Agenda and minutes

The public open forum will commence at 2.00 p.m. and the following formal business of the Council will commence at 2.30 p.m. or whenever the public open forum ends, if earlier.

There was one question submitted to the Leader of the Council by Mr Peter Bell:

“Would the Leader of the Council commit to examining how the Council could better support the public to be involved in the democratic processes and procedures of the Council with particular emphasis on encouraging those with disabilities, whether hidden or visible, and members of the public from minority groups, become more involved in the opportunities open to the public to participate, and to consider whether a specific budget allocation and staffing resource ought to be identified for this work?”

Mr Bell went onto highlight areas where he felt processes had not been followed by the Council, or where he had identified areas of concern:

·       Information had been refused on street naming and numbering following a Freedom of Information request.

·       Information had been refused on highways maintenance following a Freedom of Information request

·       Extensions to Public Space Protection Orders had not been made legally.

·       A consultation on the Animal Welfare Licensing Policy had received a number of responses as part of public consultation which had not resulted in any changes to the Policy when put before the relevant Committee

·       There had been a delay in the publication of minutes of a UK Shared Prosperity Fund Board meeting.

·       An item on Cyber Security had been noted in open session at a meeting of an Overview and Scrutiny Committee, even though the report was exempt from publication and the press and public were not excluded from the meeting

·       The quality of Equality Impact Assessments accompanying reports

·       Access to the Council Chamber for wheelchair users.

In responding, the Leader of the Council welcomed the conversation on openness and transparency as it had been a topic he had led on since becoming a Councillor. A welcome addition to the Council in recent years had been the installation of the webcasting system which allowed for public meetings to be broadcasted on the internet; however this system was restricted to the Council Chamber, so any meetings outside of that room could not be recorded in the same way.

Informal Cabinet meetings were being held around the District, in order to reach as many different parts of the area as possible and to enable members of the public to have easier access to their elected members.

The Council should be following good practice in terms of access for those with disabilities. In addition, equality and inclusivity were core values of the Council; whilst alternative means of communicating with the Council existed, more could be done to reach those from different cultures, ages and backgrounds.

There was more information that could be put into the public domain whilst being mindful of obligations to protect individuals and commercially sensitive information. The Leader reminded those watching the meeting live that Ward Councillors were a useful first port of call for members of the public if further information was required on any topic within the Council’s remit.

A motion without notice was proposed requesting that the Governance  ...  view the full minutes text for item 99.

Apologies for absence were received from:

Councillor Steven Cunnington

Councillor James Denniston

Councillor Bridget Ley

Councillor Nikki Manterfield

Minutes attached from:

11 January 2024 - 1pm (Extraordinary)

11 January 2024 - 2:30pm (Extraordinary)

25 January 2024

The minutes of the extraordinary meetings held on 11 January 2024 at 1pm, and 2:30pm were proposed, seconded and agreed as correct records.

The minutes of the ordinary meeting held on 25 January 2024 were proposed, seconded and agreed as a correct record.

To include any announcements from the Chairman, Leader of the Council, individual Cabinet Members or the Head of Paid Service.

The following announcements were made:

Chairman

The Chairman reminded everyone present of the Chairman’s Civic Dinner which was taking place on 22 March 2024.

Cabinet Member for Planning and Housing

The Cabinet Member announced the 8-week consultation period to help shape the future of the District through the Local Plan. The Local Plan provided a vision for sustainable development across the District. The current Local Plan had been adopted four years ago.

An update on employment land, and gypsy and traveller accommodation would be included with the Local Plan.

The new Local Plan was set to run until 2041.

Leader of the Council

The Leader firstly announced a change to the allocation of Cabinet roles. The Leader was to take on responsibility for Human Resources from the Cabinet Member for People and Communities. The other change would be that the Cabinet Member for Leisure and Culture would assume responsibility for Markets; this had previously been within the remit of the Leader.

