Agenda item

Question(s) received attached.

 

 

 

The Chairman advised the meeting that five questions had been received pursuant to Procedure Rule No.9, The questions had been circulated to all Members, separately to the agenda, and published on the website.

 

The Chairman invited Councillor Velan to put his question to the Chairman of Prosperous Communities Committee, Councillor Emma Bailey, as follows:-

 

“There has been a clear and ongoing increase in rubbish and litter on road verges across West Lindsey, which is damaging the appearance of the district and raising concerns about environmental harm and public perception. Given the scale and persistence of the problem, can you as the Chairman of Prosperous Communities Committee set out what specific actions the Council is currently taking, how frequently verge clearance is being carried out, what enforcement measures are in place, and whether the Council considers current resources and arrangements to be adequate?. Furthermore, what measurable improvements and timescales can residents expect to see?”

 

The Chairman of the Prosperous Communities responded as follows:

 

Thank you for your question and I would agree that there is rubbish and litter on verges across West Lindsey. I am not sure that there is an ongoing increase as WLDC do not weigh their rubbish that is collected currently for a comparison year on year. The worse reported areas are the A46 and A57 both of which are high speed roads.

 

Litter anywhere is an eyesore and the most common places for high volumes of litter is along high-speed roads. It amazes me with the number of bins that each household has that people still throw things out of windows and on the floor rather than disposing it properly at home or in roadside bins.

 

I regularly litter pick in my area and have helped to organise several group litter picks in my ward over the years. WLDC provide bags, sticks, gloves, hi vis and risk assessments and then collect the rubbish. I appreciate that the H & S involved in having crews working along the verges is complicated and potentially dangerous should there be an accident. This is one of the reasons why these clearances only happen twice a year in line with other maintenance of verges in high-speed areas, (dual carriage ways) . I have also approached probation to see if community payback could also apply to these jobs but unfortunately this is not the case.

 

We have recently promoted a young person called Reggie, who has been doing a fabulous job in his local area!

 

Some towns in the district have dedicated litter pickers in them (Mkt Rasen and Caistor have ones paid and managed through the town councils, WLDC say what they are to do and fund 20 hours per week).

 

The mobile street cleaning teams cover the whole district every week (some areas more frequent, dependant on the need), they will empty all dog/litter bins and if there are any places that are bad within the 30mph, litter pick those.

 

During 2025 the following FPNs were issued 34 FPNs (2 x breach of PSPO, 12 fly-tipping duty of care, 14 fly-tipping, 4 littering, 2 SWW Waste). I have spoken to the enforcement team about how we should publicise more when we have had been successful and issued FPNS, we WLDC do not do that currently.

 

Whilst there have been no concerns regarding environmental harm specifically raised with WLDC, the appearance and the public perception is something that WLDC is aware of that needs improving. This is why the council is currently undertaking a full cost analysis of the section of the A57, this is to include permit gaining, traffic management, operational costs, time taken to undertake the set length of road, pictures before, during and after and the weight of litter collected. This data will be put in a report for members to understand all aspects of the high-speed road cleaning and then discussions about setting budgets accordingly. This paper should be available after 16th March when it will commence.

 

This obviously highlights that the council does not think that the current resources and arrangements are adequate or the report due would not be taking place, finding a balance that does not put further financial pressures on residents is difficult.

 

As an example the A57 clearing is going to cost around £7k, some roads that WLDC clear would have issues getting permits for, (A15 & parts A46). The average cost is about £10k per week for a stretch of road (some roads would cost more for traffic management to be in place). This would mean a dramatic increase in council tax.

 

This report will provide the detail for having more measurable improvements within a short timescale. Thank you for highlighting this and allowing further discussion on the important job that our waste team does in difficult budget restraints and to give thanks to all the residents that frequently take part in litter picking in their area.

 

The Chairman invited Councillor Young to put his question to the Leader of the Council, Councillor Jackie Brockway, as follows:-.

 

“The development adjacent to the old Lea Road School in Gainsborough has been left incomplete and abandoned by the developer for over two years. This derelict site is a significant eyesore, adversely affecting local residents and deterring further investment in the town.

 

Given the Council’s powers under planning and enforcement legislation, why has this situation been allowed to persist for so long, and what enforcement actions or interventions are being pursued to ensure that the developer either completes the development or that the site is remediated without further delay?”

 

The Leader of the Council responded as follows:

 

The Council also shares the concerns raised about the site on the corner of Lea Road and Carr Lane and has been making efforts to resolve the situation. The site at Carr Lane and the Old School site are both subject to Section 215 notices which require clearance of the land and the overgrown vegetation on and around the school building. Some initial clearance work was undertaken on the site in August 2025; however, clearance of the surrounding land remains incomplete. The Council also issued a Community Protection Notice Warning in October 2024, to ensure that the persistent fly-tipping that was occurring at the entrance to the site was dealt with and this waste has also been cleared as a result. The site was also an initial focus of our out of hours ASB hotspot patrolling as a result of the fly-tipping and it has continued to be one that we monitor to ensure that it remains secure and free from any additional waste.

