Members of the Committee are requested to bring their copy of the agenda for the Executive meeting on 19 October 2022.
Minutes:
The Committee considered the following reports on the Part 1 agenda for the meeting of the Executive on 19 October 2022:
(5) BIGGIN HILL AIRPORT – NOISE ACTION PLAN
In summer 2021, five years after the signing of the Deed of Variation on their lease with the Council, Biggin Hill Airport Ltd (BHAL) submitted a Noise Action Plan review. As the review was to be carried out “in association” with London Borough of Bromley, the Council could approve it or request alterations. At the Executive Committee meeting on 12 January 2022, the Council requested further information from Biggin Hill Airport. The Airport had submitted new information in response to this request.
In opening the discussion, a local Biggin Hill Ward Councillor highlighted that the report before the Committee was a review and not the Noise Action Plan. In the view of the Member the evidence provided by Biggin Hill Airport was thorough. The Member noted that she was a Member of the Biggin Hill Airport Consultative Committee, and it was highlighted that the Airport was rigorously questioned at meetings of the Consultative Committee. The Member expressed the view that it was correct to await the CAA decision on Runway 03 before progressing further proposals.
The Chairman reported that it was his experience that the Biggin Hill consultative Committee lacked openness and transparency citing the example of frequent delays in the publication of minutes from meetings which needed to be addressed.
A Member underlined that the volume of emails from residents that Members had received, and the concerns expressed by residents demonstrated that there was a great deal of distrust. Residents had real concerns around the impact of the airport and these concerns were similar to those expressed when the Committee discussed the Airport in January 2022.
A Member of the Committee provided a brief history of the Council’s airport partner referring to the High Court case in respect of fare-paying passengers which was won by the Council. The Member stressed that one of the key considerations in choosing a partner to help with the running of the airport was protecting residents.
The Member suggested that between now and January 2023, further information would be provided, and where possible all this information needed to be placed on the Council’s website in a timely manner.
It was noted that pollution at Biggin Hill Airport had never been reviewed and it was suggested that this omission should now be corrected. In addition to a report concerning pollution Members also requested that financial assessments be provided in the next report presented to Committee. Further concerns expressed included whether the Biggin Hill Consultative Committee complied with Government Guidance and included all the required interested parties. Furthermore, the Member highlighted that Government guidance indicated that there should be a noise and tracking Sub-Group, although tracking did not appear in the name ofthe Sub-Group of the Biggin Hill Consultative Committee. The Member also underlined that the report presented in January 2023 also needed to provide full details on helicopter movements.
A Member reported that they had written to Biggin Hill Airport to request air quality readings. These requests had repeatedly been refused and Officers were urged to step in and support the request for this information.
A
number of Members expressed frustration
at the lack of progress that had been made and emphasised that
there now needed to be a move from the review to a revision
of the NAP. The Committee noted that the CAA decision
regarding the approach to Runway 03 was material, however, in the
meantime there were a number of other issues raised in the report
that needed to be progressed and listed a few where no action had
been taken or where more work was required. The Chairman
noted that one of the reasons for the delay was that Biggin Hill
Airport had been slow in submitting its application to the
CAA. The Committee agreed that 6
years was too long and come January 2023, if the CAA decision had
still not been received, the Council should be prepared to move on
the basis that progress was required, the January recommendations
needed to be actioned and decisions needed to be taken. It
was acknowledged that some negotiations would be needed to achieve
this. The Chairman highlighted that there needed to be sufficient
time to consult with residents. The Portfolio Holder
confirmed that a letter had been received from the Chief Executive
of the CAA confirming that a decision would be received by the end
of the year. In addition, the Committee noted that the three
directly affected MPs had already been encouraged to write to the
relevant Minister with oversight for the CAA, urging them to ensure
that the promised timely decision was delivered.
To agree
that in the light of the above officers should bring a further
report in January 2023. once CAA decision is made, when the
Executive can consider the impact of the decision of the CAA on
Runway 03.
