Agenda and minutes

Apologies for absence were received from Councillor Alyson Baker (non-voting).

 

The minutes of the meeting held on Monday, 17 January 2025 having been printed and circulated, be taken as read and confirmed and signed by the Chair as an accurate record.

 

All Members are invited to declare at this point any interests they have in items appearing on this agenda, including the nature of those interests.

Councillor Yvonne Peacock declared a registered interest in relation to the agenda item North Yorkshire Council's Petition Scheme - 'Rethink North Yorkshire School Transport Cuts' and issues raised in relation to that during the public participation section of the meeting.

 

Councillor Yvonne Peacock left the meeting.

 

Councillor Caroline Dickinson in the Chair.

 

Members of the public may ask questions or make statements at this meeting if they have given notice to Stephen Loach of Democratic and Scrutiny Services and supplied the text (contact details below) by midday on Wednesday 12 March 2025, three working days before the day of the meeting.  Each speaker should limit themselves to 3 minutes on any item. 

Members of the public who have given notice will be invited to speak at this point in the meeting if their questions/statements relate to matters which are not otherwise on the agenda (subject to an overall time limit of 30 minutes).

If you are exercising your right to speak at this meeting, but do not wish to be recorded, please inform the Chair who will instruct anyone who may be taking a recording to cease while you speak.

 

Public Participation

 

The following questions or statements, as detailed below, were submitted by members of the public:

 

Rob Macdonald

 

It has been suggested that the scheduled review in the summer of 2026 is sufficient to address the very real concern raised by the School Transport Action Group’s petition.

 

You have said that the ‘findings of this review will be published in autumn 2026 and should a revision to the policy be required, there would be time for this to be proposed, consulted on and adopted in time for 12th September 2027 at the earliest.’

 

This tells us two important things:

 

First, is that your recommended turnaround time for conducting a valid, and therefore meaningful review is 15 months.

 

Second, is that if you started a review in Summer 2026, it could only impact children starting school in September 2028 at the earliest. 

 

Let’s be really clear on that point. The first children to benefit from a summer 2026 review would be the September 2028 intake – three and a half years from now, at the earliest.

 

What if you try to pull that forward a year and schedule the review to run this Summer – in a few short months’ time?

 

Remember what you said – you need a full year’s actual data for a review to serve any legitimate purpose, and the earliest you will get that will be July 2026. If you try a Summer ’25 review, you won’t have the data, it won’t be legitimate, it won’t convince anybody, and it won’t solve the mess and unless you’ve already decided the outcome of a Summer ’25 review, you will not have time to formulate a proper response, with a proper consultation, and jump through all the legislative hoops required to implement a policy change in time for this September.

 

The earliest date any changes would be implemented from a 2025 review, would be for pupils starting school in September 2027.

 

At best, you’ll reduce three years chaos to two.

 

So, how will things look after two or three years of ‘nearest school’ madness?

 

Parents in the Dales forced to pay to keep their children safe – for years.

 

Parents in Craven forced to pay to get their kids to their nearest grammar school – for years.

 

Parents around Selby, Whitby and in North Richmondshire forced to pay to keep their kids within county and community – for years.

 

Every council taxpayer in the county from Harrogate to Hawes, forced to pay out for duplicate buses and extra private taxis – for years.

 

It’s clear. A review simply means delay.  It prolongs the pain. It prolongs the pretence.

 

Until this policy is changed, the chaos, the costs, the injustice will roll on. Not just two years or three years but for seven more years after that while those children affected complete their schooling.

 

Let’s put a stop to this. You already know what to do. Bring back catchment now.

 

Oscar Kendall

 

I'd like to begin by wishing you  ...  view the full minutes text for item 137.

A combined paper and electronic petition has been received by North Yorkshire Council containing above 2130 signatures of people who live, work or study in the county. As the petition contains 500 or more signatures (but less than 30,130 signatories), it has been scheduled for debate at this meeting of the Area Committee.

