Liberal Democrat councillors asked their full quota of questions at the Cumberland Council full council meeting on 4 November 2025.
1. Councillor Pickstone submitted the following question to the Portfolio Holder for Environment and Planning
‘The Council will be aware of the proposals from the National Grid on the Cross Border Connection, for a proposed new ‘mega pylon’ line across northern Cumberland from Kershopefoot to either Harker or Cumwhinton.
Can Councillor Kelly, the Portfolio Holder for Environment and Planning confirm that the Council will be making a submission in the current consultation and is it able to liaise with elected members and affected councillors to support them make submissions’.
The Portfolio Holder replied to say – ‘National Grid commenced consultation on the Cross Border Connection project on October 15th with this running until December 10th. The Council will be providing a consultation response and will be arranging a briefing session with local members on the project. In the development of our response we will be happy to consider the perspective of local members. It should also be noted that as a Nationally Significant Infrastructure Project, it will be determined through the Development Consent Order process which is led by the Planning Inspectorate on behalf of the Secretary of State’.
In a supplementary question Councillor Pickstone said that the Cross Border Connection would have an impact on a number of other issues that the council was responsible for, such as environmental concerns, highways concerns, local plan issues and economic development issues, and asked whether council officers were actively engaging with the National Grid to make sure that the issues were fully taken on board.
In response the Portfolio Holder replied yes to the question, and added that there were three sets of issues; economic issues with the cost involved, the environmental issues to be considered and the feelings and needs of the local community, all of which were to be taken into account.
2. Councillor Pickstone submitted the following question to the Portfolio Holder for Financial Planning and Assets
‘Could Councillor Cannon the Portfolio Holder for Financial Planning and Assets inform members who will bear the costs of contested town and parish council elections, where the election falls on the same day as elections to Cumberland Council and/or the Mayor of Cumbria?’
In response the Portfolio Holder said – ‘The former Allerdale and Copeland Council’s had always divided the costs of elections between town and parish councils. The former Carlisle City Council didn’t do that. Since the establishment of Cumberland Council in 2023 we have charged any contested election and that will continue to be the case.’
Councillor Pickstone asked for clarification on whether, for regular elections to be held in May going forward, would those costs be shared 50:50 or would we be charging town and parish councils for the marginal extra costs for having an election.
The Portfolio Holder explained that prior to Cumberland Council, as mentioned many town and parish councils had been used to sharing the costs for running elections for a long time, now as Cumberland Council, this was to be the consistent approach.
3. Councillor Dobson submitted the following question to the Portfolio Holder for Sustainable, Resilient and Connected Places
‘Warwick Bridge, spanning the River Eden, was constructed in the 1830s for stagecoaches and horse-drawn carts. Today, it is ill-suited for modern traffic and poses significant safety risks for pedestrians and cyclists, as does the narrow, winding carriageway through Corby Hill and Warwick Bridge.
The Department of Transport recognised the need for a bypass around Warwick Bridge before World War II, yet decades have passed without decisive action. However, with recent improvements to the A689 – including the bypass of Crosby-on-Eden- the necessity for a Warwick Bridge bypass has diminished. Instead, a straightforward, low-cost solution is available: de-trunking the A69 between Brampton and Junction 43 of the M6 and trunking the A689. Previously, National Highways cited the cost of amending the 30-year build and maintain PFI as a barrier to this change.
With the PFI set to end on 30th March 2026, Cumberland Council now has an opportunity to assume responsibility for this section of the A69 and implement essential safety measures that could greatly enhance the health and well-being of local residents.
Can Councillor Rollo, the Portfolio Holder for Sustainable, Resilient and Connected Places confirm if the Council is prepared to seize this opportunity and deliver the long overdue improvements our communities need?’
The Portfolio Holder replied as follows ‘The Council is committed to conducting all due diligence in any negotiations with National Highways, this issue has been approached with prudence in ensuring that any transition of responsibility is matched with adequate resources and support. However, I must ask, is it truly in the best interests of Cumberland Council to take on a potentially significant liability, surely, with the risks that you mention, we would look at National Highways to mitigate any risks before we assume responsibility.
The end of the PFI contract is 2039, it is the existing DBFO contract that expires in 2026 where the A69 road will return to National Highways to manage directly. We will continue to hold discissions on the future status of the A69 and the future maintenance responsibility of it from April 2026’.
Councillor Dobson said that Highways officers had recently informed the Planning Committee that the completion of the Carlisle Southern Link road would reduce use of the M6 Junction 44 as traffic heading to West Cumbria transfers to the new route. He asked, when Cumberland Council assumes responsibility of the A69, would it be introducing essential safety measures.
The Portfolio Holder said that ‘any measures that are needed to be put in place, we would want National Highways to cover the cost and not the Council. If traffic was to increase and safety measures were needed, then we would work with National Highways’.
4. Councillor Dobson submitted the following question to the Portfolio Holder for Financial Planning and Assets
‘Over the weekend of 10th of October, a Liberal Democrat member of this Council was shown, incorrectly, as an independent councillor on the Council’s website (Modern.gov system). This mirrors an incident earlier in the year when a Labour Executive Member was also incorrectly listed as Independent, and no clear explanation was provided by the Chief Legal Officer at that time.
Could Councillor Cannon the Portfolio Holder for Financial Planning and Assets please explain why this misclassification occurred again, what steps have been taken to prevent such errors, and, if this was due to user error or a technical issue?’
In response the Portfolio Holder said ‘This issue was first raised with Democratic Services at 10.01am on Friday 10th October. Councillor Wernham received a reply within six minutes after that to let him know that Democratic Services had corrected the error and would pick it up with the Council’s Committee System supplier (Modern Gov). This was done immediately and confirmation sent to Councillor Wernham that morning.
The following week, further updates were provided to Councillor Wernham to reiterate that we had corrected the system on the Friday and were trying to find out what had happened but advising that we were still waiting for Modern Gov to provide an explanation. Officers had followed up with Modern Gov, asking for a response as soon as possible. The account manager then called us to advise that this was an issue they were aware of in Modern Gov for version 15.04. We are in fact on version 15.06.5, the most recent version, but a further upgrade is being rolled out.
We have requested that we are upgraded to this new version as soon as possible and have now had confirmation that we will be prioritised for upgrade. In the meantime, officers will regularly monitor the councillor page to ensure that no other changes have been incorrectly made. Once the upgrade is applied, we will of course continue to monitor to ensure that the fault has been fixed’.
5. Councillor Wills submitted the following question to the Portfolio Holder for Financial Planning and Assets
‘With significant buildings assets across Cumberland, can Councillor Cannon the Portfolio Holder for Financial Planning and Assets inform us if there are plans to consolidate the number of buildings; especially in that there are two Headquarters buildings in Carlisle – the Civic Centre and Cumbria House?’
In response the Portfolio Holder said – ‘There are currently two projects being undertaking within our Transformation Programme relating to the consolidation of assets, one looking at the optimisation of our operational estate such as office buildings and depots, with another looking at the optimisation of our other assets to generate revenue or provide capital receipts.
Therefore, I can confirm that there are plans in place and these are being resourced to ensure they deliver. In terms of office accommodation specifically, following initial review of utilisation we are looking to bring forward consolidation and rationalisation projects in Carlisle and West Cumbria which will focus on the assets identified’.
Leave a Reply