IW Council administration's policy will be if the road re-surfacing still to be undertaken in so many residential streets is not going to be completed within what little time is left of the Island Roads' Core Investment Period (ends 31.03.20)  

Under the PFI contract Island Roads is required to ensure that all roads meet the standards set out in the contract documents for the duration of the 25 year term. Roads are continually surveyed by an independent surveying company which is accredited to survey the network using standards and processes set out nationally. The results from the surveys are used to calculate a score for each section of road (known as a Monitoring Length) and these scores are then combined to provide an average score for each classification of road (Hierarchy 1 to Hierarchy 4) in each of the Islands six districts, which were created for the purposes of the contract.

 During the Core Investment Period (CIP) the scores required in each district for each classification of road increases at each six month milestone. By Milestone 12 (April 2019) the average score for each district should be at or above the score which will need to be maintained for the remaining term of the contract (15.5 for Hierarchy 1 roads, and 15 for all other hierarchies). From Milestone 14 (April 2020) a minimum score for each Monitoring Length needs to be achieved in addition to the district average.

 Whilst most of the upgrading work to achieve the required scores is carried out during the CIP, works will need to continue on an on going basis throughout the term of the contract to ensure the required scores are maintained for the remaining period of the contract. Therefore, we will continue to see works after the CIP as roads deteriorate and interventions are required to ensure the required standards are maintained Island roads is fully aware of this requirement and use its own complex model that inputs proposed treatment types and dates and models future deterioration. Depending upon the upfront chosen treatment type the model envisages for some roads a further intervention during the period after CIP. However the period of maximum activity will be during CIP and whilst further treatments will occur in the period after it ends the  level of activity on the network will be greatly reduced.

 Subject: Organisational Health

Cllr Hutchinson -

You may have noted press reports today about the record low levels of sickness absence from work in the UK during 2017.

It then occurred to me that I have no idea what the organisational health of the IW Council is since the Employment Committee (which I chaired for 2 years) was terminated by your administration in May last year. As you will recall we used to get quarterly reports on:

 • Completion of staff personal development reviews. 

• Number of reported accidents. 

• Number of reported incidents of violence and aggression to staff. 

• Average number of days lost to sickness per permanent employee together with other statistics that relate directly to initiation (action) points contained within the Attendance Management Policy and Procedure. 

• Voluntary turnover of staff as a percentage of employments.

 You will recall as a member of the Employment Committee during my 2 years that I was always particularly interested in the low level of performance reviews in the 'caring' departments, which always struck me as entirely apposite.

Since May 2017 organisational health has been your area of responsibility, but I have seen no reports or references on these interesting matters. I have briefly looked at some of the Performance Reports that go to Scrutiny and Cabinet, but could see no mention there.

Can you advise me how there is transparency on these matters ? I am sure Council Taxpayers would be interested in current sickness absence rates, particularly those related to mental health issues.

Cllr Brodie,

Thanks for drawing this to my attention. Sometimes one forgets that because one is still party to information, others aren't. I do agree we need to have greater transparency on this issue. 

We of course still collect the information and this is regularly discussed at the Resources Group Meetings I have, as well as at CMT as part of a dashboard of indicators as to the management of the organisation. I would in addition expect any concerns around issues such as those you list, to be raised at the regular JCM meetings between Members, Chief Officers and Unions, which both Dave and I attend.

That doesn't however allow review by a wider audience and to address this I shall ask  for these statistics to be regularly published (I think twice a year would be sufficient to monitor trends and any action taken) as an appendix to the performance report presented to Cabinet at the end of each quarter.  That would mean that it is open and publicly available and because all Cabinet papers are examined by Scrutiny, will offer the opportunity of comment or question.

 Subject: Island Roads Core Investment Period

Cllr Stewart

Thanks for the written response to my Full Council question. I am afraid that I need to pursue this further as your response raises further questions. 

I have copied it to Simon Wiggins so that it can registered as a formal question to you as Leader under the process for dealing with formal questions to Cabinet members. I also intend to continue making these questions public as I feel very strongly that Islanders, not least myself, have been deceived and that your administration is failing to act in their best interests in relation to this contract.

In your response you refer me to the Final Business Case (FBC) for the PFI contract, which was agreed by Cabinet on 29 May 2012 Cabinet, then by the Department for Transport and HM Treasury, and then presented to Cabinet and Full Council on 21/22 August 2012.