The process for debating and responding to the petition is set out in the report  detailed at Appendix A.

 

The petition was originally discussed at a meeting of the Area Committee held on 27 January 2025 but was deferred for consideration at a subsequent meeting to allow further information to be provided.

Details of the petition and its aims were set out in the published report, together with a response from representatives of Children and Young Peoples Services.

 

The key features of the Council’s arrangements for receiving and debating petitions, as published on the Council’s website, are as follows:

 

Receipt of the petition is published on the Council’s website (which has been done in the case of this petition).

 

If a petition contains 500 or more signatures (but less than 30,130 signatories), it will be scheduled for debate at a meeting of the appropriate Area Committee which is the case for this petition.

 

The petition organiser is offered the opportunity to speak for five minutes at the Area Committee meeting to present their petition.  Subsequently, at the meeting, the petition will be discussed by Councillors for a maximum of 15 minutes and a decision will be made on how to respond to the petition. 

 

The possible responses by the Council to petitions, as shown on the website, are:

 

a)    to take the action requested by the petition

b)    not to take the action requested for reasons put forward in the debate

c)     to commission further investigation into the matter, for example by a relevant committee; or

d)    where the issue is one on which the council Executive is required to make the final decision, the council will decide whether to make recommendations to inform that decision.

 

The petition organiser will receive written confirmation of this decision.  This confirmation will also be published on the website.

 

In accordance with the arrangements described above, the petition organiser was invited to join the meeting to present their petition.

 

Statement by the petitioner, Ian Dawson

 

The following statement was read on behalf of the petitioner:

 

Good morning.

 

Before I start reading, I want to ask you to remember why it is that you are sitting here today, the reasons why you wanted to become a councillor. To make a real difference? To represent the views of your constituents? To do what is right? I know that it must sometimes be a hard job but also rewarding.

 

We are just a group, made up of concerned parents and residents who just want the best outcome for our children and communities of North Yorkshire. I hope everyone in this room has that same goal.

 

Back in November we handed you the petition asking for a rethink of the policy, to bring back catchment. That has brought us here today. Back then we were just a small group from Richmondshire, now we’re a determined team with a support in all corners of the county. We have 360 active supporters and many more cheering us on. We’ve come this far, and we won’t stop until we get this fixed. Too much is riding on this, for too many people for us to give up now.

 

Since we were last sitting round this table, two notable things have happened. Neither one could be described as North Yorkshire Council’s finest moment.  ...  view the full minutes text for item 138.

 

Members of the public may ask questions or make statements at this meeting if they

have given notice to Stephen Loach of Democratic Services (contact details below) and supplied the text by midday on Wednesday, 12 March 2025, three working days before the day of the meeting. Each speaker should limit themselves to 3 minutes on any item.

 

Members of the public who have given notice will be invited to speak

 

- at this point in the meeting if their questions/statements relate to matters which

are not otherwise on the agenda (subject to an overall time limit of 30 minutes);

 

- when the relevant agenda item is being considered if they wish to speak on a

matter which is on the agenda for this meeting.

 

If you are exercising your right to speak at this meeting, but do not wish to be recorded, please inform the Chair who will instruct anyone who may be taking a recording to cease while you speak.

The following questions/statements not related to Home to School Transport were submitted.

 

Barbara Gravenor, Chair, Richmond Climate Action Partnership

 

Does North Yorkshire Council have plans for on-street EV charging, which may involve installing public charging points or schemes specifically for residents without driveways. Can the council improve EV infrastructure using grants obtained from government schemes, such as the On-Street Residential Chargepoint Scheme. These schemes can involve charging points installed into lamp posts, free-standing or pillar units added to the kerb, telescopic charging points that retract into the pavement or the provision of charging directly from residents homes. Allowing residents without off-street parking to charge their electric vehicles in the street addresses a key challenge for widespread EV adoption. It will not only increase convenience but also significantly decrease the cost of charging, encouraging a greater take up of electric vehicles.