The second announcement from the Leader was on the Deepings Leisure Centre. The Leader had received a letter from the Leader of Lincolnshire County Council offering South Kesteven District Council (SKDC) the freehold of the leisure centre. Also on this subject, the Deepings School and the Anthem Trust were yet to reach an agreement with the Deepings Community Interest Company. Still to be formulated was permission from the Department for Education to proceed in full, alongside a solid business plan. The Leader had drafted a letter to be sent to the Leader of Lincolnshire County Council and had also spoken to Sir John Hayes MP about a way forward for the project with the Department for Education. There was a further meeting on 1 March 2024 to discuss these matters in more detail. The Leader stressed that all groups involved wanted to find a solution to move the project forward.

Thirdly, the Leader spoke on the subject of waste collections in relation to the new roll out of separate paper and card collections. The Leader apologised to those who had experienced issues, but had engaged with the new scheme and read the relevant instructions, whilst urging all residents to adhere to the new way of recycling paper and card. Disappointment was expressed with those who had taken out their frustrations with waste staff and Council officers who were trying to make the new scheme work.

Finally, congratulations were offered to Grantham-born swimmer Freya Colbert who was crowned the new Women’s World Champion in the 400 metre medley at the World Aquatics Championships in Doha.

Cabinet Member for Environment and Waste (Councillor Rhys Baker)

The Cabinet Member outlined that since 2018 SKDC had worked with the Lincolnshire Waste Partnership (LWP) to implement twin stream recycling, building on previous legislation. New obligations had been placed on waste collection in order to ensure greater consistency.

Last week around 7,000 bins were rejected as the waste within was contaminated, which was around 20-25% of bins collected on those days. Call handling staff  ...  view the full minutes text for item 103.

Following introduction at Full Council on 23 November 2023, Environment Overview and Scrutiny Committee considered the motion on 12 December 2023 to support the Climate and Ecology Bill.

Members considered a recommendation from the Environment Overview and Scrutiny Committee from 12 December 2023 to support the Climate and Ecology Bill.

In moving a proposal in support of the Climate and Ecology Bill, the Chairman of the Environment Overview and Scrutiny Committee outlined that strong international commitment was required to halt and reverse ecological decline. There was evidence to suggest that the resolutions from the Paris UN Climate Change Conference did not go far enough.

It was argued that catastrophic environmental events across the globe coupled with population growth had had a disastrous effect on the environment. SKDC could play its part locally with its local agenda. Technology needed to constantly adapt to meet the needs of the future. MP’s needed to raise SKDC’s concerns at a national level.

The proposal was seconded.

The following points were highlighted during debate:

·       Since 1970 the District’s local species had been depleted. The Bill was a welcome step forward in addressing issues such as this.

·       The Bill was calling on the UK government to do more. The UK did not have the biggest carbon footprint globally, but that did not mean that it could not lead by example.

·       The Bill had been written by climate scientists and had cross-party support. Support had been received from many Councils across the country.

·       A joined up environmental plan would aid in the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions. It would also explore a move to a green economy whilst working alongside developing countries.

·       The Climate and Ecology Bill no longer existed as it had not been carried over into the new session of Parliament. However, it was due to be re-introduced in the coming weeks.

·       The decision to recommend the Climate and Ecology Bill to Full Council from the Environment Overview and Scrutiny Committee was not a unanimous one.

·       The support of this Bill would be an extra cost on the SKDC budget, however there were reports of the total cost to the global economy over the next 50 years being well in excess of £150 trillion. No public consultation on this had taken place to date.

·       The UK Environment Bill 2021 provided a number of these measures already.

·       The proposed National Assembly to be set up for ecological issues would be a collaborative group to lobby Parliament, which was the arena where MPs could lobby the changing of laws.

The original motion in support of the Climate and Ecology Bill moved by the Chairman of the Environment Overview and Scrutiny Committee was amended to make it clear that the move as in support of the reinstatement of the Bill; this amendment had been accepted by the original mover and seconder of the motion.

