Agenda and minutes
PDF 194 KBVenue: the Council Chamber - Council Offices, Trinity Road, Cirencester, GL7 1PX. View directions
Contact: Democratic Services
Media
| No. | Item | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Apologies To receive any apologies for absence. The quorum for Council is 9 members.
Additional documents: Minutes: There were apologies received from Councillors Claire Bloomer, David Cunningham, Chris Twells, Roly Hughes and Tony Dale.
|
|||||||||||||
|
Declarations of Interest To receive any declarations of interest from Members relating to items to be considered at the meeting. Additional documents: Minutes: Councillor Ray Brassington declared a personal interest in respect of agenda item 11 – Sewage Summit Update. However it was confirmed that following discussions of this with the Monitoring Officer, he would be able to take part in the debate and vote.
There were no further declarations of interest made. |
|||||||||||||
|
To confirm the minutes of the meeting of Council held on 31 July 2024.
The exempt minutes at item 16 can be taken as read unless Council wishes to discuss the content (in private session). Additional documents:
Minutes: The minutes of the last Full Council meeting on 31 July 2024 were considered as part of the document pack.
Councillor Gina Blomefield raised a query regarding confusing wording on Page 22 of the document pack – Overview and Scrutiny Committee Annual Report 2023/24 - 5th bullet point, which read:
through the recommendations to Cabinet. Many of these recommendations had been accepted as part of the recommendations.
The Senior Democratic Services Officer indicated that this was a grammatical error and the latter wording would be changed to say that ‘Many of these recommendations had been accepted by Cabinet as part of its resolutions.’ Council took the exempt minutes as read.
|
|||||||||||||
|
Unsung Heroes Awards For the Chair of Council to award the Unsung Heroes Awards. Additional documents: Minutes: The purpose of this item was to present the Unsung Heroes Awards.
The Chair opened this item as the first award ceremony for residents within the Cotswold District who make a difference in their communities.
It was highlighted they had been overwhelmed by the number of nominations and that it was difficult for those judging to decide.
The following runners up were announced: Brian McTear, Kelly Foreshew and Daphne Walton. The Chair noted their contributions to the communities within Cotswold District which included helping with the organisation of local communities, and supporting vulnerable residents and children.
The Chair then announced the winner Janne Bishop who had helped to organise Mindsong – a signing group for those residents suffering with dementia and other debilitating conditions. As Janne was not able to be present to collect her award, Councillor Andrew Maclean as the local member indicated that he would present the certificate on behalf of the Council.
|
|||||||||||||
|
Announcements from the Chair, Leader or Chief Executive (if any) To receive any announcements from the Chair of the Council, the Leader of the Council and the Chief Executive. Additional documents: Minutes: The purpose of this item was to receive announcements from the Chair of Council, Leader of the Council and the Chief Executive Officer.
The Chair made the following announcements:
The Leader was then invited to make his announcements. The following announcements were given:
The Chief Executive was then invited to make any announcements:
|
|||||||||||||
|
Public Questions To deal with questions from the public within the open forum question and answer session of fifteen minutes in total. Questions from each member of the public should be no longer than one minute each and relate to issues under the Council’s remit. At any one meeting no person may submit more than two questions and no more than two such questions may be asked on behalf of one organisation.
The Chair will ask whether any members of the public present at the meeting wish to ask a question and will decide on the order of questioners.
The response may take the form of: a) a direct oral answer; b) where the desired information is in a publication of the Council or other published work, a reference to that publication; or c) where the reply cannot conveniently be given orally, a written answer circulated later to the questioner. Additional documents: Minutes: There were no public questions. |
|||||||||||||
|
A Member of the Council may ask the Chair, the Leader, a Cabinet Member or the Chair of any Committee a question on any matter in relation to which the Council has powers or duties or which affects the Cotswold District. A maximum period of fifteen minutes shall be allowed at any such meeting for Member questions.