 

This matter would be addressed during the Climate Change Activity agenda item.

 

Lorraine Hodgson, Clerk to Scotton Parish Council

 

Please find attached a copy of a Sustainable Bus Route which was presented to the Richmondshire Branch Meeting of the Yorkshire Local Councils Associations on 24 October 2024 and was fully endorsed by all Members of the Branch who represent the parish and town councils across the former Richmondshire district.

 

In addition, along with endorsing the above to you as Mayor of North Yorkshire, after some discussion it was agreed to make representation that the James Cook Hospital being the Major Hospital for the region should be included in any Transport Reform and be included as a ‘destination point’ to enable Public Transport access for patients and visitors alike.

 

The Richmondshire Branch of the Yorkshire Local Councils Associations would welcome your comment on this sustainable bus route in due course.

 

The details had been forwarded to the Mayor’s office and a response would be provided outside of this meeting.

 

An update on the work of the Mayoral Combined Authority and progress with local

issues.

David Skaith, Mayor of York and North Yorkshire Combined Authority and James Farrar, CEO of the Combined Authority outlined the structure, purpose and initial work of the Combined Authority by way of introduction. Issues highlighted included:

 

·         The powers and work of the Combined Authority.

·         The impact of further nationwide devolution

·         Economic growth

·         Police, Fire and Crime

·         Vision and investments

·         Meetings with Prime Minister, leading Government Ministers and Mayors of other Combined Authorities.

·         Various initiatives being pursued:

-        Homes England

-        Farming and agriculture

-        Impacts of flooding

-        Fire and rescue

-        Skilled workforce

-        Transport Strategy

-        Rural strategies – transport, housing, economic development

-        Energy and Net Zero.

 

A number of questions from the Committee were submitted to the Mayor’s Office in advance of the meeting as follows:

 

·       Can the Mayor talk through the process for identifying opportunities for economic and environmental improvements, having a supply of potential projects in the pipeline, and bid writing, when funding becomes available from central government?

 

·       What funding is available for businesses in the Richmond area and what is the Mayor looking for in proposals? Similarly, what projects does the Mayor think have the highest chance of coming to fruition in the Richmond? i.e. How do we link into what the Mayor wants? How does he deliver things for us here?

 

·       Housing - the availability and affordability of housing, particularly in rural areas, is important for economic development – how can this be managed appropriately to ensure local communities remain viable and maintain a local presence?

 

·       How are Important Network Roads designated, how do they work and how do they fit into the development strategy – Will they improve infrastructure and the movement of traffic?

 

·       Green transport systems (cycleways, etc.) – Has the possibility of joining other neighbouring authority areas, in funding such schemes, been explored, to assist with prioritisation?

 

·       Tourism in Hawes and the wider Yorkshire Dales – Is consideration being given to a holistic approach to developing tourism throughout the Dales, and Hawes in particular, with the possibility of Town Plans being developed to assist with that process?

 

·       Will the development of Food Partnerships be utilised to deliver food priorities in the area?

 

·       How will the Mayor assist with the development of integrated transport and access to public transport and will it lead to improvements in rural areas?

 

·       Is there a strategy for the battery storage facilities required for renewable energy sources? A number of planning applications are coming forward in respect of these and a co-ordinated approach would be of benefit to avoid proliferation in particular areas.

 

·       Is there a plan to provide access to Telehealth and how will that be developed?

 

·       Flooding – There are major flooding concerns throughout the Richmond area, for example the impact of flooding at Morton Flatts. How will the Mayor approach these issues and work together with the Environment Agency to create a permanent, sustainable solutions?

 

The Mayor highlighted the following in response to the issues raised:

 

·        The member authorities would have  ...  view the full minutes text for item 140.

