Agenda item

a period of up to 15 minutes is available to deal with questions submitted to the Council in accordance with the Executive Procedure Rules;

E.10/21

It was noted that eight public questions had been received in accordance with the Executive Procedure Rules for consideration at this meeting.

Question 1 from Caroline Snow:

‘Air Quality Annual Status Report 2019, p. 12, states: "South Hams District Council anticipates that further additional measures not yet prescribed will be required in subsequent years to achieve compliance and enable the revocation of Totnes and Dean Prior Air Quality Management Areas". What additional measures has the Council now introduced?’

In reply, the Leader informed that the Joint Local Plan contained policies relating specifically to all of the Air Quality Management Areas in the South Hams –these policies meant that the Council asked for air quality mitigation measures from new developments.  For recent planning applications for Broom Park and Sawmills at Dartington, developers had agreed to help improve walking and cycling infrastructure, encourage the use of sustainable transport, implement Electric vehicle charge points, and enable more working from home.

The Council continued to negotiate with Devon County Council (DCC), who are responsible for traffic management in the Totnes area, and with Highways England, who are responsible for the A38 at Dean Prior, to try to find practicable ways to improve air quality at these Air Quality Management Areas (AQMAs).

The Council also continued to monitor Nitrogen Dioxide and made these results available to relevant agencies and to the public. Current results for 2020 indicated that pollution levels had decreased.

Our third AQMA in Ivybridge had recently been the subject of DCC Highways works and the Council was hopeful that this would have improved the situation in that area to allow revocation of the AQMA.

Question 2 from Barbara Smith:

‘Given the known harmful effects of NO₂ and particulate pollution to the health of residents, what were the rates for NO₂ and particulates across the South Hams in 2020 and how does this compare with previous years?’

In response, the Deputy Leader stated that the Council had continued to monitor NO₂ levels at locations in the South Hams area. The validated results had not yet been published but would be published in the next Air Quality Report.  However, the raw data suggested that NO₂ levels had decreased in 2020 when compared to previous years.

(The following six questions all relate to the Climate and Ecological Emergency (CEE) Bill and the Leader provided one combined response to these questions)

Questions 3, 4 and 5 from Massimo Giannuzzi:

‘(Background: Re the CEE bill motion from Cllr Hodgson (deferred from 25^th March and again from 20^th May).  I was deeply disappointed that Conservative councillors of SHDC put forward an amendment qualifying the level of support they could offer based on the fact that the bill was waiting to be re-introduced into parliamentary procedure).’

‘Q3 I’d like to ask why Conservative councillors of SHDC put forward this amendment – given that so many other councils throughout the UK (notably Cambridge City Council and locally Buckfastleigh Town Council) were able to simply pass motions of support?’

‘Q4 Do councillors recognise that this action of introducing the amendment was unnecessary and that it would have been perfectly proper to have voted in support of the motion in the same way that other councils, described above, did?’

‘Q5 Do councillors recognise and acknowledge that in doing so, an unnecessary delay of several months has been introduced into a process that SHDC has already designated an emergency?’

Question 6 from Jeannie Hodder:

‘Re Cllr Hodgson CEE bill motion deferred - will the Conservative leader of council, agree to not introduce any further technical delays when it is re-presented which are not normal council practice, and which are not being adopted by other councils in the UK?’

Question 7 from Susan Ponton

‘Re Hodgson CEE bill motion - was invoking purdah 25 March a sign that leadership regards CEE Bill a party issue involving conflict, not a cross party supported issue? Are Conservatives committed to supporting Bill cross party when re-presented in July, as suggested on 20 May, or not?’

Question 8 from Barbara Smith

‘Please let me know what was the specific written guidance that the Monitoring Officer used to come to his decision to invoke purdah on 25 March, and if there was any request or pressure from the Executive on the Monitoring Officer to act as he did?’

In her combined response, the Leader advised that, had Cllr Hodgson submitted her Notice of Motion by the deadline for submitting Notices of Motion to the Council in February, then we would have been able to debate it at that meeting.  The next meeting of the Council was during the pre-election period or purdah period.  The Council was prohibited from publishing any material which, in whole or in part, appears to be designed to affect public support for a political party. Publishing in this context, also means using Council resources.  Local authorities were advised to be especially careful at times of heightened sensitivity such as in the pre-election period.

Cllr Hodgson’s Notice of Motion was initially taken at face value when it referred to cross-party support.  However, although late in the day, the Monitoring Officer became concerned having researched the background to the Bill further that the Bill was not as cross-party as had been understood.  Having regard to the relevant statutory provisions, the statutory code for publicity and the specific advice on the pre-election period issued by the Local Government Association, the Monitoring Officer issued the advice that the item should be deferred.

According to the Local Government Information Unit there were 398 principal authorities in the UK and nearly 12,000 local councils.  According to the CEE Bill supporters’ website, 58 councils had passed a motion in support of the CEE Bill.

Since the Notice of Motion was first aired, the legislative session during with the CEE Bill was being considered had ended and a new session had begun.  The ending of a Parliamentary session brought to an end most parliamentary business, with the exception of public bills that were carried over by agreement.  When the 2019-21 session ended the CEE Bill fell while awaiting its second reading.  Of the 30 or so bills currently before Parliament, there was no bill of that name or effect.

Specifically on each individual question, the Leader added:

For Question 3: ‘Cllr Lewis Herbert, Leader of Cambridge City Council, is a colleague of mine whom I admire and respect hugely. He and I are clear as to where our political allegiances divide, even though on a personal basis we are on very good terms. His Council may have adopted this motion, but this has little or no relevance to what South Hams might do. Lewis would understand and agree with this.’

For Question 4: ‘The amendment was proposed as a method of sustaining the spirit of a motion which made no sense once the Bill had fallen at the end of the parliamentary session.  The figures in the Monitoring Officer’s reply above are clear.’

For Question 5: ‘I entirely refute that not having passed this motion will make any difference at all to the progress of the adopted South Hams Climate Change and Biodiversity Action Plan, the evidence of which is included in today’s agenda papers.’

For Question 6: ‘The Bill no longer exists so there will not be a further motion.’