Agenda item

Member Question submitted by Cllr Niall Innes for response by the Cabinet Member for Environment, Leisure and Culture (Cllr Nigel Cooke):-

 

“To ask the Cabinet member for an update on the recent changes to Bin Collections and the introduction of Garden Waste Collections. Specifically:

 

·         Out of the total number of households in the borough, how many have signed up?

·         What was the reasons for the delays in people getting their bins?

·         What is the total amount raised so for through the introduction of the new £40 a year Bin and how has that impacted the amount it was hoped to raise?”

 

The Cabinet Member for Environment, Leisure and Culture responded with:

 

“As of 16th May 2025, there has been a total of 19,400 subscriptions and 20,500 bins have been ordered since going live in January 2025.

 

We don’t believe there were any delays in residents receiving their new brown bin, if they ordered them before the cut-off date. Due to the logistics in delivering a large number of bins throughout the borough, it was regularly communicated to residents to ‘Make sure you sign up to the new garden waste collection service by 14 February to ensure you receive your bin for the first collection date in April’. Residents who signed up after this date would still receive their new brown bin but it would not be guaranteed for the first collection of the new service as the next phase of deliveries did not start until 24th March 2025.

 

From the subscriptions referenced above, the Council has received income of Circa £800,000. This compares to the £600,000 forecast for 25-26 that was referenced in the October Powering Our Futures Cabinet report. This income will be monitored through the ongoing budget monitoring processes and reported to members in line with this. I feel this is good value for money.”

 

Cllr Niall Innes asked the following supplementary question:

 

“Despite residents paying £40 per annum for a brown bin, we have been told that it is fine for people to put garden waste in their ordinary bin. If they asked for a refund would they get one?”

 

The Cabinet Member for Environment, Leisure and Culture responded with:

 

“No, this is not the message are trying to communicate. We would prefer that residents who have regular green waste to dispose of, by using a brown bin.

 

For residents like myself with small gardens, who don’t generate a lot of garden waste, I would prefer that they either book a slot at the Haverton Hill Recycling Centre as I did last Sunday, or that they dispose of the waste in an environmentally friendly manner.”

 

Member Question submitted by Cllr Katie Weston for response by the Leader of the Council (Cllr Lisa Evans):-

 

“As the leader is aware, for the first time in over a decade the Clarences finally have a direct bus to Billingham, although limited and on a trial basis. This bus service is getting cancelled next week, as a private bus company cannot make a profit from a customer base of a village, especially off-peak. Does the leader agree that bus services shouldn’t be ran purely on a profit motive, and instead, like Teesside Airport, should be ran as a public service?”

 

The Leader of the Council responded with:

 

“I totally agree that every area across the Borough deserves access to a regular bus service. Unfortunately, this has proved problematic over many years for vulnerable communities like the Clarences. I firmly believe that transport cannot purely be run on a profit motive and the needs of communities must be taken into consideration.”

 

Councillor Katie Weston asked the following supplementary question:

 

“Will the Leader ask the Tees Valley Mayor to subsidise the Clarences bus service to Billingham?”

 

The Leader of the Council responded with:

 

“I will undertake to contact the Tees Valley Mayor to seek his support in securing bus subsidies for all vulnerable areas.”

 

Member Question submitted by Cllr Paul Weston for response by the Leader of the Council (Cllr Lisa Evans):-

 

“At the January council meeting, this council passed a motion to write to the Tees Valley Mayor asking that buses be taken back under public control, in the same way that is happening across the North of England. Have we had an answer yet?”

 

The Leader of the Council responded with:

 

“I have checked with the previous Leader and we have received no response from the Tees Valley Mayor. However, receipt of the letter was acknowledged by staff on behalf of the Tees Valley Mayor.”

 

Councillor Paul Weston asked the following supplementary question:

 

“This is very disappointing. Can the Leader write again to demand an answer?”