The Committee considered the Annual Schools update report that highlighted the following:

 

·        The local educational landscape

·        Summary of schools’ status – 31 August 2024

·        School standards

·        OFSTED judgements

·        Attainment overall

·        Early Years Foundation Stage Profile (EYFSP)

·        Key Stage 2

·        Key Stage 4

·        Not in education, employment or training

·        Suspension Incidents

·        Permanent exclusions

·        Responding to increasing exclusion from schools

·        SEN Statistics for Committee Area

·        Increasing demand for Education, Health and Care plans (EHC plans)

·        SEND provision

·        Elective Home Education

·        2023/2024 School Revenue Balances

·        School Budget Projections - Based on 2024/25 Revised budgets

·        School Finance and Funding Issues

·        Local Authority Support for Schools in Financial Difficulty

·        Schools Financial Position – Richmond

·        School sustainability

·        Pupil rolls – current and future

 

Amanda Newbold (Assistant Director – Inclusion), Howard Emmett (Assistant Director – Strategic Resources) and Louise Wilson (Assistant Director – Education and Skills) attended the meeting to assist Members with their discussions in respect of the report. Members highlighted the following:

 

·       It was clarified that the decision to suspend a pupil was delegated to the headteacher and the Governing Body. It was noted that the report indicated that on a number of occasions there had been intervention to prevent the suspension taking place. In relation to this it was noted that there were specific occasions where a suspension would be queried and discussions with the head would be undertaken in respect of this position.

·       The performance in maths at KS4 was discussed with some concern raised that this was below national levels.

·       Clarification was provided as to the nature of Special Schools in the area with a mixture of Local Authority and multi-academy trust provision. Direct links to the various schools assisted with the monitoring of improvements within these schools, with direct involvement with the LA maintained schools.

·       The KS4 results were available on the DfE website and Members would be provided with a link to access these.

 

Resolved

 

That the report on educational factors in the Richmond committee area be noted.

 

Timothy Johns – Senior Policy Officer – Sustainability and Environment provided a brief presentation on the Local Nature Recovery Strategy highlighting the following:

 

·        A summary of the engagement that had taken place to date

·        Strategy Stakeholders – including supporting authorities, core stakeholders and wider stakeholders.

·        Consultation events and engagement

·        Agreement to priorities and measures

·        Measures – actions

·        Shortlist of priorities

·        Benefits from nature

·        Development of local habitat map – Nature Network

 

Members highlighted the following:

 

·        It was asked how near the strategy was to fruition. In response it was stated that it was hoped to be in place later this year or early next with plenty of lead in time provided to implement the proposals.

·        The need for the involvement of the Yorkshire Dales National Park Authority in the process was emphasised.

·        Further updates would be provided as to the development of the strategy following the conclusion of the consultation.

 

Resolved

 

That the presentation be noted and further updates be provided to subsequent meetings of the Committee.

 

Hannah Nutsey, Climate Change Business Partner, presented her report, highlighting the following:

 

·        Climate Change Strategy: Governance

-      Regional greenhouse gas emissions

-      Yorkshire Dales National Park Authority

-      North Yorkshire Council carbon footprint

-      Carbon Disclosure Project

-      Council Climate Scorecards

-      Community engagement

 

·        Mitigation: reducing greenhouse gas emissions

-      Various placed-based decarbonisation and climate mitigation projects

-      UK Shared Prosperity Fund – capital and revenue grants

-      UK Shared Prosperity Fund – community decarbonisation audits

-      Photovoltaic (PV) panels

-      Electric Vehicle Charging Points (EVCPs)

 

·        Housing

-      Social Housing Decarbonisation Fund (SHDF)

-      Warm Homes: Social Housing Fund – application

-      Home Upgrade Grant (HUG) 2 and Warm Homes Fund

-      The LEAD programme – Stokesley and surrounding villages, Great Ayton, Potto

-      Big Community Switch Scheme

 

·        Local active travel improvements

-      Darlington Road, Richmond

-      Catterick Town Centre regeneration project

-      LCWIPs - Catterick and Catterick Garrison, Northallerton

 

·        Schools climate change engagement

·        Preparing for the changing climate

·        Supporting nature.

