Agenda item

To received and consider the report of the Head of Governance Services and Scrutiny Support and appended report of the Director of City Development and West Yorkshire Combined Authority which supports the next session of the Scrutiny Inquiry.

The Head of Governance Services and Scrutiny Support, The Director of City Development and the West Yorkshire Combined Authority submitted reports to support the next session of the Scrutiny Inquiry, Transport for Leeds – Supertram, NGT and Beyond.

The following information was appended to the reports:

·  Appendix A – Membership of the Advisory Panel

·  Appendix B – Mott Macdonald Statement of Experience and Expertise

·  Appendix C – SDG Statement of Experience and Expertise

·  Appendix D – BDB Statement of Experience and Expertise

·  Appendix E – Aecom Statement of Experience and Expertise

·  Appendix F – KPMG Statement of Experience and Expertise

·  Appendix G – Submission to the Leeds City Council Scrutiny Board (City Development) By Peter Bonsall

·  Appendix H – Submission of the A660 Joint Council to Scrutiny Board (City Development)

The following representatives were in attendance to respond to Members queries and comments:

-  Gary Bartlett - Chief Highways Officer

-  Councillor Richard  Lewis – Executive Board Member

-  Dave Haskins  - WYCA

-  Andrew Wheeler – WYCA

-  Councillor Keith Wakefield – WYCA Transport Committee Chair

-  Bill McKinnon – Vice Chairman A660 Joint Council

-  Chris Longley – Area Policy Representative, Yorkshire
Federation of Small Businesses

-  Peter Bonsall - Emeritus Professor of Transport Planning at the University of Leeds

The key areas for discussion were:

·  Clarity regarding the appropriateness and suitability of the NGT in the initial stages and if the finding at public inquiry should have been self-evident to those involved in the project during the scheme’s initial phases.

·  The efficiency of the scheme’s consultants; particularly in regard to expectations and if they were requested to ‘support’ the development of the scheme without ‘challenging’ it.

·  The importance for future transport strategies to complement and support the city’s economic plan in order to ensure achievable benefits for both Leeds and the wider city region.

·  The need for Community engagement to be open, honest and transparent, which involves communities in setting the hierarchy transport priorities particularly where these are competing. The need for open-ended questions within engagement surveys to allow all potential alternatives to be explored.

·  The recognition that consultation can often become conflated with community engagement and the need to gather the opinions of residents in addition to their support.

·  The need for any major transport scheme of the future to have rigorous external independent verification and challenge in order to highlight any potential weaknesses within the proposal at its various stages.

·  The board sought clarity concerning the extent to which an organisation can be wholly ‘independent’ and suggested that a the expert panel may be able to provide support in this regard. 

·  The importance of creating a balanced consultation with input sought from both smaller directly affected businesses as well as larger organisations. 

·  The board expressed concern regarding the assertion that ‘stated preference’ information had been held back from the DfT; thus affecting the assumed feasibility of the business case. The Scrutiny Board requested further evidence regarding this.

·  Clarity was sought regarding the process of selecting members for the expert panel.

·  The nature of member/community involvement in decision making  concerning the £173.5 million funding potentially available from the DfT.

·  The Board requested that, in light of the matters raised, an extra meeting be arranged. Representatives from the Council and WYCA officers were advised to provide a comprehensive ‘lessons learnt’ report which also addresses the statements made. The Principal Scrutiny advisor to investigate potential dates and representative availability.

RESOLVED – The Scrutiny Board:

a)  Noted the information contained within the report of the Director of City Development and WYCA.

b)  Considered the written and verbal information provided by the visiting representatives.

c)  Instructed the Principal Scrutiny Advisor to investigate potential dates for an extra meeting, representative availability and reporting requirements and advise the Chair accordingly.