Babergh and Mid Suffolk District Councils
Democratic Services

Mobile menu icon

Agenda and minutes

Venue: King Edmund Chamber, Endeavour House, 8 Russell Road, Ipswich. View directions

Contact: Committee Services 

Media

Items
No. Item

32.

DECLARATION OF INTERESTS BY COUNCILLORS

Minutes:

There were no declarations of interests.

 

33.

BC/21/11 TO CONFIRM THE MINUTES OF THE MEETING HELD ON 29 JULY 2021 pdf icon PDF 752 KB

Minutes:

It was RESOLVED:-

 

That the Minutes of the meeting held on 29 July 2021 be confirmed and signed as a true record.

 

34.

BC/21/12 ANNOUNCEMENTS FROM THE CHAIRMAN AND LEADER pdf icon PDF 17 KB

In addition to any announcements made at the meeting, please see Paper BC/21/12 attached, detailing events attended by the Chairman and Vice-Chairman.

 

Minutes:

The Chairman referred Council to his tabled report which was for noting.

 

The Chairman then invited Councillor Ward to introduce his report. 

 

Councillor Ward introduced his report and informed Council that it was good to be back in the Council Chamber for the Council meeting and whilst there were still some guidelines in place so that everyone could feel safe, it did mark another point on a steady return to normal.

 

The Leader reported that Covid infection rates locally and nationally remained stubbornly at a moderate level, which was to be expected as people mixed a lot more, but hospitalisations and deaths – also stable – were reasonably low. It did mean that the message of caution and sensible use of masks and sanitisers remained.

 

The Leader took the opportunity to mention the two awards ceremonies at which Babergh – and Mid Suffolk – were successful.

 

The Leader had attended the iESE conference and awards ceremony at Church House in London where the Council had won three awards: a gold, silver and bronze. This was really an excellent achievement and the Leader was proud that officers were delivering to a high standard and that what the Council was doing for its residents was being recognised nationally.

 

The Leader stated that whilst winning bronze in the Council of the year category was very good, the Council shouldn’t rest on its laurels and must strive for the gold award.

The Leader also reported that the Housing Solutions team was highly commended in the Community Heroes of the Year category at the Municipal Journal’s Achievement Awards for their efforts in keeping vulnerable residents off the streets during the Covid-19 pandemic.

 

The Leader was pleased to accompany Cllr Fleming of Mid Suffolk to the Stowmarket depot to talk to Radio Suffolk about the switch of our vehicle fleet to run on HVO, which took place at the weekend. We are the first rural districts to do this and shows that the Councils are delivering real benefits for residents and their environment as part of the Councils’ efforts to reach net zero by 2030.

 

The Leader was very pleased to announce that the Council’s £180k investment in CCTV in Hadleigh and Sudbury was almost fully operational. There are 21 cameras in Sudbury and 8 in Hadleigh. Four are still to go live – Belle Vue Park and Cavendish Road in Sudbury and the cricket ground and Pykenham Way in Hadleigh. There is also one mobile camera and the Council will monitor its use to determine if more are going to be needed.

 

And finally, the Leader reminded Councillors that the final stage of the Women’s Tour will be passing through Babergh on 9th October. The route takes it through several of our communities and will enable many of our residents to watch. It should be a great spectacle.

 

35.

TO RECEIVE NOTIFICATION OF PETITIONS IN ACCORDANCE WITH COUNCIL PROCEDURE RULES

In accordance with Council Procedure Rule No. 11, the Chief Executive will report the receipt of any petitions.  There can be no debate or comment upon these matters at the Council meeting.

 

Minutes:

There were no petitions received.

 

36.

QUESTIONS BY THE PUBLIC IN ACCORDANCE WITH COUNCIL PROCEDURE RULES pdf icon PDF 8 KB

The Chairman of the Council to answer any questions by the public of which notice has been given no later than midday three clear working days before the day of the meeting in accordance with Council Procedure Rule No. 12.

 

Minutes:

Question 1 - Laura Knight to Councillor Holt, Cabinet Member for Economic Growth

 

The council reports that have been released to date relating to the sale of Belle Vue do not reference the impact to Belle Vue House terrace and gardens. The access into that area from the current main entrance of the park is being sold to Churchill as part of the disposal site. You can also get into the gardens through a trampled clearing through the trees to gain access but this is not suitable for many park users, including those with mobility issues or buggys etc. Please can you confirm that BDC will provide access to this area of the park; that it has been included in costings and confirm that public access will remain to the terrace and steps outside the house which was not included in the sale, which you have categorically stated that land outside the red line would not be disposed of and which is as confirmed by BDC, public accessible open space held on statutory trust for the public.