The redacted copy of the FBC that I am able to access has the following paragraphs:

2.5.3 Project Scope 

2.5.3.1 A high-level summary of the Project scope is described below. 

2.5.4 Carriageways 

(sections emboldened by me)

You will see that at no time do these paragraphs mention your words 'agreed average standard'. Nor is there any qualification for Island Roads not having to refurbish all of the Project Network during the Core Investment Period. The FBC also makes very clear that the Scope of the Project includes all 818 km of the Project Network.

Can you please explain these clear discrepancies between what you tell me and what the FBC says ? 

Can you also tell me what level of fines have been applied to Island Roads for failure to comply with the contract in each of the financial years since April 2013, including the first half of this year ?

Can you please explain these clear discrepancies between what you tell me and what the FBC says ? 

The obligations of the Service Provider, in reference to the Core Investment Period (CIP), are outline in the Highways PFI contract. These are measured by condition indices, not lengths of treated roads.  The condition indices are calculated from road survey results.  The length of carriageway referenced in the question was the total length of carriageway at the time of contract commencement (the Project Network).  The total Project Networks is still currently in the scope of the contract to be managed by the Service Provider.  That does not necessarily mean that all roads being managed will be treated, if the condition indices are within an acceptable level.

Can you also tell me what level of fines have been applied to Island Roads for failure to comply with the contract in each of the financial years since April 2013, including the first half of this year ?

This information is deemed to be commercially sensitive.

Can you advise me how much we are currently spending on the Regeneration element of the Council's budget and how much we have spent in total since the appointment of the Director?

Can you also give me an account of what has tangibly been achieved for the Island in terms of regeneration since the investment into this directorate?

 Dear Cllr Brodie,

Please find below a summary of the expenditure on the regeneration function up to and including projected expenditure in this current financial year:

17/18 - £1.8m revenue, £2.5 capital (£4.3m)

18/19 - £996k revenue, £1.1m capital (£2.09m)

19/20 - £1.1m revenue, £621k capital (£1.72m)

Total - £3.89m revenue, £4.2m capital (£8.1m in total)

In terms of tangible achievement's during that period I would refer you in the first instance to the member update issued in January and attached again for reference.

The main achievements so far include:

Creation and protection of over 300 jobs

Several funding bids to a range of government bodies resulting in leverage of £3m UK Government funding and £15m private sector funding

Acquisition of 30 acres of permitted employment land

Development and occupation of 40,000 sq ft of Grade A office space

Costed and fully consulted regeneration masterplan proposals for Nicholson Rd and Newport Harbour

Partnership regeneration place plans for Newport and Ryde each with a series of locally prioritised delivery projects

A Bay regeneration Vision and delivery programme including partner investment proposals for Dinosaur Isle and Sandham middle school site

A Digital Island strategy and delivery road map incl investment in a Digital Business Incubation Centre to open in 2020

An overarching regeneration strategy "inspiration island" - 2019 - 2030

A Higher Education Prospectus

Establishment of a housing company

Higher business rate growth during the period than Portsmouth or Southampton - details on the value to this island over this period to follow

You will be aware of the time and resources required in developing a programme and the projects contained within it, in terms of developing business cases, taking projects through the planning system and then to market. The above represents progress from a standing start in 2017 with great prospects for further results in the coming years.

Chris Ashman

Director of Regeneration

Can I also have a break down of how the Revenue element of the Regeneration budget is spent in the current year?

Also a breakdown of what elements of the IWC Capital budget over the last 3 years are being attributed to Regeneration activity?

 Cllr Brodie,

Please find requested breakdown below

Regeneration Revenue breakdown 19-20

Employees £535,382

Premises £120,338

Supplies and Services £1,074,489

Transport £4,451

Income £414,055

Other payments £134,042

Capital Budget attributed to Regeneration 2017-20 - £4,221,000

Chris Ashman

Director of Regeneration

 Can I know how many employers there are?

I also asked for specific details of the elements of the Capital spend attributable to Regeneration.

For clarification we have 7 direct employees in regeneration and the remainder of the budget (approx. 40%) purchases time from our property, legal and procurement teams.

Capital breakdown:

*The micro brewery project is funded by the UK Govt Coastal Communities Fund and IOWC is acting as the grant holder

Dear Clare,

Can I have an explanation/briefing on two savings lines within your portfolio:

1. Remodelling Homecare Packages - £300k

2. Review of Care Packages - £1.045m

These amount to the most significant element of the overall proposed savings. Yet again for your portfolio, though I obviously understand the proportion of Council budget you have oversight of.

