In accordance with Chichester District Council’s scheme for public question time as amended by Full Council on 24 September 2019 the Cabinet will receive any questions which have been submitted by members of the public in writing by noon two working days before the meeting. Each questioner will be given up to three minutes to ask their question. The total time allocated for public question time is 15 minutes subject to the Chairman’s discretion to extend that period.
Minutes:
Mrs Lintill explained that due to the number of questions received she would not allow supplementary questions on this occasion in order to keep to the 15 minutes allocated for public questions. Please note that further publication questions had been submitted but were not read out as the questionner or representative were not present at the meeting.
The following public questions were received (the responses provided are indicated in italics below).
Mr Broughton asked the following question:
Regarding 'Chichester District’s Climate Emergency Initial Action Plan 2020 – 2025', it is pleasing that there is an action to 'Set a Local Authority Area-wide target for District CO2 reductions', however the proposed target of 10% year on year until 2025 is not nearly enough to respond to what has been declared an emergency. If this target was extended to 2030, then the reduction would be 65%. Several local authorities, including neighbouring Arun District, have set targets of net zero by 2030, i.e. 100% reduction.
Also, as the energy system of the future is going to be more distributed, and locally generated energy could be cheaper, could one of the targets of the Action Plan be based on the amount of renewable energy generated within the Local Authority Area, especially considering we live in one of the sunniest parts of the UK. A proportion of the energy demand within the Local Authority Area would be a good indicator.
The following answer was provided:
The Council's Environment Panel, in drawing up the Initial Action Plan, carefully considered the question of targets. The target in the draft plan is an area wide one, applying to a large range of activities, some of them outside of our control and influence. The target is a 10% year on year reduction to run until 2025 and to be reviewed by then at the latest. Achieving this will require a mixture of action by the Council, by central government and its agencies, and by individuals and businesses. We note that Arun's target for 2030 only refers to its own operations, not the whole of that District. The CDC area-wide target was set to align with the UK target of net carbon neutrality by 2050. The Panel acknowledged that this target on its own will not achieve the level of carbon reduction needed long term, and that to do so it must increase after 2025. However the 10% is a considerable increase from the 3-5% achieved year on year over the last decade and this reflects our ambition to drive a step change in action locally whilst remaining within the bounds of the achievable. The achievement of such area-wide targets relies on a national action plan that is still to be announced. If this arrives before the detailed action plan is approved then we will have an opportunity to review our target at that point.
As an indicator, the amount of renewable energy generated within the District would be a useful one, although data on small scale installations may be time-consuming to collate. In drawing up the next stage of the plan we will consider milestones and indicators for monitoring the implementation of the plan. This would include an assessment of the readily available sources of data.
Mr Maber asked the following question:
With reference to Resourcing and Scope of Chichester District's Climate Emergency Plan:
I request the Full CDC Meeting agree and commit to Net Zero Carbon by 2030, please? It is vital that CDC grasp the magnitude of the need ... failure to do so would be letting everyone down. Appointing a Climate Emergency Officer of the highest calibre requires this clearly defined objective, and is line with the U.N.'s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). Furthermore, this new Climate Emergency Officer's remit should incorporate liaison with others towards Biodiversity and Nature Conservation, together with Community Updates to disseminate information and involve the Community.
E.g.1) Scope for sustainable travel infrastructure to be enhanced as nature corridors and refuges.
[cycling and walking: minimal carbon footprint + better air quality + health ] + Trees Etc.
E.g. 2) A lead role in Planning Applications ... the literally miles of plastic sheeting used on the Whitehouse Farm reptile relocation scheme - littering the site for approaching two years - is a example worthy of consideration - where will all that plastic sheeting be disposed of?
[Huge fossil fuel Carbon footprint in manufacture and environmental impact of once used plastic sheet]
E.g. 3) A lead role in managing Climate Change Impacts. In other words: Input to Planning and Mitigation. For example rising sea level [Increasing Flood Risk] and rising temperatures [Air Conditioning] Etc.
Please be aware of the long list of Councils that have committed to Net Zero Carbon by 2030, including our neighbouring Arun, Adur and Worthing, Portsmouth and many more ... and that it is vital that Chichester DC grasp the magnitude of the need ... failure to do so would be letting everyone down.