 

Response:

 

Ms Knight thank you for your question to Cllr Holt.   Unfortunately, Cllr Holt is not able to join us this evening and he has asked me to respond on his behalf.    As has been agreed previously at Cabinet, the capital receipt from the sale of Belle Vue House and part of the old swimming pool site (as defined by the red lined disposal area) will be directed towards the creation of a new park entrance and in fact work is already underway on this project.  Plans for the new entrance, new toilets and the proposed new café will be subject to a public exhibition later this autumn alongside enhanced proposals for the park and we will welcome comments and suggestions at that time which will lead to the creation of a planning application for the park and the new access/facilities.

 

I can confirm that access shall remain to the whole park and in fact our aim is to improve not just the access but the movability around the park for all users. More details of our plans re landscaping will be available at the public engagement event.

 

 

Question 2 - Roger Young to Councillor Malvisi, Cabinet Member for the Environment


Would you kindly confirm the detailed brief given to the designer of the Strategic Parking Questionnaire, and the objectives sought from it, that was available on the BDC website and has now apparently been withdrawn?

When will a detailed map, showing all existing car parking facilities, including on-road parking and additional car parking opportunities needed to cater for expansion, be made available to Hadleigh's residents so that they can make a meaningful contribution to the Strategic Parking consultation exercise?

 

Response:

 

Mr Young, thank you for your question which I believe is one of many recently.

 

Babergh is keen to develop a Parking Strategy that provides a comprehensive route map with regard to the long-term approach to the provision of parking across the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 36.

37.

QUESTIONS BY COUNCILLORS IN ACCORDANCE WITH COUNCIL PROCEDURE RULES pdf icon PDF 9 KB

The Chairman of the Council, the Chairmen of Committees and Sub-Committees and Portfolio Holders to answer any questions on any matters in relation to which the Council has powers or duties or which affect the District of which due notice has been given in accordance with Council Procedure Rule No. 13.

 

Minutes:

Question 1 - Councillor Beer to Councillor Malvisi, Cabinet Member for the Environment

 

At the February 2021 full Council Budget Meeting, we approved the maximum increase in Council Tax and increased car parking charges to be applied in our own Babergh carparks. The reasons stated at the time were due to the forecast budget position of a £1.8 million deficit. This was presented at many workshops and by finance officers and the Cabinet Member for Finance.

 

To help balance this position we were given several options;

 

Introduce the full allowed council tax increase, introduce car parking charges and close the Sudbury Advice Centre.

 

I voted against these charges being introduced, based on the information supplied at the time.

 

We now have the final 2020/21 financial outturn, which shows a rather different position, we now have a £725,000k surplus.

 

So, in light of this information will the Cabinet withdraw the introduction of any car parking charges?

 

This will give our town centres of Sudbury and Hadleigh a breathing space to recover from Covid 19, this would certainly send out the correct message to our hard pressed residents of Babergh and show that as a Council we do listen to our traders and the public at large.

 

Response to Cllr Beer from Cabinet Member for Finance

 

Thank you for your question Cllr Beer. Before handing over to Cllr Malvisi to answer the specific matter of our cark park tariffs, I would like to correct a couple of misconceptions in your question.

 

Firstly, I would like to point out that we provide an Access Point, not an advice centre. We have never run an advice centre in any of our face-to-face locations. This may seem like a pedantic comment, but it is important as it gets to the nub of some of the criticism of the decision to move it. And I want to provide a further clarification and say that we have moved it, not closed it – it is still very much open and successfully serving our residents. Part of the reason for the move was that it would give us savings, but it needs to be understood also that the contract was due to expire in March and we took the opportunity to design a more appropriate service, aligned with our Customer Strategy and the changing way our residents interact with the Council.

 

Secondly, I did report, when I presented the budget, that we were forecasting a cumulative three-year deficit of £1.7m. This still stands and I don’t expect it will improve in the foreseeable future – indeed, it may well go further in the wrong direction, but officers are currently reviewing the figures as part of the preparation for setting the budget for next year. The favourable outturn of £736k does not change this because most of it was one-off benefits that won’t necessarily be repeated in future years. We have used this money to top up some reserves, most notably the Climate Change and Biodiversity Reserve and the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 37.

38.

BC/21/13 OVERVIEW AND SCRUTINY COMMITTEE REPORT pdf icon PDF 224 KB

Chair of Overview and Scrutiny Committee

Minutes:

The Overview and Scrutiny Committee report was noted.