 1. Remodelling Homecare Packages

We will be focusing first on those people with intensive levels of homecare (eg. 4 visits per day delivered each time by 2 carers) in order to see which of those visits we may be able to either reduce or transfer to a Personal Assistant (PA). It will take us 12 months to deliver the 15% target we have set ourselves.

In addition, we will be working with those we serve to promote greater levels of choice and control by transferring to obtaining care and support from a PA instead of through more traditional routes people can achieve a more personalised support network with greater flexibility

2.Review of Care Packages

Peoples needs change over time and where we are able to input recovery and/or reablement input we know that we have success in reducing long term need as well as reducing high levels of needs.

This efficiency saving of £1.045m comprises of 3 components all of which overlap - for instance in reviewing high costs placements the aim is to introduce a consistent approach to costings via the resource allocation system (RAS); equally, people in receipt of Section 117 (i.e. after care for those people under sections 2 & 3 of the mental health act) will also be subject to the application of the RAS.

That is why we have not given saving amounts for each of the three areas of activity designed to deliver this target. We acknowledge this is an ambitious target in that over the last two years our reviewing activity has already delivered £3.8m savings.

Carol Tozer

Director of Adult Social Services

 Dear Cllr Stewart,

You appear to have lost any sense of being someone who should represent all Islanders in your role as leader of the IW Council.

When I heard you on Radio 4's Today programme yesterday morning I was dumfounded. Since then I have had a good number of residents contacting me asking what on earth you and the MP are doing. You are each reported as follows;

"Bob Seely, the MP for the Isle of Wight told the Telegraph:" The Island is generally liked by social scientists because it is an isolated community. The ferries are now down to an essential service, so you can pretty much track every human being that comes off and on the island."

"Dave Stewart, leader of the Council of Isle of Wight, added:" We have 140,000 people on the Isle of Wight and we are an ideal pilot location for the Government to try out a whole community test."

Can I ask on what basis you have decided to call for the Island to be essentially a guinea pig during the current crisis?

 Councillor Brodie,

I understand you are using this email as a form of members question and I reply to you on that basis:

Firstly there is no suggestion that the Island could come out of lockdown early. Any exit from the lockdown needs to be well-managed approach with comprehensive monitoring and testing with the ability to reintroduce control measures to ensure that our vulnerable residents are protected to the fullest.

The Island's unique status gives it an opportunity to better manage any exit from lockdown than most other areas. This is an opportunity which should not be missed and would provide the stringent safeguards the Island's community and the Isle of Wight Council would support.

During these unique and unprecedented times, the council, working with partners in health and the voluntary sector, is working tirelessly to protect and support our Island community. Their response has been amazing, but there is no time to relax, we must continue to take personal and collective responsibility to protect ourselves from the virus.

If the Island is offered the opportunity of whole community testing which would give us a much better picture of Coronavirus spread on the Island, in my view this would be very informative and further contribute to helping us to keep our community safe.

Let me conclude by saying I am not calling for the Island to be a 'guinea pig' for anything. However, I am keen that we maximise opportunities to recover from the impact of the virus but at the same time ensure we keep our community safe.

I trust this allays your concerns

Dave Stewart - Leader

Free School Meals

Last nights Channel 4 News highlighted the government's entire failure to provide alternative free school meals for children currently out of school for the past 6 weeks.

In my ward, with the highest level of child poverty, I am very aware of families with children usually at the local school who are not getting the long promised meal vouchers.

Locally my local community group, Pan Together, is making plans to feed local children who are missing out on lunches.

However, I am interested to know if you and your administration are making any plans to address this government debacle Island-wide?

 Dear Geoff,

Thank you for your email about the National Voucher Scheme for pupils entitled to free school meals. I share your concerns about the operation of the voucher system and I have ensured that the concerns of schools and parents have been fed back to the DfE on a regular basis.

As background, I'm not sure if you are aware but these vouchers are not an entitlement for all children on free school meals. They are only used when the normal routes of delivering free school meals can not be accessed by the school. Many schools on the Island have continued to provide free school meals and have not drawn upon the voucher system. The DfE guidance on this issue states:

"We understand that schools will have different approaches to how they would normally provide free school meals to eligible children. These might include:

* an in-house catering team

* a local authority catering service

* a private catering provider

The steps you take to support children at this time may be different depending on the individual circumstances of the school. You might be able to provide eligible pupils not attending school with meals or food parcels through your current food provider.

Where this is not possible, the Department for Education (DfE) has developed a centrally-funded national voucher scheme to support schools with this process".

