There were no declarations made by Councillors.

It was RESOLVED:

That the minutes of the meeting held on the 4 April 2022 be confirmed and signed as a true record.

There were no petitions received.

There were no questions received from Councillors.

There were no matters referred by the Overview and Scrutiny or Joint Audit and Standards Committees.

The latest version of the Forthcoming Decisions List can be viewed on the following link:

Forthcoming Decisions List » Mid Suffolk

There were no comments on the Forthcoming Decisions List.

Cabinet Member for Planning

It was RESOLVED: -       

1.1      To respond to the consultation.

1.2      That the Assistant Director for Planning and Building Control, in collaboration with the Cabinet Member for Planning and the Leader of the Council, consider any proposed amendments to the suggested response and be authorised to make amendments before submitting a response to the Government.

REASON FOR DECISION

To ensure the comments of the councils are set out for consideration by National Grid in the further stages of the project.

Alternative Options Considered and Rejected:

1.1           To respond to the consultation with the response as set out in appendix a.

1.2          To respond to the consultation with proposed amendments to the responses set out in appendix a.

1.3          To not respond to the consultation.

Any Declarations of Interests Declared:None

Any Dispensation Granted:None

7.1          The Chair, Councillor Morley invited the Cabinet Member for Planning to introduce the report.

7.2           Councillor Burn provided an overview of the report and proposed the recommendations, as detailed in the report, which was seconded by Councillor Fleming.

7.3          Councillor Morley advised Cabinet that she had invited Ward Members to present their responses to the National Grid Consultation at the meeting. Written responses from Councillors Pratt, Eburne, Norris and Warboys were tabled.

7.4          The Chair invited Councillors Mellen, Warboys, Field, Welham and Stringer to present their responses to the National Grid Consultation.

7.5          All responses would be published on the website as supplement papers and forwarded to the Assistant Director – Planning and Building Control, be taken into consideration for the Council’s response to the Consultation.

7.6          In response to a question from other Members attending the meeting, the Assistant Director – Planning and Building Control confirmed that an expert could be used to evaluate the proposals.

7.7          The Chair proposed an amendment: ‘and the Leader of the Council’ be included in recommendation 2 of the report.

7.8          This was put to the proposer Councillor Burn and the seconder Councillor Fleming, who both agreed to the amendment.

7.9          Members debated the issues in the report including that information should also have been provided on the financial reasoning that led the National Grid decision for an onshore system,  that devaluation of the landscape and property values had not been considered nor the impact on tourism, and that tower types and any options had not been disclosed during the consultation. Further, that visual impact should be included under the landscape title, and that a summary key point should be provided at the end of the representation.

7.10       During the debate Councillor Fleming thanked local residents for their interest and input at parish council meetings. She supported the objection and highlighted that a public consultation had not taken place on whether the development would be onshore or offshore.

7.11       Councillor Gould stated that the residents’ concerns were across the District and outside of the prosed corridor of the power line installations and that the Council had to show leadership and provide a strong response to the Consultation. 

7.12       Councillor Burn stated that he was happy to see a consensus of opinion across the council.

By a unanimous vote.

It was RESOLVED: -       

1.1           To respond to the consultation.

1.2           That the Assistant Director for Planning and Building Control, in collaboration with the Cabinet Member for Planning and the Leader of the Council, consider any proposed amendments to the suggested response and be authorised to make amendments before submitting a response to the Government.

REASON FOR DECISION

To ensure the comments of the councils are set out for consideration by National Grid in the further stages of the project.

Cabinet Member for Wellbeing

It was RESOLVED: -

1.1          That Cabinet agreed the 5 Point Plan attached at Appendix One.

1.2          That delegation to the Assistant Director for Communities & Wellbeing in consultation with the Cabinet Member for Wellbeing to keep this Plan under review and to update this in response to emerging need be approved.

REASON FOR DECISION

Provides assurance and confidence, ensuring that well established systems intra-connect to respond to the emerging needs of people through effective co-ordination and service delivery. The plan includes a range of measures that focus on providing advice and support, maintaining people’s good health, building on the investments the Council have already made since the launch of its respective Communities and Wellbeing strategies and bringing forward an initial suite of interventions that will help the Council improve as a system long term, including the appointment of a Cost-of-Living Co-ordinator.

Alternative Options Considered and Rejected:

2.1   To rely on just Government support and co-ordinate that activity and hope people can find their own solutions.

2.2   To pull together a bespoke plan that will provide residents and our workforce with assurance and confidence that they are not alone and that the District Council will utilise all levers available to connect systems to support people with advice and support on the cost of living issues. Alongside this, recognising that key to any recovery related to the emerging crisis is to maintain wellbeing under the principles of prevention, empowerment, self-enablement and activities that build community resilience, so that people at a locality level can support each other too.