A Member may only ask a question if: a) the question has been delivered in writing or by electronic mail to the Chief Executive no later than 5.00 p.m. on the working day before the day of the meeting; or b) the question relates to an urgent matter, they have the consent of the Chair to whom the question is to be put and the content of the question is given to the Chief Executive by 9.30 a.m. on the day of the meeting.
An answer may take the form of: a) a direct oral answer; b) where the desired information is in a publication of the Council or other published work, a reference to that publication; or c) where the reply cannot conveniently be given orally, a written answer circulated later to the questioner.
The following questions were submitted before the publication of the agenda:
Question 1 from Councillor David Fowles to Councillor Mike Evemy, Cabinet Member for Finance
Over the weekend of 7th and 8th September, a severe leak resulted in a huge amount of rainwater entering Trinity Road causing extensive damage to ceilings, storage rooms, paper files and the electrical system such that neither the heating nor security systems were operational.
To my knowledge, over the 20 years I have worked in Trinity Road there have been several very heavy rainfalls (particularly the floods of 2007) but no significant leaks or damage.
Why has rainwater caused such extensive damage just after £1 million plus has been spent on major works to the roof? What steps are being taken to identify the cause and who is liable for the costs?
Question 2 from Councillor Tony Slater to Councillor Mike Evemy, Cabinet Member for Finance
The recent flood at Trinity Road caused significant damage to the building, critical IT infrastructure and stored documents, and had a seriously detrimental impact on the ability to work effectively from the building.
Please can you confirm that all critical data and records, whether stored digitally or in paper hard copy, were safely recovered and not compromised in anyway and what control measures are in place to ensure the resilience of CDC infrastructure in the future?
Question 3 from Councillor Len Wilkins to Councillor Joe Harris, Leader of the Council
Following the recent cyber-attack on neighbouring Tewkesbury Borough Council, please could you confirm that discussions will take place with Tewkesbury and other specialist external bodies involved in resolving the matter, to fully understand the causes and any lessons that can be learnt? Are you satisfied that member and staff training on cyber security is sufficient and there is a policy of continual improvement in this ... view the full agenda text for item 34. Additional documents: Minutes: Member Questions and the responses can be found in the attached Annex A at the end of the minutes. |
|||||||||||||
|
Petition: Retain the public toilets in the High Street/Market Square, Stow-on-the-Wold Purpose For Council to consider a petition submitted under the Local Petition Scheme (Part F of the Constitution).
Recommendations That Council resolves to either: 1. Make recommendations to Cabinet as the decision-maker for the request to be considered. 2. Refer the petition to Overview and Scrutiny Committee for review. 3. Note the petition and take no further action. Additional documents: Minutes: The purpose of this item was for Council to consider a petition submitted under the Local Petition Scheme (Part F of the Constitution).
The Chair invited the representative for the petition, Councillor Ben Eddolls, Chair of Stow Town Council, to present the petition. The following points were made:
The Chair then reminded Members of the recommendations which were as on the report
That Council resolves to either: 1. Make recommendations to Cabinet as the decision-maker for the request to be considered. 2. Refer the petition to Overview and Scrutiny Committee for review. 3. Note the petition and take no further action.
The Deputy Leader and Cabinet Member for Finance, Councillor Mike Evemy, then responded to the petition, and made the following points:
This Council notes the petition signed by 1,198 people requesting the Council to retain the public toilets in High Street/Market Square, Stow-on-the-Wold.
This Council resolves to refer consideration of the petition to Cabinet, as it is the relevant decision-making body, for discussion and decision at its meeting on 3 October 2024
It was highlighted that Stow Town Council had worked hard to investigate whether they could take over the running of the toilets ... view the full minutes text for item 35.
|
|||||||||||||
|
District Boundary Review - Council Size Proposal Purpose For Full Council to consider the draft Council Size Proposal for submission to The Local Government Boundary Commission for England (LGBCE).