In relation to the schools serving Newport, some local schools have chosen not to use the voucher system at all thus far such as Summerfields Primary and Nine Acres Primary. They have put in a system where children on free school meals receive a packed lunch on a daily basis. Nine acres has just moved to the voucher system. Some schools are using the voucher system such as Barton Primary, Medina College, Medina House Special and St George's Special. In common with schools nationally all of these reported that the system was awful during the first couple of weeks but are now reporting that it is improving and finally appears to be getting on track. It's a situation I'm monitoring closely and will continue to ensure representations are made to the DfE until it is working perfectly.

Cllr Paul Brading

Cabinet Member for Children's Services, Education and Skills.

 PSP-LLP Partnership

I can perhaps start compulsory fumbling in the dark on this proposed decision by asking - has this partnership delivered anything at all?

There is a piece of land in my ward with planning permission, that was cleared and badger free, but still nothing happens. There were supposed to be affordable homes built there. Medina Avenue - the former driving test centre.

The position with PSP is that they have provided designs, layouts and costings on a number of schemes but getting to the point of agreeing planning permissions for numbers of dwellings on each and then getting spades in the ground has proven difficult We have been in discussion about the partnership as the situation is now very different from when the relationship started.

As to the Medina Avenue project, you are probably as aware as anyone as to the difficulties faced with this site, firstly in getting a planning permission with agreed numbers and designs. Having got that and arranged demolition, we were then able to commence detailed site investigations. Those investigations have revealed unfavourable and contaminated ground conditions in particular the need for potential piling works to ensure solid foundations. This all added to the construction costs and a requirement for additional funding.

For the last six months this project along with others has been on hold because of our other priorities arising from the Covid-19 emergency, and of course the Council's dramatically changed financial position We are now looking at alternatives including the possibility of using modular construction which will allow for lightweight foundations. However, the projects we are able to carry forward and how we fund them, including this project, will be very dependent upon our overall financial position, both in bringing the current years budget back into balance and grappling with next year's. 

 Isle of Wight Council support for vulnerable families and children

Dave,

I have read this media release and your own message to Members carefully yesterday and took it as your administration not yet committing to anything for Xmas.

However, I have noted today that one of the more sensible local members of my former party, Richard Quigley was posting on social media yesterday that:

"I had a very positive and open discussion with Dave Stewart this morning. He has committed to continue to help families and children that need it through the holidays. The most sensible method of doing that is through the existing voucher scheme. So credit where it is due to Dave"

Can you clarify for me precisely what your position is?

You are aware that the local community group within my area, Pan Together CIO is committed to filling any void left at Xmas by the IW Council. I hope it does not come to that.

Thanks

Geoff

 Geoff,

Firstly my apologies for the delay in response.

Paul Brading is coordinating a meeting with interested parties (including yourself) and is also chasing latest Govt position via his contacts.

We are aware of the good work you are doing on Pan and want to be as supportive as we can.

I anticipate the meeting will be virtual and next week.

Additional response

I think you are seeking my personal views rather than just the process we have adopted.

Personally I want to ensure every Child does not go hungry at Christmas and on a broader perspective that we have arrangements in place to address not only those who are from very deprived households but also those 'on the cusp' who could easily fall over the line due to the impact of Covid on employment and therefore need support.

I obviously commend the Government for their commitments to additional funding for Christmas and Easter.

Councillor Brading and I will continue with our local engagement plans with a non-political cross community meeting to which I know you have been invited.

I would like to see this issue addressed matter of social values and support for Island Children and Families at this difficult time.

Dave Stewart

Would you like to comment on the following, sent to me by a member of staff? 

"Council officers, especially in planning and legal services (including the Monitoring Officer), are reporting.... they are living in fear of the sustained public attacks on their services/advice and in some cases their health and wellbeing and their ability to do their jobs has been significantly affected by the way they feel a number of councillors are treating them."

If this applied to a Cabinet member would you dismiss them from their post?

Geoff Brodie

Dear Councillor Brodie,

Were any allegations to be made of this nature I would approach them in the same way as council staff might use the council’s disciplinary procedures which are based on the principles of improving performance wherever possible in the first instance. This might include the identification of training needs that would help an individual achieve this goal. The ultimate sanction of dismissal is always available but in the main should only ever be considered when all other avenues to improve performance have been used.

Lora Peacey Wilcox

We have all seen the image that you posted on Facebook in November last year. In the foreground are your dogs asleep, and in the background is a display of racially offensive dolls. Yesterday [Tuesday 22^nd February] a friend of yours posted online that you have had a collection of Golly dolls for as long as she can remember. As Leader of the Council, please can you explain whether those dolls were displayed in your home in November?

