Minutes:
(A) Dr Eynon asked the
following question of the Leader or his nominee:
“On 29th
January 2020 the Leicester Mercury reported a spokesperson for the Council as
saying: “We are looking into the possibility of working with the National
Forest Company to investigate the feasibility of expanding the National
Forest’s boundaries.”
An aspiration to
plant more trees is mentioned in this Council’s Tree Strategy. The Environment Strategy refers to a need to
protect and enhance the National Forest, but boundary changes and expansion are
not mentioned.
Mr Pain replied
as follows:
“Officers of the council continue to work closely with the National
Forest Company (NFC) to promote tree planting within existing boundaries and
there are a number of projects that are being planned. This planning is at an early stage and will
involve discussions with partners and stakeholders so
details are not available at this point in time. The most recent meeting
took place on Friday 26th June.
The NFC current position is to maintain the integrity of its current
200 square mile boundary to continue to create the identity of the National
Forest, target resources for delivery, and focus effort to achieve its new 25
Year Vision. However, the NFC will also continue to operate outside of
the boundary in delivering shared objectives that will buffer, support and
strengthen the National Forest environment, economy and communities. In
addition, the NFC will share its expertise and learning with partners at a
local, national and international level to demonstrate and advocate climate
change mitigation and adaptation, with the National Forest as an exemplar of
sustainable living.
A specific project
worth mentioning is the creation of a Covid-19 commemoration wood at Market Bosworth
Country Park. This is outside of the
National Forest boundaries but has been supported by the NFC as it is part of
the gateway to the forest.
The County Council
recently launched its Tree Strategy and looks forward to the appointment of a
new Forestry Manager in August. More details around tree planting and
partnership working will emerge in due course.”
(B) Dr Eynon asked the
following question of the Leader or his nominee:
“During discussions
with Snibston Stakeholders and Community Group, some
months ago, a suggestion was put forward to create an access way between the
newly refurbished Snibston Heritage Park and
Coalville Town Football Club. This
proposal would encourage visitors to the town to park on County Council
premises and divert football traffic away from the congested residential town
centre streets.
Could the Leader
tell me what progress has been made on implementing this suggestion?”
Mr Rhodes replied as follows:
“The matter that
was raised with Council officers was to create a pedestrian gateway that would
enable access from the car park onto the public pathway and into the Football
Club. Officers have managed to include this extra provision within the scope of
the Snibston development programme.”
Dr Eynon asked the following supplementary
question:
“I thank the Lead Member for this response and am pleased to see that
officers have managed to include the provision of a pedestrian gateway as part
of the Snibston development programme and that this
will allow access from the Snibston car park into the
Football Club.
Please may I have a copy of a scale drawing of the proposed access to
share with partner organisations and the wider community including the Football
Club?”
Mr Rhodes replied as follows:
“Yes, I will ask the officer concerned to send this to you.”
(C) Mrs Hack asked the
following question of the Leader or his nominee:
“In light of Covid, School Transport is delivered differently across the
County and the response from schools and bus operators to refunds varies from
school to school, bus company to bus company.
A recent article in the Leicester Mercury indicated that some services
are offering full refunds and some are offering
nothing.
https://www.leicestermercury.co.uk/news/local-news/two-school-bus-firms-plan-4233451.
Bosworth Academy, a
school that provides secondary school places in my patch (among others),
normally transports 1,000 children a day.
This school has offered a 50% refund on the service.
There also appears
to be confusion about the CMA guidance on provision of services and if this
applies to school provided bus transport.
In view of this
could the Leader let me know:-
a) What
advice if any can the County Council give to schools and parents related to
this guidance?
b) What
representations have the County Council made, or will make, to Government
regarding the ongoing viability of school transport?
c) What
work has been done, can be done, to offer support and guidance to school
colleagues, who are working with commercial operators to get to the most
appropriate way forward?
d) Given
that there is a disparity of approaches regarding refunds, what can be done to
get consistent guidance about school transport and refund policy?”
Mr Pendleton replied as follows:
“a) The CMA have confirmed that the guidance
does apply to school-provided bus services. The position with season
ticket arrangements is also the same and so, for the period of lockdown, the
general principles apply and the full refund should be
provided.
Each commercial bus operator or school
provider should have their own terms and conditions in relation to the sale of
school travel passes. These should meet
the CMA’s standards and it is their responsibility to ensure that consumers get
a good deal when buying goods and services.
Businesses must operate within the law, which includes protecting
consumers from unfair trading practices.
Schools and parents should ensure that they understand and agree with
the terms and conditions of any commercial school bus provider before signing
up to their service.
b) The Council has made continued
representations through bodies such as the Local Government Association (LGA),
Association of Directors of Children’s Services (ADCS), County Councils Network
(CCN), the Association of Directors of Environment, Economy, Planning and
Transport (ADEPT), the Association of Transport Co-ordinating Officers (ATCO)
and direct to the Department for Transport (DfT) and Department for Education
(DfE) regarding the viability of school transport. These representations have increased and
become more urgent because, as a result of the
pandemic, the costs of providing home to school transport could double for
mainstream delivery and triple for the provision of Special Educational Needs
(SEN) transport. Representations have
also been made alongside the ongoing dialogue around the Public Service Vehicle
Accessibility Regulations (PSVAR) which could affect the viability of
commercial school operation.
c) The County Council purchases school
transport on commercial school bus services for pupils eligible for free
transport under a Service Level Agreement, which is a contractual agreement
between the Council and the commercial school bus service provider. These include terms and conditions in
relation to refunds and cancellations.
The Council has continually encouraged schools to have a similar
agreement with the bus operators to ensure the services provided meet their
requirements and the Council has offered to provide copies of its own Service
Level Agreement for schools to adapt to meet their own requirements.
d) Commercial school bus services are provided
by a variety of different bus operators who will have their own terms and
conditions regarding transport provision and refunds. Whilst bus operators cannot be forced to
adopt a particular approach, schools could introduce
an approved standard service level agreement to ensure services are managed
consistently by schools across the County.
This would require all schools to adopt the same service level agreement
with their particular commercial school bus provider.”
(D) Mr Wyatt asked the following question of
the Leader or his nominee:
“There is growing
anger locally in the village of Ellistown over the
failure by the County Highways Department to address the increasing incidents
of HGV’s using the village as a through road.
This has been reported on numerous occasions to the Highways Customer
Services Centre. Many HGVs are getting
stuck and causing damage to vehicles of local residents
due to the lack of signage and enforcement by the Highways Department and the
Police.
Can I ask the
Leader if he would instruct the appropriate officers to liaise with me and the
local Parish Council to formulate a plan to tackle this growing problem which
is blighting the lives of many local residents,
particularly those on St Christopher Road which is a no through road?”
Mr Pendleton replied as follows:
“Contraventions of
weight restrictions can only be enforced by the Police, they can be contacted
on their non-emergency number 101.
The Police will
deal with the complaint by making contact with the
haulier concerned, if known, and establishing whether the HGV was driving
legitimately through the weight restricted area.
Following previous
discussions with Mr Wyatt a review of the signage was undertaken. There is weight restriction signage
approximately 200m to the south of this junction on Ellistown
Terrace Road indicating the start of the weight restriction zone. Weight restrictions are created through a
zonal method, by which we restrict the movement of heavy goods vehicles to
mainly A and B class roads, with the addition of some strategically important
unclassified roads. St Christopher’s
Road falls within a weight restriction zone.
Repeater signs are not permitted within a zone.
If the local
community would like to discuss how they could start a community lorry watch
scheme to assist the Police with enforcement this can be arranged.”