Therefore, following a vote, it was AGREED:

DECISION

That Full Council write to all MPs within South Kesteven to urge the reinstatement of the Climate and Ecology Bill to the Parliamentary timetable before the next General Election.

Note:  Councillor Tim Harrison asked that his vote against the motion be recorded.

Members considered the ‘making’ of the Corby Glen Neighbourhood Plan as part of the South Kesteven Development Plan. There was referendum held on 18 January 2024 which supported the making of the Neighbourhood Plan.

This would be the sixteenth Neighbourhood Plan made within South Kesteven.

The recommendations in the report were moved, seconded, and following a vote it was AGREED:

DECISION

That Full Council:

1.    ‘Makes’ (approves) the Corby Glen Neighbourhood Plan (referendum version) to become part of South Kesteven District Council’s ‘Statutory Development Plan’, and a material consideration for determining planning applications in the Corby Glen Neighbourhood Area.

2.    Delegates authority to the Assistant Director of Planning & Growth to make minor ‘non-material’ changes to the Corby Glen Neighbourhood Plan as necessary, and exercise all Council functions and responsibilities in relation to making the Corby Glen Neighbourhood Plan.

The Council is required to set a balanced budget and agree the level of Council Tax for 2024/25 and this report contains a summary of the proposals that have been considered for inclusion. The proposals were considered and scrutinised in detail by the Budget Joint Overview and Scrutiny Committee on 15 January 2024.  The budget proposals were considered by Cabinet on 18 January and 6 February 2024 and the final proposals are included in this report.

Members considered the Budget Proposals for 2024/2025.

In moving the Budget proposals, the Leader of the Council ran through a presentation to accompany the Budget, which was appended to these minutes. The following points were highlighted:

·       The Tunstall software bid within the Housing Revenue Account (HRA) referred to ‘opening mechanisms’ within sheltered housing.

·       The highest amount of funding within the HRA was for Voids refurbishments.

·       Major projects were listed within the General Fund (GF). These included new projects in the Cattle Market, Stamford, and also the £1 million earmarked for LED street lighting. Replacing existing street lighting would pay for itself within less than four years.

·       Over £13 million was budgeted within the HRA for new builds and energy efficiency works. The gap between housing stock sales and purchases was reducing, meaning that the level of loss of Council housing stocks would narrow in years to come.

·       The administration had committed to improving the Earlesfield Community Centre.

·       Works in progress included improvements to Grantham using the Future High Streets Fund (FHSF). The FHSF gave the opportunity to make improvements to Grantham Marketplace.

·       Investigations into battery recycling were still ongoing.

·       In March a new bus service was being introduced between Stamford and Grantham by Centrebus.

·       There were high levels of compliance seen across the housing stock in terms of gas, electricity, legionella, damp and mould, asbestos, fire risk, lift inspections, and smoke.

·       The consultation on the 3% Council Tax rise was conducted through a database compiled through the SK Today publication.

The Budget proposals were seconded.

An amendment to the Budget proposals was moved and seconded which aimed:

‘To create a reserve of £60,000 for clearing A1 verge sides – the “Clean the A1 Reserve”. This is to be transferred from the Local Priorities Reserve.’

Debate on the amendment ensued, and the following points were highlighted:

·       £60,000 may well be sufficient to clear outstanding litter on the stretch of the A1 in South Kesteven, but unfortunately the problem would still return the following day when new traffic flowed through the area. A safe and affordable mechanism needed to be used to tackle this issue.

·       This was an issue that the previous administration had looked into, through asking officers to consider what specialist companies were available to undertake the work.

·       17 SKDC members with wards adjacent to the A1 were contacted about the issue of littering, and 8 of them responded. A number of the responders were Independents, with a lower number responding from the SK Coalition Group.

·       The issue of littering on the South Kesteven stretch of the A1 was debated, and a way forward identified, at Environment Overview and Scrutiny held on 12 December 2023.