Recommendation That Council resolves to: 1. Approve the draft Council Size Proposal (Annex A) for submission to The Local Government Boundary Commission for England. 2. Delegate authority to the Business Manager for Democratic Services, in consultation with the Chief Executive Officer and the Chair of the Boundary Review Working Group, to finalise the Council Size Proposal document to reflect the discussion at full Council (if required) and to make other minor amendments to improve the document prior to submission. Additional documents:
Minutes: The purpose of the report was for Full Council to consider the draft Council Size Proposal for submission to The Local Government Boundary Commission for England (LGBCE).
The Deputy Leader, Councillor Evemy as Chair of the Boundary Review Working Group, was then invited to introduce the report and made the following points:
Councillor David Fowles seconded the proposal and made the following points:
It was noted that the Gloucestershire Economic Growth Scrutiny Committee was replaced by the Gloucestershire Economic Strategy Scrutiny Committee. This was noted for correction in the document.
It was highlighted by many Members that the report was comprehensive in its assessment of the current circumstances and thanks were given to the officers for this.
Councillor Evemy in summing up thanked Members for their comments and noted that recommendation 2 provided appropriate delegations for any final changes needed. The document was highlighted as part of an evidence-based exercise to summarise the needs of the Council.
|
|||||||||||||
|
Treasury Management Outturn 2023/24 Purpose To receive and discuss details of the Council’s Treasury management performance for the period 01 April to 31 March 2024.
Recommendation That Council resolves to: 1. Note the Treasury Management performance for the period 01 April 2023 to 31 March 2024; 2. Approve the Treasury Management Outturn Report for 2023/24. Additional documents: Minutes: The purpose of the report was to receive and discuss details of the Council’s treasury management performance for the period 01 April 2023 to 31 March 2024.
The Deputy Leader and Cabinet Member for Finance, Councillor Evemy, moved the recommendations and made the following points:
A question was asked about Section 4.5 on the Community Municipal Investment was fully funded, and the workings of the £0.357M loan through Abundance Investments Limited for the purpose of the investments. The Deputy Chief Executive noted that the repayment would be for investors of the principal investments made and any interest owed. The bond covered the costs of the installation of Solar PV Panels at the Council Offices and the installation of some of the Electric Vehicle Charging Points (EVCPs) operated by the Council.
A question was asked regarding the financial advice providers Arlingclose and the optimum timeline to conduct a review of the arrangements and the criteria to do so. The Deputy Chief Executive stated that the selection of financial advisors was subject to a robust procurement process. It was also highlighted that advice from third parties was also sought, but ultimately the S.151 officer would be responsible for the final decision.
It was noted that the Council had a £1 million windfall from the investments but also a future requirement to borrow money in the Medium-Term Financial Strategy (MTFS). It was asked if the windfall could be held in a reserve to negate the requirement to borrow within the MTFS. There was also a question regarding the recommendations and whether the Council was approving the report or just noting it. The Deputy Chief Executive noted that the Council was required to receive the Treasury Management Strategy, the mid-year report and the outturn report from officers through the course of the year. Council was recommended to agree to endorse the report and its findings. The Deputy Leader then responded to the earlier question by highlighting that the higher-than-expected return was largely down to prudent budgeting. Whilst it was welcome that a larger return had been received, the Council was required to look at the return at the end of the year to see what funds were required to balance the Council’s budget. The Deputy Chief Executive also clarified that ... view the full minutes text for item 37.
|
|||||||||||||
|
Sewage Summit Update Purpose The purpose of the report is to provide an update to all Councillors on the Sewage Summit event that took place on 8 July 2024, the meetings held with the 3 water companies and 2 workshops that took place leading up to the event, along with outlining a series of recommendations associated with these.
Recommendation That Council resolves to:
i. Make Water Companies Statutory Consultees for both Development Control and in preparing Local and Strategic Plans; ii. Introduce clear mandatory controls on storm water drainage for all development.
Additional documents: Minutes: The purpose of the report was to provide an update to all Councillors on the Sewage Summit event that took place on the 8 July 2024, the meetings held with the 3 water companies and 2 workshops that took place leading up to the event, along with outlining a series of recommendations associated with these.