Please refer to my  media statement on local media outlets.

Cllr Peacey Wilcox

If you were leader of a London Borough Council you would have had to resign some time ago. Do you think the ethnic minority population on the Isle of Wight are too small in number to bother about?

 Absolutely not

Cllr Peacey Wilcox

Do you recognise that Golly dolls, such as those shown in an image on your facebook page in November of last year, are offensive, and will you apologise for causing offence?

 Please refer to my statement made to the media today.

Cllr Peacey Wilcox

 t is important to make the distinction between the role of leader and the individual that holds the position. This question seeks an answer simply in your capacity as leader and is not a personal attack as indeed are none from the Conservative side of the Chamber. There are questions that remain unanswered following the publication relating to social media posts sent from your home, and I think it is important that a full account is given so that the Island's reputation can be protected. I believe it is vital for democracy. Can you give a full account of the social media post and the circumstances please?

 Please refer to my statement made to the media today.

Cllr Peacey Wilcox

Considering that the Island needs to attract young working people and families to the Island regardless of background, do you understand that a Council Leader who shared an image of Golly dolls and refuses to apologise could put off people from black and minority ethnic backgrounds from coming to the Island to live, work or holiday?

Please refer to my statement made today. One of my greatest pleasures as Chairman was giving citizenship to a good number of multi national people from across the world.  Some of my greatest friends and supporters are those at St Marys.

Cllr Peacey Wilcox

You have said much about unpleasantness and threats towards those in public life. Will you denounce the actions of those in the public gallery on Wednesday who shouted, “Tory scum” and “racist scum” at councillors and support the Conservative Group Leader in calling for video recording in the Public Gallery?

 I make no comment on any words alleged to have been used as I could not make out what was being said. I have no objection to the proposal for video recording in the public gallery subject to any legal rules that may exist and any resource implications this may have.

Cllr Peacey Wilcox

I continue to get complaints concerning inconsiderate parking, obstructing pavements, driveways, etc; Lanesend School, Northwood School, Oxford Street, Venner Avenue and offshoots, Pallance Road and parking in disabled bays when not disabled. Island Roads, who I always find helpful, say they cannot do anything unless the vehicles are illegal (not Taxed, etc). Parking Services say they can only take action if there are yellow lines and can catch then at the time – at do take action when they can. The Police, I am told, are powered to deal with obstructions on the Highway (including pavements), but who knows how to contact them directly nowadays (without protracted process) and do they have the resources?

Whatever the reason, I cannot be the only Ward Councillor who has this issue nor who would agree with their residents in saying it is just not good enough, that we pay for these services and don’t get them. I am working with Ian over other concerns regarding lack of support response and wondered if this might fall into the same category? Or, is there something that we, as a council could better coordinate to deal with this issue?

One observation I have is that whilst we quite rightly put in more and more parking restrictions (Cowes and Northwood have just had a much needed swathe), we do relatively little to facilitate parking needs to compensate. Even in our Planning Policy, the number of off-street parking places for new dwellings seems unrealistically low, and very few properties that could encompass basement or roof top parking are compelled to do so.

I would be interested to know what the Cabinet thought on this matter and what, if any, measures might be considered.

Pavement parking is a subject that crops up regularly and I must advise that both the Council and the Police have relatively few powers under existing legislation to tackle the problem.

The Council’s Civil Enforcement Officers have no powers to issue Penalty Charge Notices to a vehicle parked on the pavement unless there are double or single yellow lines at the edge of the carriageway.

In more general terms, at present, parking on the pavement (without a yellow line) is largely allowed in England and Wales. Driving on the pavement is illegal and enforceable by the Police. However, in order to enforce pavement parking, the Police need to observe a vehicle driving (and not parking) on the pavement. However, the Police could theoretically take action if a vehicle was causing an obstruction on a footway, but locally there has never been an appetite for this.

You might be aware that the DfT launched a consultation on pavement parking on 31st August 2020 with an end date of 22nd November 2020. The previous Isle of Wight Council administration fed into the consultation and supported the recommendation that Civil Enforcement Officers be granted powers to issue Penalty Charge Notices for ‘unnecessary obstruction of the footway.’ Local Authorities are now awaiting a response from the DfT and according to the national media an announcement might be forthcoming, as the The Sun, The Daily Express and The Mirror (amongst others) published articles about a forthcoming pavement parking ban in January and February 2022. The Mirror stated: ‘New laws around parking on pavements are one of many coming into power this year.’ Critically, no timescale has been mentioned.