·       A previous report into debris on the verges had suggested that a figure north of £200,000 would be required to clear them. However, the figure of £60,000 would enable the Council to start a clearance. The figure of £60,000 was identified at the aforementioned Environment Overview and Scrutiny Committee. The instructions given to officers had  ...  view the full minutes text for item 106.

To set the level of Council Tax for 2024/25 in accordance with relevant statutory requirements.

Members considered setting the level of Council Tax for 2024/2025 in accordance with the relevant statutory requirements.

Note:  Councillors Phil Gadd, Chris Noon, Ian Selby and Emma Baker left the meeting.

Usually the Council Tax level would be set under the same item as the Budget, but problems could occur when a Budget was not set on the day of Council. The Council was duty bound to set Council Tax levels as the pre-cepting authority.

The Council Tax level needed to be set after the Budget in this instance because the Council Tax resolution was underpinned by Council Tax levels. The Council was required to set a Council Tax Base, a Council Tax requirement and a parish precept which were all consistent with the Council Tax resolution.

The whole Budget was predicated on raising income through Council Tax.

An amendment to lower the Council Tax increase from 2.99% to 2.5%, resulting in a reduction of £42,000 being collected was rejected using Budget and Policy Framework Procedure Rule 4.2 as the Chief Finance Officer had not had five working days with which to consider the proposal.

Note:  The meeting was extended by 15 minutes as the original meeting extension was about to expire.

Having been moved and seconded, a recorded vote was then taken on the Council Tax resolution:

For:                             Councillors Rhys Baker, Ashley Baxter, Harrish Bisnauthsing, Pam Byrd, Richard Cleaver, Phil Dilks, Patsy Ellis, Paul Fellows, Tim Harrison, Philip Knowles, Penny Milnes, Virginia Moran, Charmaine Morgan, Habib Rahman, Rhea Rayside, Max Sawyer, Rob Shorrock, Vanessa Smith, Lee Steptoe, Paul Stokes, Elvis Stooke, Sarah Trotter, Murray Turner, Jane Wood, Paul Wood (25).

Against:                     Councillors Matt Bailey, David Bellamy, Pam Bosworth, Richard Dixon-Warren, Ben Green, Graham Jeal, Gareth Knight, Robert Leadenham, Paul Martin, Nick Robins, Susan Sandall, Peter Stephens, Ian Stokes, Mark Whittington, Sue Woolley (15).

Abstain:                     Councillors Helen Crawford, Gloria Johnson, Jane Kingman, Zoe Lane, Penny Robins (5).

DECISION:

That Full Council:

1.    Sets a Council Tax level of £183.89 for 2024/2025 (Band D property).

2.    Approves the Council Tax Resolution as set out in Appendix A of the report.

To consider a draft Terms of Reference for a Community Governance Review for the parish of Little Ponton and Stroxton.

Members considered a draft Terms of Reference for a Community Governance Review for the parish of Little Ponton and Stroxton.

The meeting was extended with the consent of the members in the Council Chamber with the proviso that the item be put straight to a vote (the question now be put), having been moved and seconded.

Following a vote, it was AGREED:

DECISION:

That Full Council:

1.    Approves the Terms of Reference for the Community Governance Review for the parish of Little Ponton and Stroxton.

2.    Delegates authority to the Monitoring Officer, in consultation with the Chairman of the Community Governance Review Working Group, Political Group Leaders and the Cabinet Member for Corporate Governance and Licensing, to make any necessary amendments to the Terms of Reference document which may be required during the period of the review.

To provide Full Council with an update on changes to the Council’s political proportionality and the allocation of committee seats as a result of changes in individual Members’ political affiliation.

The report also seeks approval to formally confirm the appointment of Councillor Ashley Baxter as Leader of the Council to represent South Kesteven District Council on the Local Government Association and East Midlands Councils.

The Appointments to Outside Bodies and Committees report was not considered due to time constraints and may be heard at the next meeting of Full Council.