 

The Chairman requested that, in the absence of Councillor McLaren, any questions should be emailed directly to Councillor McLaren.

 

39.

RECOMMENDATIONS FROM CABINET / COMMITTEES

40.

BC/21/14 ANNUAL TREASURY MANAGEMENT REPORT – 2020/21 pdf icon PDF 945 KB

Chair of Joint Audit and Standards Committee

 

At its meeting on 26 July 2021, Joint Audit and Standards Committee considered Paper JAC/21/2, the Annual Treasury Management Report 2020/21.  Paper BC/21/14 now includes all the relevant updated information following consideration by the Joint Audit and Standards Committee, together with the necessary recommendations.

 

 

Minutes:

Councillor Hurren introduced the report and informed Councillors that the Treasury Management 2020/21 outturn report was discussed at Joint Audit and Standards Committee on 26th July 2021.

 

The report provided details of investment performance, effects of decisions taken during the period and confirmed compliance with the Council’s Treasury Management Policy.

 

The COVID pandemic and the impacts of a global lockdown dominated 2020/21. The start of the financial year saw many central banks cutting interest rates as lockdowns caused economic activity to grind to a halt. The UK Government provided a range of fiscal stimulus measures, the size of which had not been seen in peacetime.

 

The vaccine approval and subsequent rollout programme were both positives, but there remained much uncertainty in and around the level of losses that banks and building societies would suffer due to the economic slowdown.

 

The Bank of England held the Bank Rate at 0.1% throughout the year but extended its Quantitative Easing programme by £150 billion to £895 billion in November 2020.

The UK unemployment rate was 5.0% in the three months to January 2021. Unemployment is expected to increase as the various Government job support schemes come to an end.

 

Inflation has remained low over the 12-month period. Latest figures showed the annual headline rate of UK Consumer Price Inflation (CPI) fell to 0.4% year on year in February, below expectations (0.8%) and still well below the Bank of England’s 2% target.

 

Councillor Hurren then informed Council that specifically for Babergh

1.              The Council was able to take advantage of holding additional cash from government grants received relating to Covid-19 until they were paid out to support local businesses. This has increased treasury investment activity during the year.

2.             The Council operated within the daily bank account limits. 

3.             Short-term debt has increased by £15.5m.

 

4.             The Council lent a further £19.3m to CIFCO Ltd.

 

5.             All investment activities undertaken were in accordance with the

           approved counterparty list.

 

6.             The Councils’ investment activities including average returns can be found in Appendix C of the report.

7.             The investment in Funding Circle has reduced by £48k as unallocated funds have been reclaimed and existing loans repaid, leaving the balance on 31st March as £166k.

 

8.             The Council was compliant with the upper limits for interest rate exposure. The investment activity undertaken for the year was done so in priority order of security and liquidity over yield as prescribed in the Treasury Management Strategy.

Councillor Hurren then MOVED the recommendations in the report which Councillor Plumb SECONDED.

 

Councillor Busby queried why the General Fund borrowing had increased from £50.7m to £71.3m in the previous year?

 

In response, the Section 151 Officer confirmed that this was due to the finalisation of the CIFCO purchases in that year.

 

Councillor Ward asked if the net borrowing and total borrowing figures could be separated into the General Fund and the HRA fund and reflected in the report in the same way as the capital financing requirements was.

 

The  ...  view the full minutes text for item 40.

Recorded Vote
TitleTypeRecorded Vote textResult
To agree recommendations 3.1 and 3.2 as detailed in report BC/21/14 Ad-Hoc Carried
  • View Recorded Vote for this item
  • 41.

    BC/21/15 CAPITAL INVESTMENT FUND COMPANY (CIFCO CAPITAL LTD) BUSINESS TRADING AND PERFORMANCE REPORT 2020/21 - PART 1 pdf icon PDF 1 MB

    Cabinet Member for Assets and Investments

     

     

    Additional documents:

    Minutes:

    The Chairman welcomed Henry Cooke, Director, CIFCO Capital Ltd, Nigel Golder, Director Strategic Asset Management JLL, Helen Rumsey, Partner Ensors and Emily Atack, Assistant Director for Assets and Investments and Managing Director for CIFCO Capital Ltd.

     

    Councillor Busby introduced the report and informed Council that the report detailed CIFCO Capital’s performance over the last 12 months and the proposed business plan for the next 12 months. The business plan is a fundamental part of CIFCO’s governance and ensures accountability to its shareholders. He particularly valued the contributions from the Joint Overview & Scrutiny Committee in June this year, which confirmed that in their view, the business plan is robust and they have sufficient confidence in the management of CIFCO.

