Issue - items at meetings - Public Questions

(The closing date for receipt of public questions is 12 noon on 30 October 2008)

(i)    Public Question from Mr R Pennington (copy attached).

59(i)   Public Question – Mr. R Pennington

59.1       This public question was taken immediately prior to Item 68.

59.2       Mr Pennington asked the following question:

“Given the significant discrimination against disabled persons caused by car-free developments and the associated Traffic Regulation Order, and given that the report has no comparative studies of what other authorities do to mitigate that discrimination, and given that local organisations for the disabled have not been consulted on these TRO’s in any meaningful way, and given that there is no urgency on this matter as the other elements of the TRO can be approved and the car-free elements can be delayed, why has the TRO not been designed to allow a disabled resident to have a resident's permit?”

59.3       The Cabinet Member stated that the question was closely linked to an element of Item 68 and thanked Mr Pennington for his patience in waiting for the main agenda item to come forward.  The Cabinet Member stated that the council fully recognised the interest in the matter that had previously been expressed by the Federation of Disabled People, through Mr Pennington, as their co-opted representative, on the council’s Planning Committee. The Cabinet Member informed Mr Pennington that, in accordance with the Planning Committee’s recent resolution, he would be receiving a fuller report on the policy approach on the matter at the next Environment Cabinet Member Meeting in December and that this would enable him to formally consider the matter and any potential changes to the way in which it would be addressed. The Cabinet Member confirmed that until the next meeting, the approach that officers have taken in addressing his objections to this particular Traffic Regulation Order was consistent with previous decisions, in that there were a number of alternative parking options available to disabled people with a blue badge who may choose to live in a car-free development. The Cabinet Member added that he was hopeful that it would be possible to reach a satisfactory conclusion, and that Mr Pennington was welcome to attend the meeting in December.

59.4       Mr. Pennington asked the following supplementary question:

“Can parts of the Traffic Regulation Order therefore be deferred until the outcome of the meeting in December?”

59.5       The Cabinet Member reiterated that until that meeting the current policy would continue to apply.

59(ii)  Public Question – Mr T Chavasse

59.6       Mr. Chavasse asked the following question:

“Following inadequate preparation for halving Refuse Collections from large Brunswick Town HMOs, also causing litter by collection now being on a different day to recycling, 3 out of 4 collections have been made on the wrong day. We would, however, like to help with another useful question. Would you provide an assurance that we will now really be meaningfully consulted on the planned change of Recycling day so that it again coincides with refuse collection? Thereby reverting to the most cost effective method of reducing litter and increasing recycling without further prejudicing the residents’ goodwill or another area‘s requirements.”

59.7       The Cabinet Member stated that it was very difficult to schedule collections for refuse and recycling collections to take place on the same day because they were two separate services with separate crews. The Cabinet Member informed Mr Chavasse that the council was implementing refuse changes across the city which would affect 121,000 homes every week; a change of this scale would mean that  it would take time for the new routes to bed in and he hoped that by Christmas the service would have settled down. The Cabinet Member requested that ward councillors and residents be patient, but recognised that it was important to work with them. The Cabinet Member pledged to ask officers to meet with the residents association and ward councillors to discuss how the changes could be implemented. The Cabinet Member added that the council recognised that Mr Chavasse’s local knowledge and the influence of the association and ward councillors were very important to the success of implementing changes as smoothly as possible.