To answer questions submitted by Councillors under Standing Order No. 11(2)
Minutes:
a) Question from Councillor Jones to Councillor Upton
“In what way will residents of West Bridgford and their community services benefit from the proposed scheme of Community Infrastructure Charging?”
In response to the question, Councillor Upton stated the Council would decide how to spend the neighbourhood proportion of CIL contributions from any developments in non-parished areas such as West Bridgford and Edwalton. It was noted that the regulations governing CIL required that contributions be spent on, or to support infrastructure in the area where the chargeable development had taken place and that this must be done in consultation with local communities. It was also noted that the exact mechanisms for deciding how such contributions would be spent and for community engagement would be determined during the in between the period of when the CIL was approved and when it would come into force.
Supplementary Question
Councillor Jones questioned if the CIL was disadvantageous to non-parished areas within the Borough as they could not quality for the full 25% of the levy.
Councillor Upton stated that the exact mechanisms were laid down by the regulations of the CIL and that this issue would be looked at during the period of when the CIL was considered for approval and when it would come into force. Councillor Upton advised Councillor Jones to express his concerns in writing during the consultation period so that it could be taken into consideration by the independent examiner.
b) Question from Councillor Plant to Councillor Robinson
“Does the Leader agree with me that the leader of the County Council’s unseemly haste for Unitary status for the county without proper consultation and discussion with District and Borough Leaders and a proper business plan is not in the interests of the residents of Rushcliffe and the County as a whole?”
In response to the question, Councillor Robinson stated that the recent meeting of the County Council had approved a business plan to be produced later this year. Councillor Robinson noted that in November 2017 the Council had agreed to increase its dialogue with all local authorities. Councillor Robinson also stated that he had written to the Leader of Nottinghamshire County Council, Councillor Kay Cutts and that he had held a meeting with the Government Minister responsible for Local Government where he had stressed that the District and Borough Councils should receive clearer dialogue from the County Council whilst they were developing their business plan for the creation of a unitary authority. Councillor Robinson noted that the Borough should focus its own priorities of economic growth and should not become distracted.
Supplementary Question
Councillor Plant asked if the Leader agreed that the East Midlands as a region had not received its fair share of funding from the government and that the Leader of the County Council should instead be working with all Leaders of Nottinghamshire District and Borough Councils to lobby for fairer funding within the region instead of asking for the creation of a unitary authority.
In response Councillor Robinson stated that the Council was working at all local Councils and the Local Enterprise Partnership in order to gain recognition for the region.