Any Declarations of Interests Declared: None

Any Dispensation Granted: None

8.1           The Chair, Councillor Morley invited the Cabinet Member for Health and Wellbeing, Councillor Richardson to introduce the report.

8.2           Councillor Richardson provided an overview of the report and Action Plan. 

8.3           Councillor Richardson proposed the recommendation in the report, which was seconded by Councillor Flatman.

8.4           In response to questions from other Members attending the meeting, the Cabinet Member for Health and Wellbeing stated that overall costs would be brought together in a cohesive way for projects which the Council had already committed to, and that whilst the Communities Team had expanded in recent months, it was not yet clear if additional staff was required for the implementations of the Action plan. In terms of KPIs and performance measures, some of these would be included in the Delivery Plan, whilst others were measured by Suffolk County Council.

8.5           Councillor Richardson added a further response to a question regarding rural residents accessing the services provided in the Action Plan and advised that this would be a targeted approach in cooperation with the Communities team.

8.6           Councillor Richardson continued to respond to questions from other Members attending the meeting and clarified that there were areas of action, which would be added as the Action Plan developed.

8.7           During the debate Councillor Flatman stated that there were a lot of community activities being undertaken via the Locality Officers with community groups. Leisure providers were also looking at providing their services in rural settings if possible. However, it was important to identify what was required in the Community and to continue to support community spirit.

8.8           The Chair thanked the Assistant Director – Communities and Wellbeing for his time working for the Council.

By a unanimous vote.

It was RESOLVED: -

1.1         That Cabinet agreed the 5 Point Plan attached at Appendix One.

1.2         That delegation to the Assistant Director for Communities & Wellbeing in consultation with the Cabinet Member for Wellbeing to keep this Plan under review and to update this in response to emerging need.

REASON FOR DECISION

Provides assurance and confidence, ensuring that well established systems intra-connect to respond to the emerging needs of people through effective co-ordination and service delivery. The plan includes a range of measures that focus on providing advice and support, maintaining people’s good health, building on the investments the Council have already made since the launch of its respective Communities and Wellbeing strategies and bringing forward an initial suite of interventions that will help the Council improve as a system long term, including the appointment of a Cost-of-Living Co-ordinator.

Cabinet Member for Housing

Cabinet Member for Communities

It was RESOLVED: -

That Cabinet considered the report from Joint Overview and Scrutiny and agreed their response to the recommendations in the report as detailed in paragraph 4, in line with the Council’s response to the Cost of Living Crisis and the five point plan that will look at a better system of connectivity between partners, including the LCA, the Council and system wide partners.

REASON FOR DECISION

To respond to the recommendations in the report from the Joint Overview and Scrutiny Committee.

Alternative Options Considered and Rejected:

 Joint Overview and Scrutiny Committee on 20^th September 2021

1.1          Given the emerging cost of living crisis and the impact on residents, to create a jointly funded post to improve system connectivity between Citizens Advice Bureau, Mid Suffolk District Council and wider partners.

1.2          To not create a jointly funded post to improve joined up working between Citizens Advice Bureau and Mid Suffolk Council and partners, instead rely on existing relationships and work together effectively through the mechanisms that are already in place.

1.3          To reject the option of a dedicated officer being appointed to solely support and improve the existing working relationship between Stowmarket LCA and Mid Suffolk’s Housing Service but instead support the Council’s proposed Cost of Living 5 Point Plan and support the appointment of a Cost of Living Co-ordinator to maximise partnership working and established systems to provide targeted support in localities where there is a particular trend and need, implementing a ‘family first approach’.

Joint Overview and Scrutiny Committee on 20^th December 2021

1.4          To accept or reject recommendations that:

·       The Councils take a single view of debt and implement an integrated system for dealing with housing rent, and council tax debt.

·       Contact be made to foodbanks with a request that their clients are referred to the LCA for advice on nutrition and budgeting and cookery skills classes.

·       Remote virtual operation capability for LCA and other bodies should be provided on an accelerated programme as a matter of urgency, defining locations, IT equipment and applications, training and connectivity

1.5          The councils proposed Cost of Living 5 Point Plan and appointment of a dedicated Cost of Living Co-ordinator will address each of the recommendations above and  will work to maximise partnership working and established systems to provide targeted support in localities where there is a particular trend and need.

1.6          To accept or reject the recommendation that the 3-year rolling funding arrangement in place for Mid Suffolk CA be subject to indexation on an annual review basis.

Any Declarations of Interests Declared: None

Any Dispensation Granted: None

9.1         The Chair invited the Cabinet Member for Communities, Councillor Flatman and the Cabinet Member for Housing, Councillor Hadingham to introduce the report.