The following answer was provided:
As the answer to Mr Broughton’s question refers to, the question of target setting and dates has been extensively considered by the Environment Panel in drawing up the Initial Action Plan. It is unclear from the question whether you are suggesting we should commit to ‘Net Zero Carbon by 2030’ as an organisation (as Arun DC and Adur and Worthing Councils have done) or as the whole local authority area (like Portsmouth City). The proposed initial area-wide target of 10% year on year up to 2025 is aligned with the UK national target date of 2050, which in turn is aligned with the IPCC report on avoiding dangerous climate change that you refer to. On the remit of the proposed officer’s role, the Panel was also very mindful of the already broad remit of the role and the range of actions to be delivered in two years. For this reason the role’s focus will be on carbon reduction. Of course, adaption to climate change, planning and ecology and sustainable travel infrastructure are all important areas as well. However, bearing in mind the danger of spreading one person’s time too thinly, we have decided to take these areas of work forward using the existing staff resources within the District Council that are already dedicated to those issues.
Ms Gaskin, Chichester City Council asked the following question:
Would CDC investigate working with BID and our public transport providers to introduce a trial price reduction scheme to encourage commuter and leisure travel into the Chichester Area with a view of boosting visitor numbers, the local economy and improving the uptake of sustainable transport.
The following answer was provided:
Whilst the district council works in partnership with a number of organisations such as the BID and Visit Chichester through the vision process, we are not the lead organisation for public transport – this would be either West Sussex County Council or other public transport operators. Further information relating to the potential to extend public transport subsidies should therefore be directed to West Sussex County Council, who would be responsible for negotiating subsidies. As a Council we continue to support the local tourism economy through Visit Chichester who promote tourism across the district and have recently worked with the train operators to promote Chichester as a visitor destination using public transport.
Ms Carter, Chichester City Council asked the following question:
Could CDC fund the provision of re-usable, refillable coffee cups and water containers for the rough sleepers on our streets? This would reduce waste and would encourage engagement with local businesses.
The following answer was provided:
Provision of re-useable, refillable coffee cups and water containers for rough sleepers does not fall within the Council’s remit as Housing Authority and may present hygiene issues if they cannot be washed regularly. The Council does, however, work closely with other partners to support Rough Sleepers and will put this idea on the agenda of the multi-agency Rough Sleepers Panel to consider whether and how this proposal could most effectively be delivered. This proposal may be an initiative that the City Council may like to take forward itself.
?
Ms Noble asked the following question:
It is noted that in the proposed 'Chichester District’s Climate Emergency Initial Action Plan 2020 – 2025' there is a section entitled 'Communication and Promotion of Lifestyle Changes'. Considering that young people today are going to inherit the climate that we have created, could the council actively engage with young people about the council's plans for their future climate.
The following answer was provided:
Engaging with all sections of our community is important for a successful Action Plan, young people especially so. There is more work to be done in developing the actions fully, particularly on Action 22 the climate commission. This could involve not just educational institutions such as the university, college, and schools but also with representatives of their student bodies and other relevant groups. We would also welcome suggestions for specific groups or ways of engaging that would help us achieve what you suggest.
Ms Towers, Chidham and Hambrook Parish Council asked the following question:
Safeguarding and enhancing Strategic Wild Life corridors has, quite rightly, been considered an essential part of ensuring the sustainability of bio diversity and wild life in the face of development in Chichester District. In the event of the HLF bid being successful the funding will ensure the future of the project for five years, including the vital post of Wild life officer continuing. Although what happens after that is unclear.If it is unsuccessful there is a considerable shortfall and there are no plans to forward an enhancement programme or to continue the post of Wild Life Officer. Instead any protection of the wild life corridors will be left to the vagaries of developers and ad hoc arrangements with volunteer groups. This is very concerning and would seem to be a dereliction of responsibility to ensure that the corridors are safeguarded from major developments. What assurances can the Council give that:
a) The wild life corridors will have sufficient and specific protection from development outside the normal planning system, which developers seem good at circumventing?
b) What assurances are there that the wild life corridors will have protection further than the five year project time frame?
The following answer was provided:
The District Council intends to protect and to enhance the corridors, but using different mechanisms for these two separate objectives.
Protection will rely on a new Local Plan Policy. We will submit this as part of the Local Plan Review, with a supporting evidence base to help justify the policy before the Plan Inspector. Assuming that the policy is accepted at the plan examination, the intention is that this will form a long term planning policy protection, running beyond the lifetime of the local plan. This strategic policy can then be implemented though subsequent plan documents, neighbourhood plans and development management decisions. This long term nature of the protection requires a high standard of evidence and in addition the support of communities and parish councils will be of great help in guiding it through the examination process.
The enhancement of the corridors is our aim in preparing the report on today’s agenda. This seeks to achieve more than the planning system alone could. It will rely on a successful funding bid, and on the support of local landowners. The nature of such bids is time limited, but they provide an opportunity to work at a scale that we would be unlikely to achieve relying on the council’s own resources alone. Once the needed enhancements are in place ‘on the ground’ (assuming a successful bid) then they will benefit from the on-going and long term protection of the planning system.
Mrs Lintill then concluded public question time.