 

We have consistently attempted to engage with the owners of the site and the enforcement position is regularly under review. A recent check of the Land Registry identified a pending application against the land surrounding the school and it was very recently listed for auction by a receiver, but the lot was withdrawn on the day of the auction. We are therefore seeking to establish whether there is a new owner of the site. Once we understand whether there is a new owner, we will engage with them to understand their objectives and make them aware of what we require them to do in regard to the land and the notices served upon it.

 

I think we all agree that the development of this site would bring great benefit to the immediate and surrounding area and we hope that a change in ownership may be the catalyst for this. I hope that this also provides reassurance that the Council seeking to utilise the relevant tools and powers to improve the situation.”

 

With the permission of the Chairman, Councillor Young posed a supplementary question, indicating whilst pleased with the action taken thus far, he sought to understand what would happen if the action did not deliver the desired outcome, would or could the Council use its Compulsory Purchase powers?

 

The Chief Executive addressed the supplementary question advising as outlined in the Leaders response, the Council were hopeful the possible change in ownership would be a catalyst.  If this was not the case, then the Council would have to reassess the powers at its disposal and determine which powers it may wish to use to achieve the actions that had been raised in the question and which the Leader had also recognised needed to be addressed.

 

The Chairman invited Councillor Dobbie to put his question  to the Leader of the Council, Councillor Brockway, as follows:

 

“Leader, while the Council has invested millions of pounds of public money into improving the physical fabric of Gainsborough Town Centre, many residents remain concerned that bricks and mortar alone will not revive the high street. Empty units persist, national retailers are absent, and footfall remains fragile.

 

Regeneration must be about economic delivery, not just capital spend.

 

Given this, can you explain:

 

·       Why the authority has not yet appointed a dedicated, specialist officer focused solely on attracting high street retailers and more inward investment into Gainsborough?

·       What proactive, targeted strategy the Council is using to compete with neighbouring towns for retail operators?

·       What measurable outcomes and timelines residents can expect to see as a return on the significant public investment already made?

·       If the Administration believes the current approach is sufficient, on what evidence does it base that confidence?”

 

The Leader of the Council responded as follows:

 

“Thank you Councillor Dobbie for your question.  Reviving our high streets is a challenge we have embraced. Retail consolidation, bank closures and the shift to online shopping have all contributed to rising vacancy rates. Collectively we have been working to reverse this trend and counteract the negative impacts events such as Covid and the Cost of Living Crisis have had on shopping habits and local footfall.

 

Our commercial specialist partner Eddisons, appointed in mid-2025, has worked with us to benchmark against competitor towns, engage with agents and work with vacant property owners in order to tackle long term vacancies and develop a more balanced tenant mix. They have also engaged with a large volume of  local and regional investors as well as national retail groups to  promote Gainsborough’s investment potential.  We have developed action plans for vacant properties, provided retail business support, enhanced free parking, developed a footfall-generating events programme, provided grant funding to improve shop frontages and continue to review progress via our town centre vacancy audits and newly established town centre business group.

 

We must acknowledge that although there is no measurable ‘quick fix’ to decades of retail decline, these interventions – as well as our Levelling-Up programme, mean Gainsborough now has the built infrastructure, pedestrian connectivity and a cinema led leisure offer to compete more effectively for investment. We remain focused on attracting operators that will strengthen footfall, retail mix and town centre vibrancy - ensuring residents (and visitors) can experience a flourishing Gainsborough over the coming years.

 

With the permission of the Chairman, Councillor Dobbie posed a supplementary question which sought to understand whether the Council was investigating introducing a safety zone, similar to Retford and Worksop, as way of supporting a desire to increase the night time economy within Gainsborough town centre.

 

In responding the Leader outlined the various organisations she and the wider Council had been engaging with to understand the night time economy and any barriers to access. It was also hoped the work of the Greater Lincolnshire County Combined Authority through its emerging Transport Plan, would increase access for wider groups. Boosting the

the night-time economy and ensuring participation in it was available to more sections of the community remained a focus.

 

The Chairman invited Councillor Rollings to put her question to Councillor Bailey, Chairman of Prosperous Communities Committee, as follows:-

 

“In light of the significant role the Indoor Bowls Club plays within our district, supporting not only sport but also the physical health, mental wellbeing and social inclusion of many residents, as Chairman of Prosperous Communities Committee can you please confirm the Council’s continued commitment to investing in and delivering a new indoor bowls facility?