 

Members highlighted the following:

 

·        A number of inaccuracies that required amendment

·        The need for air monitoring in some locations

·        The urgent need to connect the EVCs provided in the various market towns. Assurances had been given that this would be implemented but was yet to happen. There was concern that Members had been reassured that this would happen on several occasions without materialising and there was now an urgent need for these to be connected. In response it was stated that this would be fed back accordingly.

·        Issues around heat pump heating were discussed and it was stated that there had been problems where these had been installed as repairs were an issue. It was stated that each property was considered on the merits of a specific provision and would not be forced into having a system that was inappropriate for their needs.

 

Resolved

 

That the report and issues raised be noted.

 

Matt Robinson – Head of Resilience and Emergencies presented a report to the meeting of the Committee held in September 2024 which resulted in a number of issues being raised by Members of the Committee in relation to the following:

 

-        Discrepancies within the report relating to which Electoral Division certain features were located

-        Ensuring that local communities were fully aware of what was required of them during emergency situations

-        A serious incident that had occurred in a local community of which the local Councillor had not been made aware

-        Some Plans developed and under development were not detailed in the report, which provided information on Flood warning sign up and Emergency Plans

-        Provision to the local Member of the flood warning plan for Stokesley

 

The report addressed the issues raised and also provided links to track the local flood risk in wider North Yorkshire.

 

Members highlighted the following:

 

·       The initial contact points for incidents coming to the attention of Members were discussed. It was emphasised that Silver Command was not expected to be an initial contact point, particularly in respect of flooding incidents, but the 0300 Council telephone contact number provided a single point of contact which then allowed information to be disseminated accordingly. Concern was raised that the contact point was not available all the time for those who had the relevant knowledge and the reporting of incidents could result in time delays in trying to identify the most appropriate contact. It was noted that a Community Resilience event was taking place shortly at Bedale Hall and various details would be outlined in more depth at that. An invite to that event was shared with Members of the Committee.

·       Issues relating to the role and contact with the Community Anchor were discussed. It was noted that the Anchors were a source of contact for specifically local events and had links to Silver Command. It was agreed that their contact details should be available to local Members and should be made available throughout the community. It was suggested that the Community Anchor role required further development to ensure it was appropriate for the local communities served.

 

Resolved

 

That the updates to the Annual Report be welcomed and the issues raised be noted.

 

Louisa Carolan, Principal Regeneration Officer, provided an update on the development of projects, agreed by the Committee, to utilise the £50k seed funding and gave the following highlights.

 

·       The boxes for taxi parking by the ‘White Shops’ at Catterick Garrison had now been completed

·       The provision of the flood responsive signage for Morton-on-Swale Flatts had been ordered and was expected to be installed shortly.

·       The integrated transport feasibility study for access to education, skills and employment project had commenced consultation but there was a request for an extension of a month to the end of April 2025 to take account of all the appropriate consultees.

 

Resolved

 

That the updates be noted and the extension of one month for the integrated transport feasibility study for access to education, skills and employment project be agreed.

 

Members considered a report presenting the committee’s work programme for the current year and looking forward to the programme for 2025/26.

 

Members suggested the following items for the work programme:

 

·       An update from Richmondshire Leisure Trust regarding Richmond Swimming Pool

·       An update on the current position regarding the A684, Morton Flatts, River Swale flooding

·       Information from Royal Mail regarding the delivery of post following a number of complaints regarding the frequency of deliveries

 

Resolved

 

That the work programme be noted, and the agreed additions be included in the work programme for future consideration.

 

Any other items which the Chair agrees should be considered as a matter of urgency because of special circumstances

There were no urgent items of business.