Agenda item

To receive the report of the Head of Legal and Democratic Services on any Notices of Motion received by him (Lilac pages).

Councillors are asked to note that any Notices of Motion must be received by the Head of Legal and Democratic Services no later than noon on Tuesday, 5 February 2019.

The Council had before it a Notice of Motion set out in the agenda papers standing in the names of Mr M J Hart, Mr A D Kent, Mrs J A Brunner, Mr G R Brookes Mrs E A Eyre, Mr A Stafford, Mr P A Tuthill.

The motion was moved by Mr A D Kent and seconded by Mr P A Tuthill who both spoke in favour of it, and Council agreed to deal with it on the day.

In the ensuing debate, the following points were made:

·         Statutory companies gave only a cursory consideration to the needs of local residents and the Council. Statutory companies (or their subcontractors) were digging up newly laid pavement before patching it to a lesser standard and leaving the Council to pay for repairs and failing to keep local residents informed. Health and safety breaches were a regular occurrence. Section 74 notices should be issued where works overrun. There should be supervision during the work and an inspection after completion and any corrections made at the contractor’s expense

·         Examples of poor work by statutory companies included fire hydrants and cable access points being covered by tramac, delays in work being carried out, damage to verges, mud on the road, bus lanes rerouted, pipes dug in the wrong place, holes left in the highway, difficulty in contacting them, unhelpful responses to complaints, unnecessary road closures, and signs and bollards left on site

·         Local businesses were being unnecessarily affected by delays and the poor standard of work being carried out

·         The problems experienced with statutory companies was impacting on the Council’s strategy for investment in growth

·         There was an incorrect assumption that delays were caused by County Council contractors and this had a negative impact on the Council’s reputation

·         The Cabinet Member with Responsibility for Highways commented that the Council had the power to ensure that statutory companies made good any or all damage to the highways and leave them in a condition to the standard before the work began. The Council also had the power to do the work itself and recharge them. Statutory companies were liable for the damage they caused and repair work to the required standard. They were also responsible in law for the work of their contractors and sub-contractors. The Council received 300 applications a day for work undertaken by statutory companies. So far, all works had been carried out without the need for the use of remedial powers, although it was a constant battle to get to that point. From 1 April, resources would be available to employ an additional enforcement officer and two extra inspectors

·         The complete lack of planning by developers added to the problem. The Government should be encouraged to increase the fines for poor quality work by statutory companies

·         Parish councils and possibly lengthsmen had an important role in pointing out transgressions by statutory consultees to the Council

·         Given the number of applications for work received from statutory consultees, it was not surprising that the Council was not always able and did not have the resources to respond to issues promptly.

On being put to the vote, the motion was agreed unanimously.

RESOLVED "This Council is concerned at the increasing number of complaints with regards to works carried out under the New Roads and Street Works Act 1991.

Recent examples seen have produced a flood of complaints regarding temporary traffic lights installed with inadequate signage, poor response to complaints when said lights fail, lights installed without permits, third party contractors employed by statutory companies with inadequate training and supervision, poor quality and dangerous works that have resulted in emergency additional road closure orders for safety reasons, blocking of highways with plant, mud and rubble left on the highway and inadequate signage and lighting for pedestrians. In one recent case a large section of the highway was destroyed and will need replacing due to the poor quality works carried out.

The works carried out often require Worcestershire County Council's highways officers to respond at Worcestershire County Council's expense to cover for the inadequate service, works and supervision from the statutory companies. This Council agrees that it is completely unacceptable that Worcestershire tax payers’ money should be used to pay for this.

As a Council we are proud of the excellent reputation and performance of our highways and repairs and this Council resolves to request the Cabinet Member with Responsibility for Highways bring a report to a future meeting of Cabinet setting out how Worcestershire County Council can ensure that those statutory undertakers, utility companies and third parties not meeting our excellent standards when undertaking works on the highway are held to financial account and scrutiny."