9.2         Councillor Hadingham and Councillor Flatman provided their introductions to the report.

9.3     Councillor Hadingham proposed the recommendations in the report which was seconded by Councillor Flatman.

9.4     In response to questions from other Members attending the meeting, the Cabinet Members for Communities and Housing and Officers assured Members that the recommendations from the Overview and Scrutiny Committee had been taken into consideration. They detailed how the Council had strong working links with the Local Citizen Advice (LCA) and that regular meetings were held with the LCA.  Much of the information included in the Action Plan was based on information received from the LCA and work was being undertaken to continue to strengthen the relationship with LCA.  Work was also ongoing with Suffolk County Council in relation to food banks and once this had been evaluated, action would  be taken to address any identified issues. Babergh District Council continued to provide funding to LCA on a year on year rolling basis.

9.5         Members were also advised that the LCA provided quarterly updates directly to Members’ email inboxes.

By a unanimous vote

It was RESOLVED: -

That Cabinet considers the report from Joint Overview and Scrutiny and agrees their response to the recommendations in the report as detailed in paragraph 4, in line with the Council’s response to the Cost of Living Crisis and the five point plan that will look at a better system of connectivity between partners, including the LCA, the Council and system wide partners.

REASON FOR DECISION

To respond to the recommendations in the report from the Joint Overview and Scrutiny Committee.

Cabinet Member for Economic Growth

Cabinet Member for Health and Wellbeing

It was RESOLVED: -

1.1           That Cabinet considered and approved the Masterplan (appendix a), and initial Business case (appendix b - restricted) for the proposed scheme which includes an indicative cost plan and funding strategy.

1.2          That cabinet noted the work to date on the partnership strategy (appendix e - restricted) and future management models (appendix d – restricted) for the new hub in detailed.

1.3          That Cabinet endorsed the recommendation to Council for further funding to complete the scheme to detailed design stage and submission of a planning application, next management modelling and a 2-year partnership co-ordinator to fully maximise current and future partnership working and collaboration across the site outlined in 6.4

REASON FOR DECISION

This development provides a unique opportunity to create a holistic wellbeing hub in Stowmarket which brings together on one site, education, sport, leisure and health facilities and users. The proposal meets many Council, local partnership and government outcomes but also creates the conditions to stimulate some new and exciting partnerships which enhance opportunities for local communities and provides a regionally significant centre in the town.

Alternative Options Considered and Rejected:

2.1     Several options for the scheme were considered with the partners, other landowners and key stakeholders, and the option presented in this report provides for the optimum use of the land available to secure maximum wellbeing outcomes.

2.2     An initial option to just provide additional facilities on the High school site was considered but this does not create the best conditions for maximising partnership and collaboration across all stakeholders. 

Any Declarations of Interests Declared: None

Any Dispensation Granted: None

10.1   The Chair, Councillor Morley invited the Cabinet Member for Health and Wellbeing, Councillor Richardson to introduce the report.

10.2   Councillor Richardson introduced the report and proposed the recommendations as detailed in the report, which was seconded by Councillor Flatman.

10.3 In response to questions from other Members attending the meeting, the Cabinet Members for Health and Wellbeing stated that in addition to Community Infrastructure Levy funding (CIL) other potential funding options across Suffolk were being explored.

10.4 The Chair advised Members that the meeting would go into closed session to consider the confidential appendices before the debate.

10.5 The meeting went into closed session.

10.6 The motion to re-admit the public was unanimous and the recommendations were put to Members for voting.

By a unanimous vote

It was RESOLVED: -

1.1     That Cabinet considers and approve the Masterplan (appendix a), and initial Business case (appendix b - restricted) for the proposed scheme which includes an indicative cost plan and funding strategy

1.2     That cabinet notes the work to date on the partnership strategy (appendix e - restricted) and future management models (appendix d – restricted) for the new hub in detailed.

1.3     That Cabinet endorses the recommendation to Council for further funding to complete the scheme to detailed design stage and submission of a planning application, next management modelling and a 2-year partnership co-ordinator to fully maximise current and future partnership working and collaboration across the site outlined in 6.4

REASON FOR DECISION

This development provides a unique opportunity to create a holistic wellbeing hub in Stowmarket which brings together on one site, education, sport, leisure and health facilities and users. The proposal meets many Council, local partnership and government outcomes but also creates the conditions to stimulate some new and exciting partnerships which enhance opportunities for local communities and provides a regionally significant centre in the town.

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 item, it is likely that there would be the disclosure to them of exempt information as indicated against the item.  The author of the report proposed to be considered in Part 2 of the Agenda is satisfied that the public interest in maintaining the exemption outweighs the public interest in disclosing the information.

Councillor Richardson proposed that the meeting went into closed session, which was seconded by Councillor Whitehead.

By a unanimous vote.

It was RESOLVED:

That 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 item, it is likely that there would be the disclosure to them of exempt information as indicated against the item be approved.