The question of legislation to prevent pavement parking feeds into the Department for Transport’s ‘Gear Change’ agenda which prioritises the needs of the pedestrian and cyclist over those of the motorist.

I hope this explains the position, but as mentioned, there is not much material help the Council can offer in terms of parking enforcement unless a vehicle is parked on the pavement with a yellow line at the edge of the carriageway.

Changes to the highway network to resolve these matters are considered on a case by case basis. The council would potentially look at Traffic Regulation Orders (TROs) to assist with managing the safety and integrity of the network, as we have done in Northwood, Gurnard, Cowes and East Cowes so far.

Any suggested proposals from residents, local councils or councillors should be raised with Island Roads as they will be added to the Highways Safety and Improvement Register to inform future District TRO reviews.

It should be noted that TROs do not just refer to Double Yellow Lines, other time specific restrictions can be considered were necessary/appropriate. Of course all agreed TROs are subject to a formal consultation process, so their implementation cannot be guaranteed.

Additionally residents can request that Access Protect Bars (APBs) are added, at a fee, to the carriageway in front of formal driveways. Again these can be requested via Island Roads.

Finally in respect of Oxford Street, Northwood we have recently been notified of vehicles being parked in the bus stop clearway, this is now being addressed through the installation of  clearway sign to reinforce the existing on carriageway markings and allows it to be enforced.

The local planning authority’s approach to parking provision follows the national planning policy framework and is expressed locally through the Council’s Guidelines for Parking Provision as Part of New Developments Supplementary Planning Document. This was prepared by the Council in 2016 and adopted in 2017, and seeks to balance the demands of high quality design, facilitating sustainable transport choices, personal choice over the level of car ownership and minimising the impacts arising from new development on the surrounding road network.

Cllr Jordan

Does the Leader of the Council agree with members of her minority administration that questions to her at Full Council regarding possible racism are misogynist because she is a woman? Does she believe that only male Leaders should be subject to full scrutiny and accountability? If not, will she educate her misguided colleagues?

“The Leader agrees that all people should be treated with equality, respect and fairness, male or female.

The Leader is also aware that Misogyny is a very real and serious issue that requires positive and proactive actions when it exists.

The Leader is working to eradicate such unacceptable behaviour on the harassment and victimisation of women, specifically, as that is what Misogyny entails,  by definition, the bullying and continued systematic abuse of women”

Cllr Peacey Wilcox

The Monitoring Officer has reminded councillors in his report to Annual Council at Agenda item 7a (para 20) that under the ‘Code of Practice for Members and Officers Dealing with Planning Matters':

" Members who are consistently unable to support national or local planning policies will inevitably find themselves unable to take objective decisions in relation to individual planning applications and should not participate in development management decision making."

As the Leader is also leader of the Independent/Green Alliance political group, which still has at least four members of the Planning Committee who have found themselves speaking and voting against national or local planning policies on two or three occasions during the past twelve-month period (Cllrs Adams, Critchison, Jarman, Medland), will she seek to replace them with councillors who will not so blatantly put at risk the Council's credibility as a planning authority? If not, why not?

 As the report makes clear, Members must be able to make their own decisions and free to take their own view, otherwise, it would be akin to whipping and there would be no point having member involvement in decision making.

Cllr Peacey Wilcox

At the Full Council meeting in February the Leader made allegations that she had been the victim of hate crimes including harassment and intimidation. Although she named no one the implication was clear that she meant councillors, such as myself, who were questioning racially offensive postings on her personal social media. 

Hants Police then confirmed they were looking into the Leader's formal complaint.

However, we have recently learnt that the Police are not pursuing an investigation into these claims.

Can the Leader explain why she wasted Police time with these nonsensical allegations? Does she not think that the Police have enough to do without being involved in her defence of an untenable position over racism?

The Police have not indicated that I have wasted police time at all. I will be eternally grateful for the swift, support and advice they have given me during this time.

Cllr Peacey Wilcox

I was surprised to learn from you at Full Council that you have set up a Council-wide 'Anti Poverty Group', but have not invited (or even kept informed) the councillor who represents the most deprived ward on the island.

Is there no end to the Alliance's antipathy towards me because I stand up against racism?

I always try to value your participation Cllr Brodie.  I will bring your request for inclusion to the attention of officers as we move forward.

Cllr Love

Given it is now over 3 months since the £40m budget allocation was agreed by Full Council for building affordable housing - thanks to my casting vote - can you please issue a members briefing as to where you are with plans to secure and then spend this? Preferably something that is also issued for public information.