Councillor Lisa Spivey, Cabinet Member for Communities and Public Safety introduced the report and made the following points:
Councillor Joe Harris formally seconded and reserved his right to speak.
A question was asked regarding the new MPs for the North and South Cotswolds constituencies and what dialogue would take place. Councillor Spivey stated that regular meetings would take place and she was confident that they would use their influence in Parliament to ensure action on this issue.
There was clarification sought on the definition of a ‘matrix of Grampian conditions’. Councillor Spivey responded that these were planning conditions based on the size of developments proposed and what actions are needed. These were important to ensure the appropriate infrastructure was put in place where required.
There was a question on the current flood management team and how the new officer post would work. In response, Councillor Spivey highlighted that the Flood Risk Management Team would be key to assessing the risks from developments. However, there was a need for all stakeholders to come together to tackle these issues and for the Council to have a link with water companies.
A question was raised regarding the Grey Water Motion that was passed by Council and how work around grey water linked to the issue of flooding from sewage. Councillor Spivey noted the Council’s online resources on grey water and reaffirmed the important work to reuse natural water where possible.
There was a question regarding the issue of run-off of agricultural chemicals from farmland and how this will be tackled. It was noted by Councillor Spivey that the issue of ... view the full minutes text for item 38.
|
|||||||||||||
|
Report of the Constitution Working Group - Planning Protocol and Scheme of Delegation Purpose To consider updates to the planning scheme of delegation and the planning protocol following review in practice of the updated format of those parts adopted from 1 April 2024, for the benefit of all stakeholders.
Recommendation That Council resolves to:
Additional documents:
Minutes: The purpose of the report was to consider updates to the planning scheme of delegation and the planning protocol following a review in practice of the updated format of those parts adopted from 1 April 2024, for the benefit of all stakeholders.
The Cabinet Member for Planning and Regulatory Services, Councillor Juliet Layton, introduced the report and the amended Annex A.
The amendment read as follows:
Add text to right and column of section 3.A (page 151 of the Agenda) to add: Types of applications NOT to be determined under delegated powers…
(d) Planning applications, Permission in Principle and Technical Details Consent applications involving either (i) the provision of 10 or more dwellinghouses, (ii) where the number of new dwellinghouses is unknown, the residential development is proposed to land comprising 0.5 hectares or greater area, (iii)1,000m2 non-residential building floorspace or the development of 1 hectare or more land
(excluding any such applications where amendments of, or variations to, existing permissions are sought, as defined by Sections 73A and 73B of the Town & Country Planning Act 1990)
The following points were made:
There was a question raised regarding if this was a procedure to refine the protocol rather than being a substantive change. Councillor Layton confirmed that this was simply a case of clarifying and correcting wording in the documents.
Following a question for clarity, it was confirmed that the amendment would be inserted at page 146 of the papers and not page 150 as stated.
A question was asked around whether relatives of Councillors would come under the restrictions of delegated authority use. This was confirmed by Councillor Layton as being correct.
There was also a question regarding Listed Building matters and declining to entertain an application. The Interim Development Management Manager noted that whilst rarely used, the authority can decline to hear an application if the application was being dealt with on appeal or was not substantially different from one previously rejected by the authority.
The rules of ... view the full minutes text for item 39.
|
|||||||||||||
|
Review of Standards Arrangements Purpose To consider the adoption of procedure rules for the Standards Hearings Sub-Committee and a review of the Council's arrangements for dealing with complaints under the Code of Conduct.
Recommendation That Council resolves to:
Additional documents:
Minutes: The purpose of the report was to consider the adoption of procedure rules for the Standards Hearings Sub-Committee and a review of the Council's arrangements for dealing with complaints under the Code of Conduct.
The Chair of the Audit and Governance Committee, Councillor Nigel Robbins, introduced the report and made the following points:
Councillor Helene Mansilla then seconded the recommendations and made the following points:
It was noted by Council that the documents were timely given the number of complaints relating to Town and Parish Councillors.