RESOLVED: That the Executive be recommended to
1. To note that Biggin Hill Airport Ltd (BHAL) submitted additional documentation by the deadline of 30 June 2022 in response to the information requested by the Executive in January 2022.
2. To note that with the additional evidence provided, BHAL has completed its review of the Noise Action Plan (NAP) though one of the ongoing commitments under the NAP for BHAL to progress the implementation of Runway 03 is yet to be achieved.
3. To note that BHAL is dependent on Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) authorisation to progress Runway 03 and a decision is expected later this year, by December 2022.
4. To note that the Leader and the Chief Executive have written to the Council’s three directly affected Members of Parliament encouraging them to write to the relevant Minister with oversight for CAA, urging them to ensure that the promised timely decision is delivered.?
5. To note that the outcome of the CAA decision on Runway 03 will be significant in determining the next steps following the review of the NAP.
6. To agree that in the light of the above officers should bring a further report in January 2023.
(7) DELEGATION OF FUNCTION AMENDMENT AND CHANGE TO THE SCHEME OF DELEGATION TO OFFICERS (TRADING STANDARDS)
The report followed a decision by the Executive on 30th June 2021 to accept Delegation of Function in certain Trading Standards investigations. It was in part concerned with one of those investigations where delegation of function had been provided by the two local authorities in Appendix 1 and related to retrospective delegation of function from these two authorities in order to correct an error on the face of the approved minutes.
The report also sought to explicitly delegate the Director of Environment and Public Protection to accept a delegation from and to give a delegation of function to local authorities or their Executives in respect of other current and future investigations. The purpose was to clarify the previous decision in order to preclude the possibility of the risk of a successful challenge in related prosecutions.
The Chairman suggested that in future reports it would helpful if more detail regarding the impact of the decisions being delegated could be provided.
RESOLVED: That the Executive be recommended to
1. Ratify retrospectively the delegation of functions from local authorities (listed in Appendix 1) for adoption for the purpose of legal proceedings;
(j) Exercise the functions of the Council to delegate a function or to receive a function from another local authority or its Executive in relation to trading standards and consumer protection, including prohibiting the sale of dangerous goods, promoting fair trading and investigating or prosecuting offences. Note: this delegation operates in addition to Article 11.04 of the Constitution.
(8) HOUSEHOLD SUPPORT FUND
Report HPR2022/0
The report set out details of the Government announcement regarding the Household Support Fund (HSF) and sought endorsement of the proposals for the allocation and distribution of the HSF.
In response to a question concerning the merits of the application process, the Director for Housing, Planning and Regeneration explained that the grant conditions were quite explicit in requiring an application process. An email would be sent to residents who had previously applied for the grant and, where necessary, letters would also be sent.
Members expressed concerns around digital exclusion highlighting that some vulnerable people may missed out on the grant because they did not have access to broadband. The Chairman highlighted that residents could utilise the facilities in local libraries to access the internet and the Director of Housing, Planning and Regeneration confirmed that take up would be monitored. Where necessary Officers would be available to assist with the application process. In addition, support agencies were also being trained to provide assistance.
A Member highlighted that residents who were eligible for vouchers should not have to wait months to receive them and the Member expressed hope that the application process could be simplified and expedited for any residents who had previously been eligible to receive vouchers under the scheme.
In respect of the take up of the previous tranche of funding, the Director of Housing, Planning and Regeneration reported that the previous grant had been fully spent and exact numbers would be provided following the meeting.
RESOLVED: That the Executive be recommended to
1. Note that Bromley Council’s allocation for the Household Support Fund (HSF) is £1,868k;
2. Approve the drawdown of this amount from the 2022/23 Central Contingency to the Operational Housing revenue budget;
3. Approve the full utilisation of this ringfenced grant, in 2022/23, as detailed in paragraph 3.9 of this report
4. Agree that any final changes are delegated to Chief Officer in consultation with the Portfolio Holders for Renewal, Recreation & Housing and Resources, Commissioning & Contracts Management.