 

Furthermore, can you as the Chairman of Prosperous Communities Committee

provide an update on the proposed timeline and next steps to ensure this important community asset is progressed without delay?”

 

The Chairman of the Prosperous Communities Committee responded as follows:

 

Thank you for your question.

 

The previous Leader of the Council did announce at Full Council last year a commitment to invest in indoor bowls in the District, however I think it is important to be clear that this was not underpinned by any formal council decision or allocation of any funding for such a project and as such no formal and actual commitment to back this up.

 

Without borrowing, and also with constraints on borrowing arising from the recent Government Financial Settlement, you are fully aware of the restraints on funding available for large projects. As a result of this when deciding on where funding should be directed the council and members need to decide on what is best value.

 

Given the time constraints that are now upon us due to Local Government Reorganisation, and the financial controls that will be put on the council as part of that process, it is important that we also look at what can be achieved in that timeframe with the money available to the council that benefits the whole of the district.

 

I have done much research and had various communications not only with the Bowls Club representative but also the Bowls Sports development officer and also the Indoor Bowls Association. I have fed this back to officers and other councillors so that informed decisions can be made regarding bowls and any provision.

 

This Administration is however committed to, and progressing proposals for enhancements to sports and leisure provision as set out in the Corporate Plan and Thematic Business Plans that we will consider shortly, and the Prosperous Communities Committee will be asked to approve and adopt a new Sports and Physical Activity Strategy later this month.

 

The Council is already progressing a number of objectives set out in this strategy and assessing the scope and opportunities for enhancement of leisure and sports facilities.  This includes improvements to West Lindsey Leisure Centre in Gainsborough as well as other facilities and opportunities.

 

Following the All-Member Briefing regarding the leisure centre held on 26th February at which you attended, it is planned that a report will be brought forward to Members in April to approve progressing this project to the next stage which is an exciting development.

 

This work will involve engaging with stakeholders, including the bowls community, and considering the facilities the council is able to provide with a report back to Members later this year, hopefully in the summer.  As Members will appreciate, this specific work and assessment of other options to enhance sports and leisure facilities will need to have regard to the budget and financial resources available to the Council.  As we will discuss later the recent Government Financial Settlement has not been a positive one that we would have hoped for and one which would have enabled us to invest even more.

 

 

On hearing the response, the former Leader of the Council called for a Point of Order.  With the Chairman ruling the point of order out of order, there ensued heated exchange regarding the interpretation of Standing Orders and a warning regarding conduct being issued.  The Chairman advised the former Leader he would allow a point of personal explanation, during which he disputed the opening statement, suggesting the Indoor Bowls Plan was supported, had been costed and could have been delivered.

 

With a further warning to abide by the Chairman’s ruling, Councillor Rollings was permitted to pose a supplementary question during which  she raised the lack of direct reference to providing an indoor bowls facility in both the Corporate Plan and the Member Leisure Workshop, and sought to understand where the Chairman of the Prosperous Communities personally stood on re-introducing an indoor bowling offer.

 

The Chairman of Prosperous Communities responded directly, outlining previous challenge she had offered when serving in the previous Administration and reminded the questioner that the decision would be one for the Committee as a whole and of the collective ethos of the current Administration.

 

 

The Chairman invited Councillor Howitt-Cowan to put his question to Councillor Brockway, Leader of the Council as follows:

 

“Given the tight timescales for Local Government Reorganisation, many residents are concerned that insufficient progress has been made on asset transfer to parish and town councils. What specific steps is the Council taking now to ensure these transfers are completed in time, and what contingency plans are in place if deadlines are not met?”

 

The Leader of the Council responded as follows:-

 

“Thank you Councillor Howitt-Cowan for your question. 

 

The Council is currently designing a Community Asset Transfer Policy, as it currently does not have one, this will be presented to Corporate Policy and Resources committee in due course.

 

Once approved this will allow Officers to be able to progress any expressions of interests received from town and parish councils or groups from the community and voluntary sector and assess whether any assets can be transferred.

 

This will take into account things like the suitability of the applicant, how the asset will be safeguarded in the future and the means of transfer amongst other criteria. It is envisaged any expressions of interest will be dealt with in a timely manner to ensure the process is timely and transparent.”

 

With the permission of the Chairman, Councillor Howitt-Cowan posed a supplementary question which sought to understand what consultation was being undertaken with local councils and local councillors regarding asset transfers, where they been engaged in decision making.

 

In responding the Leader confirmed local councils would be consulted in due course but outlined  the work the Council needed to undertake in the first instance at pace. It was important that asset transfers were undertaken in a timely manner but also in the best interest and that a balance was struck, providing security for the wider district into the future. 

 

This brought Rule No.9 questions to an end.