 

The Leader of the Council responded with:

 

“I am more than happy to write again to the Tees Valley Mayor to seek a response.”

 

Member Question submitted by Cllr Ted Strike for response by the Deputy Leader and Cabinet Member for Resources and Transport (Cllr Paul Rowling):-

 

“Could the Cabinet Member please provide information on the Council’s current working from home arrangements, specifically:

 

a) What percentage of the workforce, who are eligible to work from home, currently do so?

b) What is the general policy on the number of days per week staff are permitted to work from home (e.g. two or three days)?

c) Are there any controls in place to manage how many staff work from home on the same days?

d) What percentage of eligible staff work from home on each day of the week – Monday through to Friday?

e) What percentage of staff work from home on both Mondays and Fridays?”

 

The Deputy Leader and Cabinet Member for Resources and Transport responded with:

 

“Thank you, Councillor Strike.

 

The Council’s approach to flexible and remote working is shaped by our Smarter Working Policy, which forms part of the Council’s Workforce Strategy and supports our wider Colleagues Powering Our Future mission. This mission is about ensuring we have a committed, empowered and skilled workforce to deliver the Council’s priorities in a challenging financial climate.

 

Smarter working is not just about location—it’s about making the best use of our people, processes, technology and workspaces to deliver for our residents. It’s also key to supporting one of the seven priority areas in our Workforce Strategy: ensuring we are an inclusive, healthy, well-supported organisation with the right skills in place for the future.

 

Turning to your specific questions:

 

(a) While we don’t hold live corporate data on how many staff are currently working from home, around 50% of roles are suitable for flexible or remote working. Among those, most employees do work flexibly in some form.

 

(b) There is no set corporate rule on the number of days per week permitted for homeworking. Arrangements are agreed between staff and managers depending on the needs of the service. In many cases, two or three days per week is common, but the pattern is not prescribed.

 

(c) There is no need for a corporate dictat in this area. Working patterns are best managed at team and service level to ensure appropriate coverage, continuity of service, and opportunities for in-person collaboration.

 

(d and e) The Council does not currently record which specific days staff work remotely, so we cannot provide data on day-by-day patterns or on staff working from home on both Mondays and Fridays.

 

Our approach has also supported wider benefits. We’ve been able to rationalise our office space, making savings for residents. And flexible working supports our ambition to be an inclusive employer—making space for colleagues with different life circumstances, such as carers or part-time workers, who might otherwise be excluded from traditional working models.

 

We’re building a workplace that is adaptable, resilient and focused on wellbeing. Through smarter working, we continue to aim to be an employer of choice, aligned with our communities and capable of delivering for the Borough, both now and in the future.

 

We are committed to being an employer of choice, with a diverse, talented and empowered workforce that’s fit to meet the future demands of the Borough and deliver our ambitious plans for our residents.

 

We are passionate about ensuring we have a passionate and productive workforce. Our working policies enable us to appeal to a wide range of potential employees and provide flexibility within reason for our existing workforce. The labour market is constantly adapting, particularly post covid, and we must ensure that we continue to be an attractive employer against strong private and public sector competition.”

 

Cllr Ted Strike asked the following supplementary question:

 

“When the last Chief Executive was in post, staff could work from home two days a week and then this was increased to three days. Clearly this is not the approach anymore. However, no policy on this has been taken through Council. Does the Cabinet Member agree that there should be a clear policy on this matter as staff can’t be supervised if they are not in the office.”

 

The Deputy Leader and Cabinet Member for Resources and Transport responded with:

 

“There is no need for a prescriptive approach or changes to staff contracts. Our staff have different roles and it is best that working arrangements are agreed between staff and managers. The hybrid model of working also means that we can be efficient about our Council accommodation and workspaces. What we are doing works. There are no concerns about supervision or performance, and we commend our staff for their dedication to their roles.”

