a)    Councillor C. Rayner will ask the following question of Councillor Saunders, Lead Member for Finance:

I made a number of capital bids for the 2019/20 financial year for the ward that I represent (Horton and Wraysbury), however I believe all were unsuccessful. Do you think that the capital budget should be more evenly spread among the rural parishes?

b)   Councillor C. Rayner will ask the following question of Councillor Coppinger, Lead Member for Planning and Health:

Further to a letter dated 18/1/19 from the Environment Agency to the borough in Wraysbury, what does the council now intend to do regarding the planning policy/local plan for this land in Hythe End, in light of the official advice from the statutory body?

c)    Councillor Hill will ask the following question of Councillor Coppinger, Lead Member for Planning and Health:

Why have numerous lamppost banners costing circa £22,000 been displayed across RBWM without advertising consent and without being submitted to the relevant planning panel?

d)   Councillor Cannon will ask the following question of Councillor Dudley, Leader of the Council:

Please can you provide an update on the current position in respect of plans and their progress to address the current funding gap for the Environment Agency River Thames Scheme?

(The Member responding has up to 5 minutes to address Council. The Member asking the question has up to 1 minute to submit a supplementary question. The Member responding then has a further 2 minutes to respond.)

a)    Councillor C. Rayner asked the following question of Councillor Saunders, Lead Member for Finance:

I made a number of capital bids for the 2019/20 financial year for the ward that I represent (Horton and Wraysbury), however I believe all were unsuccessful. Do you think that the capital budget should be more evenly spread among the rural parishes?

Councillor Saunders responded that he agreed that capital budgets should be more evenly spread among the rural parishes.

By way of a supplementary question, Councillor C. Rayner asked if the Lead Member would write to Horton and Wraysbury Parish Council to give them hope for funding for the CCTV programme in the village.

Councillor Saunders responded that there were ongoing discussions in relation to CCTV in Horton and joint arrangements for funding were being looked at. He suggested that the relevant Lead Member, Councillor M. Airey, together with officers would be in a better position provide Councillor C Rayner with the information requested. Councillor M. Airey agreed that he would respond in writing to Councillor C. Rayner.

Councillor C. Rayner commented that he was still waiting for a response in writing from Councillor M. Airey to a question from a previous full Council meeting. Councillor M. Airey confirmed that a written response had been sent. Councillor C. Rayner commented that this was from a junior officer and he expected the response to come from the Lead Member. Councillor M. Airey commented that the response had come from the Head of Commissioning – Communities, who was not a junior officer. 

b)   Councillor C. Rayner asked the following question of Councillor Coppinger, Lead Member for Planning and Health:

Further to a letter dated 18/1/19 from the Environment Agency to the borough in Wraysbury, what does the council now intend to do regarding the planning policy/local plan for this land in Hythe End, in light of the official advice from the statutory body?

Councillor Coppinger responded that as the question related to a current planning application, he was limited in the response he could give. The letter referred to was the response from the Environment Agency as statutory consultee to a consultation on a planning application, it would not be appropriate for him to comment on that application specifically.  He noted that the Environment Agency had objected to the proposal as it comprised development in the functional flood plain (otherwise known as flood zone 3b). Each application was considered on its own merits.  The National Planning Policy Framework set strict tests to protect people and property from flooding which all local planning authorities were expected to follow. Where these tests were not met, national policy was clear that new development should not be allowed.

Councillor Lenton commented that residents in Wraysbury were just as concerned about CCTV as those in Horton. In relation to Hythe End, this had been a running sore ever since he had become a councillor and ever since the borough allowed the operations to start. It was not satisfactory to say this was still dragging on.

Councillor C. Rayner confirmed that he did not have a supplementary question.

c)    Councillor Hill asked following question of Councillor Coppinger, Lead Member for Planning and Health:

Why have numerous lamppost banners costing circa £22,000 been displayed across RBWM without advertising consent and without being submitted to the relevant planning panel?

Councillor Coppinger explained that Councillor Dudley was the appropriate Member to respond as his portfolio included communications.

Councillor Dudley responded that banners were widely used by other councils to share key messages with residents and research had shown they had a greater impact in terms of communicating key achievements and priorities. The banners were placed by the communications and marketing team to highlight the six key priorities which were agreed in the Council Plan at Full Council. The council monitored council performance against those six priorities. 

The banners did not require planning permission. The intention was to install the banners using deemed consent but, due to an error in the sizing, advertising consent was required and an application would be made imminently.  

The six banners were reflective of the council’s six strategic priorities in the council plan 2017-21. They were also linked to the residents’ survey. New banners may be installed in the future as part of the ongoing communications strategy. Councillor Dudley summarised the banners and how they related to the six key priorities and the results of the residents’ survey:

There were 84 banners in total across the borough.

The company worked in a number of other local authorities including Birmingham, Brighton & Hove, Camden, Cardiff, Coventry, Hammersmith & Fulham, Haringey, Harrow, Havering, Leeds, Luton, Manchester, Newcastle, Newham, Peterborough, Portsmouth, Walsall, Westminster, York, Richmond and Greenwich.

By way of a supplementary question, Councillor Hill commented that it had been widely reported in the press and on social media that residents were angry and had expressed the view that the banners were a waste of taxpayer money and constituted political campaigning so close to an election. Councillor Hill asked when the banners would be removed, would they stay removed, and would the Maidenhead Conservative Association be paying the bill?

Councillor Dudley responded that the banners represented a small investment form the communications team to tell residents about council priorities. The banners would come down in the middle of March 2019 but the structures would remain so that they could be used for future campaigns.

d)   Councillor Cannon will asked the following question of Councillor Dudley, Leader of the Council:

Please can you provide an update on the current position in respect of plans and their progress to address the current funding gap for the Environment Agency River Thames Scheme?

Councillor Dudley responded that there had been a recent meeting with Surrey County Council and Phillip Hammond. He was hopeful that, as had been agreed by the Council, both the borough and Surrey County Council would levy a flood levy to enable repayment of a loan, to be taken out by an entity yet to be determined, to meet the funding gap. The issue was being progressed in central government. He sincerely wanted to see completion of the scheme; the council had already agreed £10m funding.

Councillor Cannon confirmed he did not have a supplementary question.