A 45-minute period in which members may ask questions of the Leader, Cabinet Members, the Chairmen and Vice-Chairmen of the Overview and Scrutiny Committees and opposition group leaders excluding the Chairman and Vice-Chairman of the Planning Committee, Licensing and Alcohol, Entertainment and Late Night Refreshment Licensing Committees and Governance and Audit Committee.

Members’ Open Questions were not considered due to time constraints.

The UK's current voting system (known as First Past the Post, FPTP) originated when land-owning aristocrats dominated parliament and voting was restricted to property-owning men.

Currently in Europe, only the UK and authoritarian Belarus still use archaic single-round FPTP for general elections. Internationally, Proportional Representation (PR) is used to elect the parliaments of more than 80 countries. These countries tend to be more equal, freer and greener.

PR ensures all votes count, have equal value, and that seats won match votes cast. Under PR, MPs and Parliaments better reflect the age, gender and protected characteristics of both local communities and of the nation.

MPs better reflecting the communities they represent in turn leads to improved decision-making, wider participation and increased levels of ownership of decisions taken.

PR would also end minority rule. In 2019, 43.6% of the vote produced a government with   56.2% of the seats and 100% of the power. Fair, proportional votes also prevent ‘wrong winner’ elections such as occurred in 1951 and February 1974.

The current FPTP system leads to some of the electorate questioning the point of voting since they do not feel their views are represented. This contributes to apathy and subsequent low turnout in elections. Engaging with the electorate is vital for a functioning democracy.

PR is the national policy of the Labour Party, Liberal Democrats, Green Party, SNP, Plaid Cymru, Reform UK and Women’s Equality Party along with a host of Trade Unions and pro-democracy organisations. 31 District, Borough, City and County Councils have already passed motions asking for Proportional Representation to be used in General Elections.

PR is already used to elect the parliaments and assemblies of Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland. So why not Westminster?

South Kesteven District Council therefore resolves to write to H.M. Government calling for a change in our outdated electoral laws and to enable Proportional Representation to be used for UK general elections.

Councillor Vanessa Smith’s motion was not considered due to time constraints and may be heard at the next ordinary meeting of Full Council.

This Council restates and reaffirms its profound concerns regarding the unsustainable proliferation of solar farm developments in South Kesteven.

South Kesteven District Council hereby resolves to:

1. Acknowledge the adverse impact of clustering solar farm developments around substations, leading to catastrophic consequences for the landscape, biodiversity and local amenities. Solar farms classed as Nationally Significant Infrastructure Projects (NSIPs), numbering 15 in the Greater Lincolnshire area alone, will contribute to the industrialisation and transformation of open countryside, negatively affecting current and potential residents alike.

2. Affirm that land classified as Best and Most Versatile (BMV) should not repurposed for the development of solar farms. Considering the limited efficiency of solar energy (10-12%), due to the UK’s limited sunlight, the Council regards it as a poor investment compromising food security and escalating food imports and costs, resulting in questionable net carbon savings.

3. Promote superior alternatives to solar development on farmland, endorsing the principles set out by the Solar Campaign Alliance. The Council supports the smarter deployment of solar on domestic and industrial buildings and recommend this be added to the local plan.

4. Express concern about international labour practices, union rights and use of forced labour, as well as the adverse environmental impact in the supply chain of solar panels, particularly in NSIP developments.

This motion underscores our steadfast commitment to safeguarding food supply, preserving the landscape, our heritage and environment, while advocating for responsible and sustainable development within South Kesteven, aligning with our shared goal of achieving net zero carbon reduction targets.

In support of Lincolnshire County Council and North Kesteven District Council, this council resolves to send a copy of this motion to the Minister of Energy Security and Net Zero. 

Councillor Sue Woolley’s motion was not considered due to time constraints and may be heard at the next ordinary meeting of Full Council.

The meeting closed at 5:47pm.