 

Member Question submitted by Cllr Marcus Vickers for response by the Cabinet Member for Environment, Leisure and Culture (Cllr Nigel Cooke):-

 

“We have seen the crisis in Labour ran Birmingham City Council, with well over 21,000 tonnes of rubbish piling up in the streets and rats bigger than cats, causing misery and health risks for residents.

 

Can you provide reassurances and detail what resilience or emergency planning measures are in place in relation to waste collections, to ensure that no such crisis will happen here within Stockton Borough Council?”

 

The Cabinet Member for Environment, Leisure and Culture responded with:

 

“Whilst we are not fully aware of the specific issues in Birmingham, here in Stockton-on-Tees we have a long-standing record of maintaining excellent working relationship with our waste collection staff, with mutual respect and regular engagement between frontline colleagues and managers within the service, to ensure that we continue to deliver high performing services. This is a critical service to our residents and to ensure a continuation of the excellent service that we have all become accustomed to, a rigorous and robust business continuity plan is in place which ensure effective continuation.”

 

Councillor Marcus Vickers did not have a supplementary question but placed on record his thanks to the Council’s waste collection staff.

 

Member Question submitted by Cllr Niall Innes for response by the Leader of the Council (Cllr Lisa Evans):-

 

“At Full Council on 22nd January 2025, I put forward a Motion that sought the Chief Executive and Leader of the Council to outline the Council’s desire for the Government to enact a full public inquiry in to Grooming Gangs.

 

The motion also asked 'That the Leader of the Council engages with local stakeholders and meets with them alongside other Group Leaders to discuss what this Council can do to robustly support and protect young people of this borough most at risk'.

 

Despite my motion successfully passing, I understand that the second part has not been undertaken and no meeting has yet been arranged. Can I ask why this is?”

 

The Leader of the Council responded with:

 

“Thank you for your question, Councillor Innes, I do appreciate it.

 

The motion passed by Council in January 2025 included a request that the then Leader of the Council engage with local stakeholders and meet with them alongside other Group Leaders to consider what further steps could be taken to support and protect young people at risk.

 

Since that time, I have taken on the role of Leader. I have not received any proposals from the originating group as to how such a meeting would be structured, what it would aim to achieve, or how it would align with the Council’s existing arrangements.

 

As Leader, and previously in my role as Cabinet Member for Children’s Services, I have always engaged regularly with partners and stakeholders on issues relating to the protection of children and young people in our borough and have always had an open door policy to discuss anything with Councillors.

 

More broadly, the Council engages routinely with relevant partners through formal governance and partnership structures, particularly in the areas of safeguarding and community safety. These include, for example, the Health and Wellbeing Board, the Community Safety Partnership, and multi-agency safeguarding arrangements.

 

Having taken advice, it is also important to note that, under the Council’s Constitution, the Leader holds executive responsibilities in relation to external engagement. Other Group Leaders do not have an equivalent role and are not able to exercise executive functions or represent the Council in external forums in the same way.

 

As the motion did not define a format, structure or specific objective for the proposed meeting, and as the approach suggested falls outside the Council’s formal governance framework, no further steps have been taken at this stage in relation to that aspect of the resolution.

 

However, I am more than happy to meet with Group Leaders to explore this. If you have any ideas about how we can take that forward, then I remain open to considering any constructive proposals that you may have.”

 

Councillor Niall Innes asked the following supplementary question:

 

“I appreciate that there has been a change in Leader, however, the response is unsatisfactory as the Council motion has not been actioned. The Leader should have reached out first, not waited for a Council question.”

 

The Leader of the Council responded with:

 

“My response had already addressed this question. Due to recent surgery, I have not yet had the opportunity to meet with Group Leaders, but I look forward to doing so.”

 

Member Question submitted by Cllr Ray Godwin for response by the Cabinet Member for Regeneration and Housing (Cllr Richard Eglington):-

 

“Recently it was announced that global online retailer Amazon will be opening a new site on land near to Queen Elizabeth Way. Although I welcome such investment. Sites such as this can attract hundreds of truck and van movements each day, working 24 hours a day,7 days a week.

