Agenda item

Subject to the required notice being given, members of the public can ask questions of the Leader of the Council, Portfolio Holders or Chairmen of Committees.

The Chairman shall determine the number of questions to be tabled at a particular meeting in order to limit the time for questions and answers to half an hour.

One question has been received, on notice, from a member of the public.

Councillor Miles had earlier declared an interest in relation to this item insofar as she supported Mr S Walker in his campaign against the closure of public conveniences and she was a local Ward Member for Walton.

Subject to the required notice being given, members of the public could ask questions of the Leader of the Council, Portfolio Holders or Chairmen of Committees.

The following question had been received, on notice, from a member of the public:

Question

From Mr S Walker to Councillor M Skeels Snr., Portfolio Holder for Leisure and Tourism:

“The proposed closure of 10 public toilets by TDC has generated considerable public concern, anxiety and protest as evidenced by the submission of two large petitions and a third currently being promoted on the online petition site 38 degrees. There has not been a Cost-Benefit analysis or Economic Impact Assessment of the closures while the estimated cost savings have been calculated at £100,000 per annum.

Therefore, before any toilets are closed, will TDC carry out a Cost-Benefit Analysis and Economic Impact Assessment; and consult with Public Health England, Local GP surgeries and local Businesses via their local representatives, to ask what the impact of the toilet closures would be on Patient health and well-being and on Business revenue; and to bring the results of the Cost-Benefit Analysis and Economic Impact Assessment together with those consultations to a Full Council meeting, and publish the results?”

Councillor Skeels replied as follows:

“I would like to thank Mr Walker for his question and I can assure him that it is with great reluctance that the decision has been taken to rationalise any service provision.

I think that it would be very difficult to undertake any meaningful cost benefit analysis on this type of service given the number of variables and cross dependencies involved.  By way of example it would be difficult to discount bias from some consultees as they would have a clear interest in a specific outcome, whether that be positive or negative such as was identified when we considered the toilets in Jaywick Sands where those near neighbours affected by antisocial behaviour associated with the toilets had a very different view as to closure than those who were not local to that provision.

What is important to consider is that we are looking at closing those toilets which generally have lower numbers of users, higher incidents of antisocial behaviour, higher operating costs, have alternative provision and are almost universally not suitable for refurbishment or enhancement.  It is also true to say that we are looking to enhance some facilities as part of the new strategic approach.

We will explore with local businesses, both existing and new, options for the public to use their facilities and it is important that businesses recognise that they need to step up to the plate and play their part to both develop their own provision or work with Town and Parish Councils to take on services which they claim are vital but which the District Council can no long afford to support.”