     

    Since its inception in 2017, CIFCO has provided Babergh with £3.5m of net income. £1.3m was delivered during the last financial year whilst facing unprecedented challenges as a consequence of the pandemic and certainly providing the Councils with much needed income at this time.  CIFCO was able to withstand the challenges of the pandemic and continue to deliver income to the Councils and this is testament to the investment approach and strong management of the CIFCO portfolio since its inception, which has seen rent collection rates above the industry norm.

     

    The business plan identifies that the challenges of the pandemic are not behind us and takes a prudent approach to CICFO’s financial management over the next few years, ensuring that the CIFCO portfolio continues to provide income to the Councils, running about a quarter of council tax, to support the delivery of services and projects locally as well as creating a long-term legacy for the District to benefit from in the future.

     

    Councillor Busby then MOVED the recommendations in the report which Councillor Ward SECONDED.

     

    Councillor Barrett queried why the recommendations in the Overview and Scrutiny report were for noting only.

     

    In response, the Monitoring Officer informed Council that Scrutiny is not provided with pre-empted recommendations. It would be for Scrutiny to make their own recommendations once the review had been undertaken.

     

    Councillor Lindsay asked about the deferment of the £1.5m for the next three years and what would happen if the money that was owed could not be paid back?

     

    In response, Councillor Busby stated that it was the intention of CIFCO to pay each month and if they didn’t, interest would accrue.

     

    The Assistant Director for Assets and Investments added that if the deferred income was not able to be paid back in three years time, then the amount would be added to the existing loan and would be paid back over a longer period and would incur accrued interest.

     

    Councillor Lindsay asked how much the loan was and when it was scheduled for repayment.

     

    In response, the Assistant Director for Assets and Investments informed Councillor Lindsay that the schedule of loan repayments was detailed in the report. The length of the loan would depend on when the asset was purchased with the average length of the loan being  ...  view the full minutes text for item 41.

    Recorded Vote
    TitleTypeRecorded Vote textResult
    To agree recommendations 3.1 and 3.2 as detailed in Report BC/21/15 Ad-Hoc Carried
  • View Recorded Vote for this item
  • 42.

    EXCLUSION OF THE PUBLIC (WHICH TERM INCLUDES THE PRESS)

    To consider whether, pursuant to Part 1 of Schedule 12A of the Local Government Act 1972, the public should be excluded from the meeting for the business specified below on the grounds that if the public were present during this/these item(s), it is likely that there would be the disclosure to them of exempt information as indicated against the/each item.

     

    The author(s) of the report(s) proposed to be considered in Part 2 of the Agenda is/are satisfied that the public interest in maintaining the exemption outweighs the public interest in disclosing the information.

     

    Minutes:

    As Members had completed their discussion of Item BCa/21/15 Capital Investment Fund Company (CIFCO Capital LTD.) Business Trading and Performance Report 2021/21, the Chair refrained from going into closed session.

     

     

    43.

    CONFIDENTIAL APPENDIX C - CIFCO CAPITAL LTD BUSINESS AND INVESTMENT PLAN 2021/22 (Exempt information by virtue of Paragraph 3 of Part 1)

    Cabinet Member for Assets and Investments

     

    44.

    RE-ADMITTANCE OF THE PUBLIC (WHICH TERM INCLUDES THE PRESS)

    45.

    COUNCILLOR APPOINTMENTS

    46.

    ELECTION OF CHAIRMAN OF LICENSING AND REGULATORY COMMITTEE

    Minutes:

    On the proposal of Councillor Ward and seconded by Councillor Jan Osborne, a nomination for Councillor Dawson to be Chair of Licensing and Regulatory Committee was tabled.

     

    On the proposal of Councillor Hinton and seconded by Councillor Plumb, a nomination for Councillor Maybury to be Chair of Licensing and Regulatory Committee was tabled.

     

    The nominations were PUT to Council

     

    It was RESOLVED: -

     

    That Councillor Margaret Maybury be appointed as Chair of the Babergh Licensing and Regulatory Committee.

     

    47.

    MOTIONS ON NOTICE

    48.

    TO CONSIDER THE MOTION ON NOTICE RECEIVED FROM COUNCILLOR MALVISI

    Motion on streetlighting in Babergh:

    Babergh recognises that street-lighting is a significant aspect of our climate change and biodiversity action plans, and that lighting can be adapted and controlled to reduce energy use as well as the impacts on human health and wildlife – especially bats, owls and other nocturnal insect populations which are declining[1], [2]. The Council also notes that many communities and campaign groups are calling on local councils to protect dark skies. 

