Leicestershire County Council Lib Dems

Below is a copy of what i submitted to the planning inspector about Scraptoft Hall, back in December. We are still waiting to hear any news.

As one of three ward councillors, I have represented the village of Scraptoft for 20 years. I am a member of the Planning Committee and was present at the meeting on 13^th January 2009 when the current proposal was considered.  I am familiar with the site and surrounding area and have been heavily involved in planning matters relating to the Hall and the former De Montfort University Campus to the east of the site, currently being redeveloped for housing.

Ever since De Montfort University decided to dispose of the Hall and the adjacent campus and concentrate their development programme at the City campus in Leicester, there has been a need to find a new and acceptable use for the Hall. During the last 8 years there have been 3 different proposals: first, De Montfort University submitted a scheme in partnership with a developer, Lychgate properties, second a local resident brought the site with plans to restore the Hall and build some retirement homes in the grounds and now there is the current proposal by Scraptoft Hall Retirement Village.

The first two proposals never reached the Planning Committee for one reason or another and in my view both proposals were poor, badly thought out in terms of access arrangements and did not provide for an acceptable restoration of the Hall.

Whilst historically DMU failed in their responsibilities to maintain this important grade 2* listed building, the Hall has deteriorated enormously since DMU left. The main problem has been persistent vandalism and criminal damage. Last year the lead and slates were stolen and over a period of time most of the  fittings and fixtures have been removed. Reports of youths seen in the building were being received every week last summer and a great deal of Police time has been spent attending incidents and dealing with trespassing. I am aware that there has been at least one arson attempt and the Police have expressed  concern to me that unless a use is found for the Hall, there may not be a Hall to save for much longer.

In considering the current proposal it is important to remember that since its original listing, the area surrounding the Hall has undergone significant change as we saw on the site visit. The University Campus build in the 1950s and 60s comprised large blocks of student accommodation, buildings for teaching, recreation, support services, access roads and car parks. However desirable it would have been to turn the clock back when DMU vacated the site, the existence of the campus buildings meant that when David Wilson

The present scheme has undergone a number of changes following objections /concerns raised by local residents, the Parish Council and the district planning authority. The original proposals included some 3 storey development to the north of the Hall, close to existing properties on Beeby Road. Local residents were concerned that the new building would be overbearing and would result in a loss of amenity. When the applicants were made aware of these concerns they responded positively and were willing to make changes to the design in an effort to address these points. In particular, the reduction of block D from 3 to 21/2 storeys dropping to single storey at the northern end has been welcomed by affected residents.

There has been a great deal of debate about the historic importance of the views from  Covert Lane and looking outwards from the site towards the Scraptoft and Thurnby Valley Separation Area. The extent to which these views will be compromised by blocks G and H is a matter for the Inspector to reach a judgement on.  I agree that it is one of the crucial issues for this Inquiry to address. But in my opinion we shouldn’t forget the other significant and important view of the Hall from the West looking through the gates towards the front elevation. This view is equally important (some may argue more important) and, unlike a previous scheme, the current proposal, which preserves the views from the west, will help to protect the character and appearance of the Conservation Area.

Harborough District has more elderly people than the national average and the number of older people are expected to grow faster than average over the next 20 years. In Scraptoft and Thurnby I am aware of elderly residents living in large family houses which have become too big for them. They wish to stay in the local area but there is insufficient high quality suitable accommodation available and I believe this scheme will help to meet the local housing needs of older people. It is also worth mentioning that whilst local opinion is not the only issue on which applications should be determined, there have been few local objections to this proposal which is not normally the situation in Scraptoft. Indeed most people I have spoken to say there is a desperate need to find solution for the Hall and believe the authorities should  be realistic about what can be delivered bearing in mind the length of the time the Hall has been empty.

In conclusion, I am convinced that the current scheme which gained consent from the District Council in January of this year is the only chance we have of securing the future of Scraptoft Hall before vandalism and theft result in its complete destruction.