Dear Councillor Brodie,

Thank you for your email.

The budget proposal to allocate £40m to  Housing, which you and the majority of councillors supported is an access to obtain monies, and as you are aware not money held within the Isle of Wight Council.

A business case for each application will need to be put before the s151 officer, checked and evaluated. If all is positive we will then be granted access to apply for a loan from the PWLB (Public Works Loans Board). At the present time the IWC has not put forward a business case or proposal.

The present Alliance administration took control of the Council a year ago, and differing areas of housing and housing provision are spread through various departments and areas of service. Respectful to the previous administration I have endeavoured to review what is efficient and what is not so efficient in the present set up. I have come to the conclusion that  there is a requirement for change to better suit the aspirations and bring forward positive results at this present time.   There is opportunity to undertake this with a new interim CX who is already moving in support of a homelessness/ housing centric approach.

The property company is in name only, this needs to be dealt with asap, with any resulting housing stock excluded from ‘the right to buy’. I am meeting with each RP (Rental Provider) who operates on the Island to set a dialogue whereby we seek/reach agreement on  building developments etc. We have recently been awarded the status of a RP which will allow us to also compete for Homes England funding etc.

We are, through the regeneration team researching sites for the modular homes for which we have funding and Chris Ashman has the sign off. We are also in the process of clearing 3 brownfield sites in readiness for sale/development, again this is being dealt with through regen.

We have purchased 4x flats to house rough sleepers, and these are in various towns within the Island this was dealt with through our Homelessness team.

I am conscious of the interest of many, and welcome the support of all councillors in moving things positively forward. I am also available to discuss on a one to one basis all aspects of Housing and Homelessness on the Isle of Wight. I hope this email gives you an understanding of where the IWC is at present.

Cllr Stephens

Dear Cllr Stepehns

Thanks for your response.

Can I now ask WHY no business case has been put to the Section 151 Officer? Surely that is something that needs to be done urgently if the Council is to address the appalling housing problems of the Island. 

It certainly seems strange to me that the Section 151 Officer is the ultimate arbiter of something decided democratically by Budget Council. Within my own Community Council (Newport & Carisbrooke) we take PWLB loans that are comparable to the IW Council in terms of overall turnover with the agreement of councillors, not officers. I am sure the same applies to your own Ryde Town Council.

Can I also ask why the Registered Provider 'housing company' has not been progressed? Once again this shows a level of tardiness in dealing with our housing problems.

Finally, has your administration considered pulling together all Housing responsibilities into one service area. It seems entirely ridiculous to have it spread across Adult Social Care, Planning, Regeneration and Public Health. A dreadful example of silo working, preventing forward action.

I would remind you that there are only 35 months until the next elections. And 3 months have passed since Budget Council......

Dear Councillor Brodie,

I will answer your third point first, and agree with your concerns over the tardiness of IWC housing being placed in 4-5 various departments. This is the legacy framework which I requested previously to be  

 re-organised. I am pleased to say that elements of this will be coming forward soon. The CX is now interviewing for a head of housing, who will pull relevant areas of service into a more cohesive way of working.

Officers have researched various areas for development but have failed to identify a suitable site at this time and therefore no business case has been formulated for the purchase and installation of modular homes.

Ryde TC has acquired assets without the need for a s151 officer, however the IWC has to follow its own guidance and due diligence with the public purse. I have been told that each submission will have to show a 5-6% return.

I have held meetings with the other RPs who operate on the Island and the IWC newly found status will find momentum as we progress with positive change. I am looking to structural change to assist with  the RP status.

The ‘new’ housing company was registered with Companies House by the previous administration, but in name only. Work is required to formulate the objects of this company.

In my role as cabinet member I am always prepared to meet on a one to one basis and listen to proposals which may assist processes within the remit of housing.

Cllr Stephens

Is it the case that this Alliance administration now sees Pan & Barton as a dumping ground for its social problems, rather than an area that needs help in real 'levelling up' far more than most Island communities? 

In your desperation to patronise me you have entirely ignored my question. Or perhaps you did not understand it?

I will repeat,

"Is it the case that this Alliance administration now sees Pan & Barton as a dumping ground for its social problems, rather than an area that needs help in real 'levelling up' far more than most Island communities?"

I am happy to explain it if that would help.

For the record I have fully understood the understated responsibilities of councillors with regard to corporate parenting ever since I was first elected back in 2005. Responsibilities that are NEVER made clear to candidates pre-election.