     

    Motion:

    Babergh District Council recognises that light pollution is increasing and that it causes harm to wildlife and insects as well as being problematical for many people particularly when the light is high in intensity.  Therefore the Council seeks to reduce the intensity and extent of outdoor lighting within its public realm and housing assets as well as in other lighting schemes where it has influence, to the extent practical.  The Council will also include firm guidance in its Biodiversity Supplementary Planning Document to protect and enhance dark skies for the benefit of wildlife as well as human health and wellbeing. 

     

    Proposer – Cllr Elisabeth Malvisi

    Seconder – Cllr Leigh Jamieson

     

    To achieve these objectives the Council will include lighting control within the Biodiversity Supplementary Planning Document (SPD) which it has committed to preparing and will work with the planning team and also partner organisations such as Suffolk County Council, and its suppliers in order to reduce current levels of light pollution to the extent practical.  The Council recognises the dichotomous role that artificial lighting plays in making people feel safe but also its negative impact on health, wellbeing and visual resources.  The council will ensure that new or replacement artificial lighting whether in the form of street lighting, commercial and residential lighting or advertising signage is installed to meet the lowest possible level of intensity and visual intrusion in line with current evidence on lighting characteristics.

     

    Notes:

    ·       Streetlighting that uses LED lamps emits a brighter, whiter light with higher levels in the blue region of visible light (400-480 nm) than their traditional counterparts. This shift in the emitted spectral composition towards blue white light has well-known impacts on the biological rhythms and functions in both humans and animals, particularly in nocturnal insect species and bats and owls.

    ·       Some estimates predict that 1 million species, or 40% of all insects will become extinct over the next few decades, and the negative contribution made by artificial lighting in this regard and especially in the blue white must be recognised and not dismissed.

    ·       Illumination, especially in the short wavelength -ultraviolet and blue light- causes damage not only to human sight but also to our nocturnal friends.   It causes disorientation in insects, affects their patterns of movement, their way of foraging and very importantly affects their ability to reproduce with catastrophic implications for their populations.

    ·       By contrast long wavelength light - amber and red – has a lower impact on our nocturnal friends.

    ·       LEDs can be engineered to emit light of any desired spectral range,  ...  view the full agenda text for item 48.

    Minutes:

    Councillor Malvisi MOVED her Motion and informed Council that is was recognised that streetlighting could play an important part in the Council’s climate change and bio-diversity plans. Not only can it be controlled to reduce costs and reduce our carbon footprint but by installing the right type of light the Council can protect its nocturnal wildlife.

     

    Currently LED lighting was being fitted and whilst these have reduced costs which was good on the one hand it had a very negative impact on another. As a society, we have moved towards a blue white light. This blue white light has a terrible effect on the behaviour of nocturnal wildlife leaving it confused and affecting reproduction. So much so that it is estimated that 40% of all insects will become extinct within the next decades. Councillor Malvisi asked that the Council approve her Motion so that a new bio- diversity supplementary planning guidance can be produced to help protect our nocturnal wildlife on whom our futures are so dependent.

     

    Councillor Jamieson SECONDED the Motion and informed Council that a similar Motion was being put to Mid Suffolk so that both Councils could work jointly to reduce light pollution that would benefit everybody.

     

    Councillor Hinton supported the Motion and stated that he was in favour of streetlighting being turned off as he felt it was nice to have a dark sky. He also stated that he hoped that Suffolk County Council would take account of any provisions that were made in the NPPF.

     

    Councillor Cresswell thought it was a good idea but felt that a balance should be struck where there were areas of anti-social behaviour.

     

    Councillor Plumb stated that his parish council had been pressurised by Suffolk County Council to install LED lighting and asked how it was intended to bring the County Council on board with this?

     

    Councillor Busby asked if the biodiversity planning document would come back to Council?

     

    Councillor Arthey confirmed that it would.

     

    Councillor Lindsay addressed the concerns relating to Suffolk County Council and confirmed that the County Council were looking closely at this matter. It didn’t mean that the lights would all need to be replaced but would mean using some lower intensity lighting.

     

    Councillor Malvisi confirmed that lighting filters could be installed if needed.

     

    Councillor Fraser confirmed that Suffolk County was working to replace its street lighting with lower intensity lighting.

     

    It was RESOLVED: -

     

    That Babergh District Council recognises that light pollution is increasing and that it causes harm to wildlife and insects as well as being problematical for many people particularly when the light is high in intensity.  Therefore, the Council seeks to reduce the intensity and extent of outdoor lighting within its public realm and housing assets as well as in other lighting schemes where it has influence, to the extent practical.  The Council will also include firm guidance in its Biodiversity Supplementary Planning Document to protect and enhance dark skies for the benefit of wildlife as well as human health and wellbeing.  ...  view the full minutes text for item 48.