It is unrealistic of English Heritage to assume that there is any alternative waiting in the wings – both the current economic climate and the modern housing estate which wraps round the eastern part of what was once a desirable gentleman’s residence complete with ornamental gardens and extensive pleasure grounds militate against the possible purchase and restoration of the Hall by a single benefactor.  < 

It is equally unrealistic to suppose that there are developers eager to take on a grade II* listed building in an appalling state with little scope to recoup their costs with new build in the grounds especially as ‘other grant funding’ is unlikely to be forthcoming in the current economic situation.

English Heritage claims that the Hall was not marketed vigorously enough by DMU and that the District Council has rushed into this scheme without having due regard to the damaging impact it may produce on the Conservation Area, the listed building and its setting.  As I have already explained, there were several schemes put forward following active marketing of the property by DMU (indeed I can recall seeing the ‘for sale’ advertisements in the local paper on at least 3 occasions).  None of these reached fruition until this latest proposal.  It is also unfair to claim that the District Council was too eager to find a solution to the building’s condition and failed to weigh up the harm of the new build.  Much discussion was held with the developers, the ward councillors and the parish over the extent of the new building proposed but in the end it was decided that rescuing the Hall before it was too late outweighed any possible harm to the already seriously compromised historic landscape.  In the absence of any fairy godmother waiting in the wings, this scheme represents the last viable chance to secure the future of Scraptoft Hall.  It may not be the ideal solution but it is the only one we have or are likely to have.

English Heritage claims that this proposal is not in the public interest because of the damage it causes to the setting of the Hall.  Surely the ‘public interest’ lies in preventing the total collapse of a nationally important building whose setting has been so eroded over the last 50 years.

Hi, just wanted to let you all know your Lib Dem County Councillors have a new website: www.leicestershirelibdems.org.uk. This new site will be where all of the county press releases, comments and policies will be uploaded.

Over the next few weeks, this site will be changed into a personal website for me as the local member for the area on both the County and the Borough.

Simon

Liberal Democrats have responded to the County Council’s publication of its draft Budget.  

Simon Galton, Group Leader said: “this report is something that we have feared for some time. The Tories are attacking key services that vulnerable and elderly people rely upon in order to fulfil a promise on Council Tax that is entirely dependent on a Conservative Government being elected and being able to afford to increase grants to councils.    

I am sure many people are concerned about prices and costs, but the 0% promise is very unlikely to be fulfilled – the state of public finances means it would be very hard to meet. The Tories nationally have already admitted the need for higher Taxes and maybe even an increase in VAT. So as we have warned previously, even if it could – there is no such thing as a free lunch.  

Our other big concern is that the full effects of the budget won’t be realised until 2011 and beyond, which of course is after the General Election. These include plans to remove all contracted evening and Sunday bus services, cutting support to the Voluntary Sector and non emergency repairs to roads and removing grants to Scout and Guide groups who use Council buildings. We feel this budget is like a ticking time bomb which may not go off for some time but when it does, the full effects will be felt far and wide.  

The Liberal Democrats appreciate that times are hard, and we agree council taxes should be kept as low as possible but as a responsible opposition, will strongly oppose cuts that will hurt the very people the Council should be protecting. In due course, we intend to present some alternative proposals to mitigate the worst effects of the Tories budget plans. ”

Hi all,

my Liberal Democrat Spokesman, Cllr Alan Bailey, has recently written to the Cabinet expressing his concern at the proposals of the Conservatives to once again try and sell the Care Homes.

Just wanted to wish all of you a very Merry Christmas and a peaceful New year.

The County Council’s budget will be announced on the 5th January - this will have detail on how the Conservatives plan to shave £70m off the budget. Watch this space for our initial reaction.

Also, we plan to launch a new website in the New Year - we have had over 30,000 visits this year and i thank all of you for you ongoing support and interest in our work.

Cheers!

Simon

Hi, i am also posting a copy of the letter that Don Wright Lib dem spokesman for Children and Young People, sent to the Cabinet at its meeting on Tuesday. This issue plus the care homes is definately going to make the Budget season (in January) alot more important.

