Agenda item

Further to the last meeting on 10^th June , members had submitted questions on the COVID presentation for Officer responses.

A questions and answers paper had been submitted and those members who had submitted questions were asked to make any further comments on the responses if required.

1.    Councillor Fewings on the selective licensing powers further asked if he could be provided with a list of all powers available for dealing with empty properties including those under selective licensing powers.  The Head of Housing and Development Control agreed to supply Councillor Fewings with this information.

2.    Councillor Townsend on planning applications further asked for an explanation of the performance indicators figures and referred to an outstanding application in his Ward.  The Chief Operating Officer explained that the Q4 performance figures for 2019/20  for planning targets had been achieved, however the figures in Q1 of this year had been effected by COVID and there was a backlog of applications to work through.  He asked Councillor Townsend to let him know of the specific application he was referring to and he would look into it for him.

3.    Councillor Fewings in respect of lobby Government to support industries he further asked that the Council be innovative on supporting low carbon industries.  Councillor Gordon Lishman agreed and said that a Burnley based approach was needed rather than being subsumed by into the LEP.

4.    Councillor Townsend in respect of the flood defences in Padiham further commented that it was disappointing that the work had slipped to late Summer 2020 despite it being an emergency in 2017.  He said that a more pro-active response was required.  The Chief Operating Officer said that a more detailed response would be provided, he said that it required a multi-agency approach but that the Council was trying to influence partners as much as possible to complete the works.  A more comprehensive report would be available shortly.

5.    On the response to Councillor Townsend`s question on infrastructure projects, Councillor Gordon Lishman said that the Council needed to be ready to take advantage of the Government`s job creation and job protection initiative and in respect of retro-fitting older homes under climate change the Council should be in pole position to make bids.

6.    Councillor Townsend further commented on his disappointment of Burnley`s response in the Redefining Lancashire plan that had been sent to the Prime Minister which had only referred to Pioneer Place and felt a more ambitious submission could have been made.  The Chief Operating Officer responded by saying that there was a short window of opportunity for bids with a strict set of criteria which  precluded other projects.  Councillor Fewings asked if the cinema and restaurant complex needed to be reconsidered in light of COVID as the Council had a fiduciary duty to ensure money was being used wisely.

7.    Councillor Fewings further commented on the transparency and accountability of the LEP and asked who was speaking for Burnley on this board.  Councillor Townsend said that the LEP had recently failed a governance review and ought to have had a scrutiny committee established 12 months ago. 

8.    Councillor Commis commented on Pioneer Place but said it was not an option to review the decision on it, he said it might prove difficult to secure tenants in the current climate.

9.    Councillor Townsend criticised the Government`s funding package which for Burnley Council equated to £10 per capita as the majority of the money was ring fenced. This left the Council with a £3.4m deficit.  Councillor Margaret Lishman said that she was pushing for additional funding from the Government and felt that the Government was relying on the local Councils to provide services in the community, whilst devaluing what Councils do by not acknowledging the costs to the Councils during the COVID crisis.

10.Councillor Fewings on Burnley Golf Club further commented that golf was a niche sport and that Burnley Leisure could have opened this up for general public use during the pandemic in the interests of the health and wellbeing of residents.

11.Councillor Pate in respect of a digital strategy further commented that she still had no answer on when this would happen and that it was being confused with an IT strategy.  There was a need for connectivity of choice for residents. The Performance and Engagement Manager said that the name of the document caused confusion but that it was clearly a digital strategy and he would involve Councillor Pate in the review of it.  He said that the Council had to get best value from Liberata. Councillor Pate referred to the  Good Things Foundation who had done Salford`s digital strategy and said they should be considered when refreshing Burnley`s digital strategy.

12.In respect of holiday provision for children during school holidays Councillor Pate praised Burnley Leisure for their plans to run activities which was generous given their current situation with COVID.

13.The Policy and Engagement Manager responded to Councillor Townsend`s question on the % of vulnerable children identified who had been attending school.  He said that a % figure of vulnerable children could not be given but the number of children attending school during week commencing 15^th June had been 285 across all settings.  He would send out the detailed LCC response on the definition of vulnerable children to everyone.

14.Councillor Pate asked if all the vulnerable people had now been identified.  The Chief Operating Officer (COO) said that had a comprehensive list had been compiled with many partner organisations.   He confirmed that a leaflet on what is on offer for residents will be sent out with the canvass forms as previously suggested by Councillor Fewings.

15.On the impact of COVID on the third sector Councillor Pate said she had wanted a more local response.  She said some had changed how they worked for which there were positive and negative aspects.  She said some were providing free meals to the vulnerable but asked what might happen when things return to normal. What is the impact for our local third sector and what funding issues they have experienced?  The COO advised that he was working with the third sector on a weekly basis.

16.Councillor Townsend in respect of UCLAN,  said that whilst it was good news that the 4k number of students was still on track for 2025 he had concerns around the dip in foreign students and how this would impact  on the accommodation provision at Sandygate.  He asked if the business case was  being monitored to ensure the Council wasn`t left with a financial burden. The COO said that the first year had been  modelled on a significantly less figure, but as of last week 25 expressions of interest for accommodation had been received.  The situation will continue to be monitored.

17.In respect of the cut in bus services the COO said he was still awaiting a response from LCC and would report back to members on this.

18.Councillor Foster asked if any evictions had taken place since she raised the issue at the last meeting and also whether an analysis of the data captured could show a breakdown of the hard to reach groups in terms of age, ethnicity, areas had been possible,  The Head of Housing and Development Control said he was not aware of any evictions and that his team were working closely with landlords.  The Head of Policy and Engagement said that there wasn’t a breakdown of information to share as it  was based on data from the NHS and there were strict parameters on how the data could be used.

19.  Councillor Townsend asked would happen next in terms of the scrutiny of the COVID response.  He said that a recovery plan was needed over the  next12 months.  The COO confirmed that this was being developed and there would be an economic recovery plan and a community recovery plan which would be on the forward plan for scrutiny to monitor.