    Recorded Vote
    TitleTypeRecorded Vote textResult
    To agree to the Motion proposed by Councillor Malvisi as detailed in the agenda Ad-Hoc Carried
  • View Recorded Vote for this item
  • 49.

    TO CONSIDER THE MOTION ON NOTICE RECEIVED FROM COUNCILLOR JAMIESON

    Motion:

    The Council will sign up to be a Client Partner on the Considerate Constructor Scheme - https://www.ccscheme.org.uk/about-partnership/client-partners/

     

    Becoming a Client Partner is free and demonstrates that the Council is an organisation that proactively chooses to demonstrate its commitment to raising standards in the construction industry. We will be recognised by the public and those working on site as an organisation that places huge importance on showing care and consideration towards the local community, the environment and the welfare of the workforce.

     

    Client Partnership member companies agree to recommend Scheme registration to all sites under their control and are expected to encourage conformance with all aspects of the Scheme’s Code on their registered sites.

     

    Proposer – Cllr Leigh Jamieson

    Seconder – Cllr Robert Lindsay

     

    Minutes:

    Councillor Jamieson introduced and MOVED his Motion and informed Council that details of the scheme had been circulated to Councillors ahead of the meeting. If the Council were to sign up to be a client partner on the Considerate Construction Scheme, it would agree to caring about the appearance of the construction, safety, respecting the community, care for the environment and respect for the workforce.

     

    Becoming a Client Partner is free and demonstrates that the Council is an organisation that is committed to raising standards in the construction industry. It will be recognised by the public and those working on site as an organisation that places huge importance on showing care and consideration towards the local community, the environment and the welfare of the workforce.

     

    Client Partnership member companies agree to recommend Scheme registration to all sites under their control and are expected to encourage conformance with all aspects of the Scheme’s Code on their registered sites.

     

    Councillor Lindsay SECONDED the Motion.

     

    Councillor Hinton noted that the membership related to sites being registered rather than developers and asked what powers the Council would have to say that they must sign their sites up for this if they were based outside of the county.

     

    In response, Councillor Jamieson confirmed that wording could be put into contracts to encourage them to sign up.

     

    Councillor McCraw asked if it was just our own sites that we could impose this on or could we impose it on developers sites?

     

    Councillor Jamieson confirmed that it was primarily for our own sites, but wording could be included to encourage others.

     

    Councillor Norman asked if, when we were appointing contractors, could the Council include questions to ensure that they adhered to these principals.

     

    Councillor Ward stated that the Council already asks contractors to sign up for this. Nine local authorities had already signed up, Babergh would be the first district council to sign up.

     

    It was RESOLVED: -

     

    That the Council sign up to be a Client Partner on the Considerate Constructor Scheme - https://www.ccscheme.org.uk/about-partnership/client-partners/

     

    Recorded Vote
    TitleTypeRecorded Vote textResult
    To agree to the Motion proposed by Councillor Jamieson as detailed in the agenda Ad-Hoc Carried
  • View Recorded Vote for this item
  • 50.

    TO CONSIDER THE MOTION ON NOTICE RECEIVED FROM COUNCILLOR LINDSAY

    Motion:

    This Council will consider returning to a committee system at the earliest opportunity after 20th December 2021 with implementation from the Annual Council meeting in May 2022. 

     

    Proposer – Cllr Robert Lindsay

    Seconder – Cllr Leigh Jamieson

     

     

    Minutes:

    Councillor Lindsay MOVED his Motion that Council consider returning to a Committee system at the earliest opportunity after 20th December 2021.

     

    Councillor Jamieson SECONDED the Motion.

     

    Councillor Ward MOVED the following amendment

     

    After five years of the current leader/cabinet governance model, the council believes it is time to review how effectively this is working and assess it against a committee governance model. Council will therefore instruct the Constitution Working Group and officers to define the details, including benefits and disadvantages, of an improved cabinet model and a suitable committee model.

     

    The working group should report back to the first full council meeting after 20th December 2021 with these two options to allow council to decide which it prefers, with a view to implementing any changes at the annual council meeting in May 2022.

     

    The Chairman asked Councillor Lindsay if he accepted the amendment.

     

    Councillor Lindsay and his seconder accepted the amendment.

     

    It was RESOLVED: -

     

    After five years of the current leader/cabinet governance model, the Council believes it is time to review how effectively this is working and assess it against a committee governance model. Council will therefore instruct the Constitution Working Group and officers to define the details, including benefits and disadvantages, of an improved cabinet model and a suitable committee model.