Revised submission to Cabinet re. Melton Schools reorganisation 15 / 12 / 09

The Liberal Democrat Group makes the following submission to the Cabinet with regard to the proposed closure of King Edward VV School, Melton and asks that it be considered:

1.    A three-school plan for secondary school reorganisation in Melton was adopted by the Administration two years ago and came into full operation in September 2009. This occurred despite much uncertainty and doubt about whether forecasted pupil numbers could justify such a scheme.  2.    The phasing of new school building on the John Ferneley site and the major extensions and improvements on the Long Field site, in contrast to no refurbishment on the King Edward site, made a considerable impact on parental choice. Understandably many parents were drawn to the excellent new facilities being provided at John Ferneley and Long Field and these attractions have overshadowed the fact that King Edward VII, without the advantage of extra building, has made major and rapid improvement in performance under its new and strong leadership.

3.    In view of unbalanced pupil numbers the Administration is proposing closure of King Edward VII just 12 weeks after the start of the plan – a proposal that has led to massive public protest. Melton parents have seen how the process has become unfairly distorted and understand fully the unique value of King Edward VII to the town and its huge contribution over a hundred years and now to the education of its children. They demand a fairer deal for this school.

4.    King Edward VII can make a strong case for its retention at KS4 Level as detailed in the information published by its parent support group. King Edward VII has by far the strongest case for leadership and involvement in teaching and learning at the new Post-16 Centre. Putting the needs of learners first is, of course, a key principle but effective learning can only be achieved through using and employing the best and most experienced teachers at the appropriate levels and King Edward VII has them in abundance.

5.    Under the pressure of recent events the Melton Partnership has begun to weaken and schools have openly declared that they see a two-school solution as the way forward. This Darwinian struggle for survival and supremacy is severely damaging the good intentions of the original partnership and is no basis for sound decision-making.

6.    Accordingly the Liberal Democrat Group calls on the Administration to delay any decision on this matter to allow a further period of discussion and negotiation and to enable a satisfactory conclusion to be reached, under which all three Melton secondary schools continue to have a role to play in this reorganisation.

I have decided to post a copy of what my fellow County Councillor Alan Bailey sent to Cabinet yesterday. The ongoing problems that the Conservatives are experiecneing in trying to sell these care homes is starting to look silly.

SUPPORTED ACCOMMODATION FOR OLDER PEOPLE IN LEICESTERSHIRE 

I note that at their meeting on Tuesday15th December, the Cabinet are to consider a report from the Director of Adult Social Care and Health entitled “Supported Accommodation for Older People in Leicestershire”. I would be grateful if copies of this letter could be shown to the Cabinet Members so that my comments, below, can be considered before they take their decision on this item.

My comments are as follows:-

I have real concerns about the recommendation to transfer nine of the Council’s remaining in-house Elderly Persons Homes (EPHs) and associated day care services, with the option of closing one or more of the homes should  there be “not sufficient market interest” or  if “a transfer cannot be concluded following a full tender process”.

My concerns include the following:-

1)     It is a high risk strategy to offer TEN care homes for transfer/sale when it has recently proved impossible to transfer ‘only’ SIX homes. The paper to cabinet admits that “in the current economic climate there remains a risk of market uncertainty and potential for a transfer not to be completed” and that “the fact that other authorities in the East Midlands are also putting their homes on the market within a similar time scale increases the risk.”

2)     Since March, 2007, this will be the third attempt to sell or transfer some, or most, of the remaining in-house care homes. The previous two failed, the most recent in June, 2009 “because of the impact of the prevailing and unprecedented economic climate.” The economic climate is no better now that it was six months ago.

3)     Playing High Risk Strategies with the homes of elderly people is wrong, especially when the stated aim of the process is to make savings.

4)     I am concerned that having gone through almost three years of uncertainty our elderly care homes residents are once again having the future of their homes put in doubt.

5)     Just this week a LGiU policy briefing quoted the Care Quality Commission Quality of Care reports 2008-09 as stating that “Council owned …(residential and domiciliary care) ….. services perform best, and private sector services least well.” It also says:- “It is interesting to note that council owned services perform best – out-sourcing is not necessarily always the best solution.”

6)     Council run homes are popular with residents, their families and staff. The Councils’ own consultation results prove this.

