Agenda item

Martin Shields gave a presentation. A copy of his PowerPoint slides is attached to these minutes as Appendix 2. He apologised that Carol Maclellan had not been able to attend tonight’s meeting.

He said that in the course of the review of the scheme a number of detailed conversations had taken place with parishes. It was clear that the scheme is popular, and that the parish sweepers are recognised as being knowledgeable. Parish sweepers know the area, and have the ability to be flexible and to respond to issues efficiently and practically. They are a good link between residents, the parish council and B&NES Council.

Concerns have been expressed that there is no allowance in the Scheme for growth, like new housing developments and new roads. Some sweepers do additional work voluntarily, and the Council is grateful for their good will. It is apparent that there is some confusion about responsibilities. Council staff still went out to do things that the sweepers could do, so there was scope for better co-ordination. Parishes were sometimes not sure what they could expect from the Council, e.g. in relation to the emptying of bins.

Increasing financial pressure on the Council requires all service areas to be carefully reviewed and savings made. It was important to achieve consistency of approach; at present £73k is spent on 18 parishes, less than half, and there is no funding for any additional parishes wishing to join the scheme. Most parishes received between £2.5k and £3k per year. There are no clear terms of reference for this money. What can the Council expect the parishes to do? What is the scope for parishes to decide how to spend the money? How is it possible to demonstrate value for money? There needs to be a fundamental review of what the scheme is about. Parishes should consider what they want from the scheme and what things they could be doing in their own communities that would mean that B&NES staff did not have to be sent out.

The Council has a responsibility for the health and safety of parish sweepers which it cannot delegate to the parishes, and this needs to be factored in to discussions about the future of the scheme.

There had been suggestions from parishes about the scheme, but now the discussion needs to be taken to a new level. Further suggestions from parishes about a cost effective scheme were welcome.

Andrew Orme of Freshford PC said that discussions about revisions to the scheme had been ongoing for some time and asked when a timetable would be set for meaningful progress. Martin acknowledged that progress had been slow; this was partly because of a worsening of the Council’s finances. He expected that dialogue with parishes would be concluded over the next couple of months and that then a proposal could be formulated. The budget for the revised scheme would have to be approved by Council. If the revised scheme was going to cost more, then clear benefits would have to be demonstrated. Andrew responded that Freshford PC considered that further resources were required for street cleaning in order to achieve a basic minimum standard for a decent environment and that at present B&NES Council was not being very helpful. Martin agreed that greater clarity was required about aims and responsibilities.

Lyn Alvis of Monkton Combe said that he had shown Martin the many miles of footpaths in the parish. He also suggested that Martin and his team would find the parish council more informative than the parish sweeper.

Chris Clemence of Hinton Charterhouse PC said that his parish council had not been consulted about the scheme and were not aware of what the consultation period or process were. Martin said that he and his team would pick this up and ensure that information went to all parishes.