     

    The working group should report back to the first full Council meeting after 20th December 2021 with these two options to allow Council to decide which it prefers, with a view to implementing any changes at the annual Council meeting in May 2022.

    Recorded Vote
    TitleTypeRecorded Vote textResult
    To agree to the Motion proposed by Councillor Lindsay as amended Ad-Hoc Carried
  • View Recorded Vote for this item
  • 51.

    BC/21/16 JOINT WELLBEING STRATEGY pdf icon PDF 354 KB

    Cabinet Member for Communities

    Additional documents:

    Minutes:

    Councillor Davis introduced the report and informed Council that he was delighted to be presenting the first Wellbeing Strategy for Babergh to Council. The document was a high-level document developed by councillors, officers, key partners and key community stakeholders. The strategy focuses on identified needs which are and will be dealt with in the associated delivery plan.

     

    Councillor Davis said that the wellbeing of our residents is probably the most important aspect of our role as councillors. Everything we do impacts and affects the wellbeing of our residents.  The vision for this strategy will mean that our residents will have the best possible conditions for good wellbeing and have lives that are happy, healthy and rewarding.

     

    Developing a Wellbeing Strategy has enabled the Council to set out its strategic vision and approach to support the wellbeing priorities of its local communities. Understanding our wellbeing priorities will also enable us to make the most effective use of our resources.

     

    Addressing the wellbeing of our communities has rarely never been more important than at present as we live in the shadow of a global pandemic.

     

    Wellbeing, put simply, is about ‘how we are doing’ as individuals, within communities and society. It provides a holistic view of people’s lives, taking in not just health, but our opportunities, engagement and success in other areas of life including social, civic, economic and the built and natural environment.

    Councillor Davis went on to say it is well recognised that the broader determinants of health are particularly important in ensuring a healthy and happy population and these are also the types of wellbeing issues over which Councils have some control and influence; for example, stimulating our local economy, managing our environment, developing and managing our homes or providing leisure facilities.  This strategy therefore does not duplicate the wellbeing impacts already contained within our Economy, Housing, Environment and Communities Strategies.  These other strategies will however be reviewed to ensure wellbeing outcomes are being optimised through those strategies; and performance in relation to those aspects will be included when we are reporting on our performance in respect of wellbeing. 

    The Strategy sights the 10 Measures of National Wellbeing, developed by the Office for National Statistics which organises nationally surveyed and gathered data into different areas of life affecting wellbeing. We have adopted the 10 areas with a focus on: personal wellbeing, relationships, Health, the local communities where we live and what we do with our time.

    Our long-term outcomes will focus on enabling:

     

    ·        Families to lead active, healthy, safe, and independent lives and manage their own health & wellbeing;

    ·        All communities to have sustainable and inclusive places and spaces, which maximise health & wellbeing opportunities and benefits; and

    ·        A reduction in Health inequalities.

    As this strategy spans the period to 2027, our long-term outcomes are supported by a set of shorter-term outcomes that will focus on the next two years and are accompanied by more detailed objectives which are set out in the Strategy and where it makes sense  ...  view the full minutes text for item 51.

    Recorded Vote
    TitleTypeRecorded Vote textResult
    To agree recommendations 3.1, 3.2 and 3.3 as detailed in report BC/21/16 Ad-Hoc Carried
  • View Recorded Vote for this item
  • 52.

    BC/21/17 PAY POLICY REPORT pdf icon PDF 117 KB

    Leader of the Council

    Additional documents:

    Minutes:

    The Chairman welcomed Michelle Kirk, Director, East of England Local Government Association Government Association and Suzanne Hughes, Head of HR and OD to the meeting.

     

    Councillor Ward introduced the report and informed Council that some Councillors had informed him that they believed that the report had been rushed so he intended to present a brief chronology by way of introduction.

     

    Senior salaries were last reviewed ten years ago in 2011 when Babergh first started working jointly with Mid Suffolk. The levels that were set then have stood the test of time.

     

    It was highlighted in the risk section of the Pay Policy Statement that was debated in March 2021, where it was recognised that senior salaries had fallen behind the market. No changes were proposed at that time.

     

    Despite not having to carry out senior officer recruitment to the Senior Leadership Team in the previous two years, officers were hopeful that they could still successfully recruit to the newly formed Assistant Director for Communities and Wellbeing post within the existing pay structures. Despite extensive marketing and strong interest in the four-way shared role, it became very clear when discussing the role with candidates, many did not consider the salary level competitive or appropriate compared to similar or existing roles. Fourteen people applied, none of which were considered to have the necessary experience to undertake the role.