7)     Although about 90% of the County Council’s residents in residential care are already in independent care homes we believe that the remaining council run homes, few though they are, offer an element of choice.

8 )     These drastic proposals regarding the homes for elderly people are being made simply for the reasons of finance. Greater weight should be given to the wishes of the residents.

I believe that we should be exploring further the opportunities for in-house savings. In the Director’s paper in June, 2009, it was reported that “during the course of the discussions with the consortium a number of more efficient working practices have been identified which, when fully implemented across the 10 in-house homes will make a contribution to achieving this” (required savings).  Have these been fully implemented?

Yours sincerely

Alan Bailey CC

Liberal Democrat Spokesman, Adult Social Care & Health

Following on from recent events in Melton, the County Lib Dems have produced an amendment for next Wednesday Full Council. My colleague Cllr Don Wright is leading on this and the press release shows what we are trying to acheive: 

“Cllr Don Wright, Lib Dem Spokesman on CYPS, said: “our amendment proposes a way forward. It highlights key, factual and relevant points that need to be addressed in response to the problems of pupil numbers in Melton’s schools. We believe that people in other areas due for reorganisation such as Loughborough need to be reassured that this doesn’t happen again. But we disagree with Labour on the need for an independent enquiry, which would be costly, drawn out and undermines the efforts of the Director of CYPS” 

Cllr Simon Galton, Leader of the Opposition said “Our amendment allows for a proper mechanism by involving the Council’s Scrutiny Committee so that the necessary lessons can be learnt from the Melton review. I am sorry to say that the Labour proposal is not realistic whilst our amendment will enable the issues to be examined in an open and democratic forum. After all that is what Overview and Scrutiny is for and I’m disappointed that Labour doesn’t seem to have confidence in the system.”  

“There are also more issues to consider than simply launching an enquiry. I recently attended a conference where I heard the Conservative Shadow minister for Local Government, Caroline Spelman talk about the pressures faced by local government. After hearing what she said, I have serious concerns that the ‘Building Schools for the Future’ fund could be abandoned after the general election.  This funding is what the Council is relying on to modernise and improve secondary schools across Leicestershire. Many education authorities have already benefited from millions of pounds of funding but Leicestershire was placed towards the end of the programme and it would be grossly unfair if Leicestershire’s young people lost out because of planned cuts in public spending by who ever wins the election.” 

“At the end of the day, education isn’t about numbers of pupils on an attendance sheet – it’s about individual young people who deserve the best possible education. We must not forget this and simply get stuck in petty political squabbles.” 

Just wanted to up date you on developments  in Harborough - on Monday night (23rd) i managed to write a successful motion that won the vote.  It has some important points on the Co-op’s Eco-Town- and this will hopefully be the one of the final nails in the coffin

The motion said:

“That this Council following a request for clarification from the Rural East Have Your Say meeting:

1. welcomes the decision by the Government not to shortlist the Co-Op’s Pennbury Eco-town near Stoughton in the first wave of sites in England
2. notes the reasons why Pennbury failed to meet the Government’s criteria reflects the concerns raised by Harborough District Council during two consultation exercises
3. notes that the Chief Executive has recently advised the Department of Communities and Local Government that the opportunity to bid for support for studies of further locations was discussed at the Housing, Planning and Infrastructure Group. This group comprises of representatives from all authorities in Leicester and Leicestershire. The outcome of the discussion was that we would not be making a bid for support. Accordingly no further work is planned to be undertaken by the Council at this time.
4. acknowledges that the decision to formally withdraw the bid is a matter for the Co-op not the Council
5. believes that the issue of housing development is best decided at a local level by democratically elected local authorities. “

Liberal Democrat Councillor Don Wright has commented on the County Council’s Cabinet decision regarding King EdwardVII School. 

He said: “The level of protest from the people of Melton, Opposition councillors and other interested parties was so high that the Conservatives have been forced into playing for time. Even the local Conservative councillor spoke in support of the retention of King Edward

The Conservatives have five weeks to dig themselves out of a big hole and they will need a very large shovel, we remain concerned that despite postponing the decision the Conservative administration will eventually reinstate their original proposal to close King Edward VII.”