It was asked whether the information could be shared with the public to ensure they were aware of the processes. The Director of Governance confirmed that this information would be available on the website.
There was a question regarding page 179 on stage 1 of the complaints process regarding complaints being ruled out if they were not about Members acting in their role as a Councillor. The Director of Governance noted that the public would see Councillors as being their role all the time, so it was often difficult to distinguish between when a Councillor was and was not acting in their capacity as a Councillor. It was highlighted that the Monitoring Officer consulted with the Independent Persons when assessing complaints and would sometimes progress complaints to the investigation stage if there was any doubt.
The Council noted that the Sub-Committee terms of reference required 3 Members to attend to be quorate, and had a membership of 3 Members all drawn from the Audit and Governance Committee. It was therefore suggested that the use of deputies should be required to make sure that all Audit and Governance Committee members could step into the position if required.
There was a query regarding whether complaints should be in a written form, how this would affect current complaints and how different councils were managed if they had adopted different code of conducts. The Director of Governance replied firstly by stating that the form was a preference because it required complainants to provide all of ... view the full minutes text for item 40.
|
|||||||||||||
|
Notice of Motions In accordance with Council Procedure Rule 12, the following Motions have been received:- Additional documents: |
|||||||||||||
|
Motion A: Safety of lithium batteries in e-scooters and e-bikes & their disposal Proposer: Councillor Nikki Ind Seconder: Councillor Mike McKeown
Whilst Full Council recognises the significant environmental benefits of electric-powered micromobility vehicles, such as e-scooters and e-bikes, in reducing CO2 emissions—particularly as transport remains the largest source of CO2 in the Cotswolds—we believe it is essential to address the growing safety concerns surrounding lithium batteries. By supporting the Safety of Electric-Powered Micromobility Vehicles and Lithium Batteries Bill, we aim to ensure that safety standards keep pace with the increasing use of these vehicles, allowing us to continue promoting low-carbon transport solutions while protecting public safety.”
Whilst we have been lucky so far in the Cotswolds, lithium battery fires are on the increase – there have been over 1000 in the past few years, nearly 200 injuries, and over a dozen fatalities and the cost to the UK runs into £billions.
It is important to clarify that the safety concerns raised in this motion are specifically related to lithium batteries in e-bikes and e-scooters, where the higher risk of fire incidents is largely due to poor quality standards and substandard components. This motion seeks to address those issues by advocating for stronger safety regulations, rather than any intrinsic problems with the technology itself. It is also important to note that there are no significant safety concerns with electric vehicle (EV) car batteries, which undergo stringent testing and have a lower fire risk compared to petrol, diesel, and hybrid vehicles. By improving standards for micromobility batteries, we can support safer, sustainable transport options without undermining the broader transition to electric vehicles.”
Electrical Safety First, with cross-party support, is promoting the Safety of Electric-Powered Micromobility Vehicles and Lithium Batteries Bill. A Bill to make provisions regarding the safety of electric-powered micromobility vehicles and of lithium batteries and to ensure greater safety in the use and disposal of lithium batteries. The proposed legislation covers:
• Safety Assurance – this clause mandates a third-party safety assessment, conducted by a government-approved body, for all e-bikes, e-scooters, and their lithium-ion batteries before they enter the UK market. This process mirrors safety measures in place for other high-risk products like fireworks and heavy machinery • Responsible Disposal – this clause requires the Government to make regulations ensuring the safe disposal of lithium batteries once their lifecycle ends. • Comprehensive Fire Safety – this clause assigns the Government the responsibility of comprehensively addressing fire-related concerns – involving enhancing safe usage, charging and storage practices for these devices. It includes setting standards for conversion kits and charging systems and considering a temporary ban on the sale of universal chargers that heighten fire risks.
Electrical Safety First has the support of many national organisations, including the National Fire Chiefs Council, local Fire and Rescue Services, insurance companies and various organisations who have issued warnings regarding the lithium-ion battery situation.