However, I will always put the difficulties of the many above the few. Why should the many permanent residents have to tolerate disturbances caused by one teenager? Particularly when they already tolerate an often mis-managed shelter within the immediate vicinity.

I look forward to a reply to my original question next time.

To clarify my previous answer, no electoral division/ward of the Isle of Wight is “a dumping ground” as described in your question.  All Island communities are a valued part of Island life. As I have previously said, we have a responsibility to all children across all of the Island and to talk of a dumping ground for children is disrespectful to them and our communities.

Levelling up in not necessarily simplistically based and evidenced on electoral division/ward administrative boundaries only and blanket use of geography as a means of addressing need is an imprecise tool as levelling up applies within and across communities however large or small. Levelling up applies to all, including vulnerable children too.

Hello Lora,

At last week’s Full Council I asked a Members Question for an update on the proposed transfer to the Council of Houses on Pan Meadows, by Barrett Homes. This was discussed and I believe agreed under the Conservative Administration, prior to May 2021, and I recall the agreement to be in the region of 25 houses?

I am disappointed after a week to not have received the written response I was promised?

Could I please have the written response to my question as soon as possible

Regards

Cllr Paul Brading

Dear Cllr Brading,

Thank you for recent question at full council. As a response in the form of an update, we are continuing negotiations with BWD (Barratts) on the number of homes and timescales for transfer of homes in lieu of commuted sums in line with the development agreement entered into in 2011. This is a long term agreement which legally comes into force when Barratt build the last home on the site. Barratt will be building for 2 more years and the council has and continues to seek early settlement of the agreement to transfer new “affordable” homes to the council“ for Islanders.

Regards

Lora

Re Local Housing Allowance (LHA) levels

Given the clear disconnect between actual private rents and Local Housing Allowances set by the Valuation Office Agency (a government agency), have the IW Council leadership considered making real (indeed strenuous) efforts to challenge these current, ridiculously low levels of LHA?

For example, I believe that a resident claiming universal credit gets an LHA of £575pcm for a 2-bedroom house when the rent will be at least £695pcm. This means they need to find £120pcm from what is already a poverty level of income. I also understand the gap for a 3-bedroom is at least £175 pcm.

I suspect that very few, or indeed no properties have been marketed by local letting agents (from whom the VOA collect their data) at the LHA rate of £575 pcm - 2 bed or £775 -  3 bed in the last two years. 

I am aware that the  Chartered Institute of Public Finance ( CIPFA) and the Ministry for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities Government (DHLC)  have raised concerns with their Government peers regarding the rates of Local Housing Allowance (LHA) which are not representative of market rents. You will be aware that the LHA rates are prescribed in legislation and can only be changed by Parliament. 

I have spoken with my peers and colleagues at the LGA on this matter to understand what or if any action is already being taken forward on behalf of local authorities.  I shall also be writing to the MP to set out clearly our concerns and asking him to lobby for an urgent review of rates to avoid hardship to those low income households living on the Island.  I will be happy to share this letter with members when it has been sent.

Cllr Ian Stephens

Re. Isle of Wight Law Centre

I am shocked to learn of the imminent closure of the IW Law Centre on 31 August 2022, which according to the Charity Commission website actually has two of your Cabinet members as trustees (Bacon & Andre).

For my ward's residents, the Law Centre has been the 'go to' place for housing and legal advice, particularly after the previous administration brought the CAB 'in-house', meaning many of my residents were no longer keen to access its services as County Hall is seen as 'the enemy'. 

Can I ask if your administration is going to try to help save an independent Law Centre for the Island? It appears that the previous administration pursued a policy of starving the Law Centre of grant support (to the tune of circa £250k) and I would be disappointed if that is continuing under a regime that is supposedly different.

Can I also ask if your officers seriously believe that the CAB will be able to take up the work previously undertaken by the Law Centre?

Thank you for your the Members Question to Cabinet Member in relation to the current position with the Law Centre.

I can confirm that our Administration was saddened to hear that the Law Centre have made a decision to close. Our staff continue to work with the Law Centre to try and find a solution that will enable the service to continue. Housing, and in particular homelessness, is a priority for our Administration, with the Cabinet approving a Homelessness and Rough Sleeping Strategy action plan in June  this year.

We recognise that this may be a very distressing time for all people accessing support through the Law Centre, including your ward residents, and would like to assure those affected by the news, that we are continuing to explore all options to ensure people receive the services and support they need to help prevent their risks of homelessness.

Cllr Lora Peacey Wilcox