 

What is the current provision for truck parking and driver facilities, toilets, showers etc within SBC? and what additional facilities and parking are planned to support this new facility?”

 

The Cabinet Member for Regeneration and Housing responded with:

 

“The Council is aware of recent press articles concerning this land and Amazon. The site is subject to a live planning application and, as such, it would be inappropriate to provide direct comment on the details of those proposals, however, parking for HGVs and any associated facilities deemed to be required as an integral part of the proposed development would be considered as part of the application and required to be provided where necessary.

 

In terms of current provision, as these tend to be on a site-by-site basis it is not information that the Council currently holds, however, both officers and I look forward to working with councillor Godwin about the issue.

 

I feel it’s important to keep talking to businesses.  Businesses need to feel they are part of the community alongside residents, I would like them to feel they are investing in communities and not just sites. I want them to feel and understand the social benefits of investing in our great communities.”

 

Councillor Ray Godwin asked the following supplementary question:

 

“It is a legal requirement for drivers to take proper breaks or they could lose their licences. Adequate parking and facilities need to be available. When companies do not meet their responsibilities, this pushes vehicles into residential communities. What lessons can we learn from going forward?”

 

The Cabinet Member for Regeneration and Housing responded with:

 

“Businesses need to understand the social benefits of investing in the community and I look forward to working with Councillor Godwin on this issue.”

 

Member Question submitted by Cllr Sylvia Walmsley for response by the Cabinet Member for Regeneration and Housing (Cllr Richard Eglington):-

 

“Will the Cabinet Member join with me in praising the progress and partnership working carried out to date by the Thornaby Town Deal Board? Will he also give a comprehensive update regarding the programme of works, especially with regard to demolition of the Golden Eagle and construction of the new swimming baths? This is to counteract deliberately mendacious and misleading information which is fed into the public domain by people who know better which causes widespread concern amongst the Thornaby people.”

 

The Cabinet Member for Regeneration and Housing responded with:

 

“After a protracted and complicated period of negotiation The leasehold interests in the Golden Eagle were secured, giving the Council the unencumbered freehold of the building in October 2024.

 

Since that point a number of checks, surveys and inspections of the building have taken place allowing us to better inform a specification of tender documents to enable the demolition of the property.  The tender process has now closed, with tenders being assessed with a view to appointment and start on site as early as possible, this is aimed to be done for the end June 2025. Timescales remain an estimate until the tender and appointment process is concluded and a contract programme agreed with the successful demolition contractor.  Full details on programme and milestones will be shared once agreed.

 

With regards to the pool, a contractor (Galliford Try) was appointed to undertake a two-stage design and build contract for the works to the pavilion leisure centre and construction of new pool and gym.  The first phase involves carrying out the final stages of detailed design throughout the summer with a view to concluding design in August 2025 and starting on site in September 2025.  It is anticipated that the construction phase will take circa 12 months.”

 

Councillor Sylvia Walmsley asked the following supplementary question:

 

“Would the Cabinet Member and Deputy Leader agree that we must communicate better in future ad keep the public informed of any delays to counteract negative publicity?”

 

The Cabinet Member for Regeneration and Housing responded with:

 

“Rumour and speculation are fed by online comments, mainly from people looking to be online influencers rather than actually delivering something great for the town. They have enjoyed talking down the hard work of the town deal board.

 

I will take some of the criticisms on the chin; at times the Council, the Board and the members have not communicated what was happening well enough. There has been a vacuum of information, and all vacuums get filled. We must get better at shouting about our successes

 

I would like to say something about the town deal board. Since I joined it, I have been encouraged in the way that the members (most of the members) have worked together, I feel that under the great chairmanship of Mark White, members have worked with a common goal to improve the lives of our residents and the great town of Thornaby. And I would like to thank all members and the Chair, Mark White.”