     

    Based upon this feedback, EELGA were commissioned to undertake an independent review on senior leadership pay in order to determine the extent of which the Council’s pay scales were uncompetitive. Finally, Councillor Ward referred to 5.2 of the report which drew directly from the Pay Policy Statement.

     

    Councillor Ward then MOVED the recommendations in the report which Councillor Arthey SECONDED.

     

    Michelle Kirk, Director of EELGA delivered a short presentation on the content of her report.

     

    Councillor Melanie Barrett asked whether the Director of EELGA had been asked to give an opinion on the job design and job description or on providing a different approach or was the commissioned report based on one unfilled vacancy.

     

    In response, the Director of EELGA informed Council that she was not asked to look at the job description but the overall job package. The package was configured correctly but the offer was too low.

     

    Councillor Melanie Barrett sought confirmation that the figures were based on the current year and asked how many increments members of staff could progress to if they had met all of their targets?

     

    In response, the Head of HR and OD confirmed that staff could only progress one increment point per year. Staff would start on the nearest point to their salary and progress one increment a year until they reach the top of the scale subject to them reaching their performance targets. The EELGA recommendations were based on staff naturally progressing through the incremental points.

     

    Councillor Melanie Barrett asked why the scales had been reduced to only three incremental points rather than five.

     

    In response, the Director for EELGA stated that five years was  ...  view the full minutes text for item 52.

    Recorded Vote
    TitleTypeRecorded Vote textResult
    To agree recommendations 3.1, 3.2, 3.3 and 3.4 as detailed in report BC/21/17 Resolution Rejected
  • View Recorded Vote for this item
  • 53.

    BC/21/18 REVISIONS TO INTERNAL NEIGHBOURHOOD PLANNING PROCEDURES pdf icon PDF 337 KB

    Cabinet Member for Planning

    Minutes:

    Councillor Arthey introduced the report and informed Council that it had come a long way since the first few parishes began the neighbourhood planning journey. Our internal decision making procedures have served us well, and the Council had continued to find ways to improve on the way we interact with Neighbourhood Planning, including placing greater emphasis on the earlier informative stages.  Most importantly of all, we continue to think about what we can do better. 

     

    The report before Council looked at two key regulatory processes that fall to this Council:  

     

            our decision making on the recommendations set out in the independent examiners report, and our advancement of that Plan to referendum (Regulation 17A), and 

     

            subject to a majority yes vote, our adoption of the Plan (Regulation 18A).

     

    The report proposed changes to the agreed procedures which, with appropriate checks in place, should ensure that the Council can be ‘better, smarter and swifter’ in the way it guides neighbourhood plans through these stages.

     

    In Babergh to date, 10 NPs have been through the examination process.  Of those, 5 have now been adopted and 5 are in the final stages of being modified prior to being made ready to go to referendum.

     

    In all cases, no objections were raised by either the District or Parish Council to implementing in full the examiners recommendations. That would suggest that our earlier and on-going engagement with these groups is working.

     

    Councillor Arthey hoped that the Council would agree that the proposed changes to how Regulation 17A and 18A stages were managed were both sensible and practical. 

     

    In simple terms, they would remove the need for Cabinet to specifically approve the progression of a neighbourhood plan to referendum and would simplify the process by which this Council adopts a Neighbourhood Plan where it has received a majority yes vote.

     

    Cllr Arthey MOVED the recommendations in the report which Councillor Busby SECONDED.

     

    It was RESOLVED: -

     

    1.1          That the procedure for automatically taking a post-examination Neighbourhood Plan to Cabinet seeking approval to proceed to Referendum be changed. The proposal would automatically allow a Plan to proceed to referendum where the parish and district council have agreed to implement any required modifications. Where there are other considerations, a report will still be presented to Cabinet. The revised procedures would allow prompt publication of a decision notice, reduced administrative work, and ensure closer compliance with the relevant regulations.

    That the procedure that requires taking a post-Referendum Neighbourhood Plan with a majority ‘yes’ vote to Council seeking formal adoption be changed. The new proposal, which would be to obtain Chief Executive approval endorsed by the Cabinet Members for Planning, would enable a Neighbourhood Plan agreed at Referendum to be formally adopted quickly, efficiently, and within the eight-week statutory time limit.

    Recorded Vote
    TitleTypeRecorded Vote textResult
    To agree recommendations 3.1 and 3.2 as detailed in report BC/21/18 Ad-Hoc Carried
  • View Recorded Vote for this item