Questions, if any, from Members who have given notice.
Minutes:
Questions from Councillor Stuart Lees to Councillor Steve Flitter, Leader of the Council:
“After a recent email from our director of housing regarding issues with platform housing asking us as councillors to contact Platform directly at the email address provided. As we are all aware our director of housing spends a lot of hours sorting issues out regarding platform housing for which I myself are extremely grateful, but I find this unacceptable as to the length of time you have to wait for a operator to answer your call. This is why our residents contact us councillors to get a quick and positive response. Platform look after 40,000 homes and operate in over 100 local authorities.
My questions are:
1. Why don’t councillors get a faster response to our residents’ issues from platform. As the system is at the moment councillors have to wait just the same as our residents to get through on a call which is why we as councillors are contacted in the first instance. Is it time a review is had regarding platform due to the amount of time our residents have to wait for work to be carried out?
2. Is it time that the housing repairs are brought back in house. Following a recent incident in Ashbourne in a platform housing area, why are our elderly residents not being visited by Platform officers, as per their tenancy policy?
3. If councillors use the email system as advised can a same day response be had?
Thank you, Cllr Lees.”
Councillor Steve Flitter provided a verbal response as outlined below:
1. Platform have asked for member enquiries to be directed to a dedicated email address. On receipt the email is logged and set for follow up by a named member of platform’s staff. The impact of the covid pandemic is still being felt within the construction industry and this together with inflationary pressures and availability of materials is still causing delays for many housing associations.
2. Housing repairs are delivered by platform’s own inhouse service. It is not feasible or possible to bring these services inhouse. housing related support provided within age designated accommodation has been the subject of funding cuts for many years. The supporting people programme, funded by government via county councils previously would have paid for wardens to undertake support to residents. Like many housing providers, platform have not been able to fund warden type services across their sheltered housing stock to the same levels as the previous supporting people programme.
3. Platform have stock within 100 local authorities and will receive emails from members across this vast area. Very few organisations are able to offer a substantive same day response to email enquiries. Platform work to a 5 day response time for emails received by the dedicated member email address.
Urgent questions from Councillor Susan Hobson to Councillor Steve Flitter, Leader of the Council:
“1. Yesterday morning I saw a press release from Derbyshire Dales District Council that said that the “G&TWG has listened to public concerns expressed this week and in response has postponed 2 of the 10 recommendations”.
I am a member of this group, and I was not aware of any meeting of the G&TWG to discuss this matter.
Does the Leader of the Council accept that the above statement is therefore incorrect and alter that press release, and will he confirm who made the decision to postpone?
2. Derbyshire Dales District Council has a duty of care to some of the most vulnerable Traveller families – the G&TWG were recently presented with two costed options for sanitary facilities at Matlock Station. Why do they not form part of the recommendations?
3.Despite the press release there is no mention in the revised agenda of what “postponed” actually means. Can the Leader of the Council provide a clear timeline for this?”
Councillor Flitter provided a verbal response.
Urgent questions from Councillor Anthony Bates to Councillor Steve Flitter, Leader of the Council:
“1. The specific recommendations for Fishponds Meadows Overspill Car Park, Ashbourne and Old Station Road Car Park, Rowsley have been “postponed”. Can the Leader of the Council explain why these two sites were chosen?
2. As a new Derbyshire Dales District Council member I find it very strange that less than a year from a decision being made that gave a clear view that car parks are not suitable these sites are again being brought forward – can the Leader of the Council explain why we appear to be going backwards?”
Councillor Flitter provided a verbal response.
Urgent questions from Councillor Dermot Murphy to Councillor Steve Flitter, Leader of the Council:
“1. Vulnerable travellers, businesses and residents had clarity and finality in November 2022 when all Derbyshire Dales District sites were dismissed as being unsuitable apart from Matlock Station and Matlock Bath Station. What has materially changed to any of those sites since that time?
2. Can the Leader of the Council confirm his commitment to the process for the Woodyard site?
3. When will the consultation process start, and will the Leader confirm that the report will be ready for the November 2023 meeting?”
Councillor Flitter provided a verbal response.