Full Council notes that: • Fires caused by lithium-ion batteries in e-scooters and e-bikes have multiplied fourfold since 2020 • The UK is now facing a projection of nearly one e-bike or e-scooter fire ... view the full agenda text for item 42. Additional documents: Minutes: The Chair Councillor Nikki Ind introduced the motion as the proposer, and made the following points:
Council noted that e-scooters and e-bikes were also a danger due their higher speed which may cause more accidents.
Council noted that the fires from lithium batteries were much more difficult to extinguish than normal fires.
It was highlighted that e-scooters were generally illegal and the police had a responsibility to enforce the current legislation around these motorised vehicles.
Councillor Mike McKeown then spoke as the seconder of the motion and made the following points:
|
|||||||||||||
|
Motion B: Ambulance motion Proposer: Councillor Paul Hodgkinson Seconder: Councillor Gina Blomefield
Council notes with concern the latest ambulance response times for the Cotswold district. For category 1 cases the target time to arrive at a patient’s home is 8 minutes on average but in the Cotswolds this is running at 13 minutes and has been increasing this year. Northleach and Bourton Vale wards are running at 22 minutes. For category 2 cases the target is 18 minutes but this is running at 57 minutes. Chedworth and Churn Valley Ward is the joint worst in the county at one hour, 2 minutes. Council also notes the excellent work of first responders and paramedics who are doing their best in challenging times.
Residents want to feel reassured that the South Western Ambulance Service NHS Foundation Trust (SWASFT) (described as having the worst performance of all ambulance trusts in the country in a recent County Council Health Overview and Scrutiny Committee report) is taking steps to improve.
Council instructs the Chief Executive to write to the CEO of SWASFT asking him for a full report on what steps he will be taking to improve ambulance response times in the Cotswold District as well as providing more support to grow the Community First Responder teams whose assistance is invaluable and thereafter invite him to attend the Overview and Scrutiny Committee to discuss his report and the actions resulting from it. Council also instructs the Chief Executive to write to the Chair of the county’s Health Overview and Scrutiny Committee asking that committee to express this Council’s concerns at its next meeting and to regularly scrutinise ambulance performance as a standard agenda item. Finally, Council instructs the CEO to write to our two MPs asking them to raise this issue in Parliament and to lobby SWASFT on our behalf. Additional documents: Minutes: The Chair called the proposer of the motion Councillor Paul Hodgkinson to introduce the motion. The following points were made in doing so:
Council noted the delay to ambulance response times because of the problems with the lack of available beds to take patients, and it was asked whether that work needed to be done to help the issue of response times. Councillor Hodgkinson responded by agreeing with the need for these bottlenecks to be cleared, but there needed to be further resources for the ambulance service.
Council asked how the motion could help get clarity of the local issues amidst the wider issues with the National Health Service. Councillor Hodgkinson noted that it was important for Councillors to hear from the management of the service to see what the issues were, and for the management to see how Members took these issues seriously.
There were various comments regarding the longstanding multi-faceted issues in the National Health Service and the social services sector which would have an impact on ambulance response performance.
Council commended the work of emergency response services in sometimes dangerous circumstances.
It was highlighted that there were issues with the real terms funding position of the National Health Service over various years.
Councillor Blomefield seconded the motion and made the following points:
|
|||||||||||||
|
Next meeting The next meeting of Council will be held on Wednesday 27 November 2024 at 2pm.
Additional documents: Minutes: The next meeting of Full Council was noted to be on 27 November 2024. |
|||||||||||||
|
Matters exempt from publication If Council wishes to exclude the press and the public from the meeting during consideration of any of the items on the exempt from publication part of the agenda, it will be necessary for Council to pass a resolution in accordance with the provisions of section 100A of the Local Government Act 1972 on the grounds that their presence could involve the likely disclosure of exempt information as described in specific paragraphs of Schedule 12A of the Local Government Act 1972.
Council may maintain the exemption if and so long as, in all the circumstances of the case, the public interest in maintaining the exemption outweighs the public interest in disclosing the information.
Additional documents: Minutes: Council did not enter private session. |
Carried