Agenda and minutes

Link to further information in the Council’s Constitution

There were no declarations of interest made.

To receive as a correct record the minutes of the Meeting of the Council held on Thursday, 7 December 2023.

Councillor J Walker asked for an amendment to be made to the minutes. Under minute number 45, she asked for the word ‘regressive’ to be changed to ‘progressive’.

Accepting this change, the minutes of the meeting held on Thursday, 7 December 2023, were approved as a correct record and signed by the Mayor.

The Mayor informed Council that she had been very busy in the run up to Christmas attending many different places of worship for festive services.  She mentioned her very enjoyable afternoon talking to past councillor Michael Cox who was being interviewed as part of the preparations for the Council’s Golden Jubilee celebrations. The Mayor regrettably informed Council that she had been unable to attend the service of celebration in honour of outgoing Lord Lieutenant Sir John Peace, but she had extended the gratitude of the Council for his services and wished him well in his retirement.

The Leader announced that the East Midlands Combined County Mayoral Authority had been accepted by Parliament and was now a legal entity, with a Shadow Cabinet in operation until the first Mayoral Elections on 2 May 2024. He advised that he had also been meeting with Network Rail, which was in the process of finalising its plans for electrification of routes through Rushcliffe and would shortly be undertaking community engagement primarily around Sutton Bonington and Normanton on Soar.

There were no Chief Executive announcements.

To answer questions submitted by Citizens on the Council or its services.

No citizens’ questions were received for this meeting.

The report of the Director – Finance and Corporate Services is attached.

The Leader and Cabinet Portfolio Holder for Strategic and Borough-wide Leadership, Councillor Clarke presented the report of the Director – Finance and Corporate Services outlining the Council’s Budget and Financial Strategy for 2024/25.

The Leader informed Council that he had great pleasure in presenting the Budget and Financial Strategy for 2024/25 and thanked the Director of Finance and Corporate Services and the Finance Team for their hard work throughout the last year.  He stated that the financial position of the Council was strong and that the budget presented was legal, balanced and valid.  The Leader recognised that times remained challenging and went on to say that several councils nationally had already issued s114 notices, with many more warning that significant change was needed to avoid such a position.

The Leader advised Council that the budget presented resourced the delivery of the new Corporate Strategy as well as the statutory and discretionary services residents in the Borough valued, supported businesses and climate reduction projects as well as financing improvements to a number of leisure centres and play areas.  Despite this, Council Tax remained in the lowest quartile nationally presenting excellent value for money, and where increases in specific fees and charges had been made that was to directly cover increases in costs or to develop services. The Leader stated that it was a common misconception that Rushcliffe was a wealthy Borough with no social deprivation and informed Council of additional Government funding received recently to help tackle a growing homelessness problem in the Borough. 

The Leader informed Council that he had been lobbying the Government for a multi-year settlement, as had the Local Government Association (LGA) and the District Councils’ Network, to provide greater certainty and stability.  Efforts had also been extended to decide the future of the New Homes Bonus and complete the Fairer Funding Review; however, the Council had to work with what it currently had.

The Leader advised that external borrowing would only be contemplated when absolutely necessary, given the associated interest payments.  He referenced Rushcliffe Oaks, Bingham Arena and the Enterprise Centre as worthwhile investments the Council had recently made to benefit residentsand stated that this growth was funded through the Council’s prudent management of its income and reserves. It was noted that the budget presented for approval contained a Capital Investment portfolio worth £24.8m over the next five years.

In summing up the Leader informed Council of an additional £128k received from central Government recently, of which £100k had been allocated for climate change activities and £28k for additional support for victims of the recent flooding.  There was also a new requirement to produce a Productivity Plan that would be based on the Council’s existing Transformation and Efficiency Programme. The Leader went on to conclude that the budget as presented was robust, deliverable and affordable, despite the challenging environment in which the Council was operating and recommended all Councillors to vote for its adoption.

Councillor Virdi seconded the recommendation and reserved the right to speak.  ...  view the full minutes text for item 56.

The report of the Director – Finance and Corporate Services is attached.

It was proposed by Councillor Clarke and RESOLVED that the meeting be extended and would finish no later than 10.30pm.

The Leader and Cabinet Portfolio Holder for Strategic and Borough-wide Leadership, Councillor Clarke presented the report of the Director – Finance and Corporate Services outlining the Council’s position on Council Tax for the year 2024/25.

The Leader advised that this was a technical process to set the Council Tax and moved the recommendation as detailed in the report.

Councillor Virdi seconded the recommendation and reserved the right to speak.

Councillor Gowland stated that Rushcliffe took more Council Tax, despite the rate being lower and core spending power was also higher in Rushcliffe.  Central Grants continued to decline, and the Conservative Government had deliberately pushed taxes into Council Tax, which was regressive.  Rushcliffe was asking to take more money from its residents to put in the bank, and whilst understanding the importance of having reserves, Councillor Gowland stated that the Council had a guaranteed income from Council Tax. Councillor Gowland agreed that it was important not to be in debt; however, the Council was not reducing its debt, it was increasing its reserves and it was unclear what would be done with the additional money being raised.  This money should be used instead to reduce cuts to Disabled Facilities Grants, address climate change challenges or to build council houses.  Councillor Gowland concluded by advising that the Labour Group would be supporting the recommendation, as the Group wanted to spend the money sensibly in the near future.

Councillor Virdi referred to Council Tax take and agreed that Rushcliffe did have a slightly higher proportion; however, out of the neighbouring seven districts, Rushcliffe was mid-range and if Business Rates were included, Rushcliffe was at the bottom.  In respect of Levelling Up funding, Councillor Virdi advised that Rushcliffe also received very little compared to other neighbouring districts.

It was RESOLVED that the Council Tax Resolution for 2024/25 as detailed in Appendix A to the report be approved.

The report of the Monitoring Officer is attached.

The Leader and Cabinet Portfolio Holder for Strategic and Borough-wide Leadership, Councillor Clarke presented the report of the Monitoring Officer outlining proposed amendments to the Council’s Constitution.

The Leader explained that the amendments had been through the scrutiny process, considered by the Planning Committee Working Group before returning to the Governance Scrutiny Group, and referred Councillors to the Appendix to the report, which detailed them.

Councillor Edyvean seconded the recommendation and reserved the right to speak.

Councillor Calvert confirmed that he had been one of two Governance Scrutiny Group Members, together with Councillor Thomas, who had sat on the Working Group, which had considered amendments to Planning Committee arrangements.  Councillor Calvert referred to the positive amendments made by the Working Group, which had been reported back to and approved by the Governance Scrutiny Group in November 2023. Council was reminded that those amendments had been included in the report published for Full Council on 7 December 2023, which had subsequently been withdrawn without explanation. Councillor Calvert stated that no further information about proposed changes to the Constitution had been provided prior to publication of the report last week, and he hoped that if there had been any, they would have been reported to the Governance Scrutiny Group.  Having reviewed this report, Councillor Calvert confirmed that he could not find any significant changes and sought confirmation that none had been made.

Councillor Thomas echoed the concerns expressed by Councillor Calvert, advised that she had also not found any significant changes and welcomed the constructive process that had been undertaken for this review.

Councillor Edyvean confirmed that whilst there had been further discussion in response to questions raised in relation to ambiguity of language, there had not been any changes made to the original proposals.

It was RESOLVED that Council adopts the proposed revisions to the Constitution.

To receive Notices of Motion

a)               Councillor Calvert

Violence against women and girls (VAWG) remains far too high in our society. 

In Rushcliffe we are determined to change this.

This Council is a signatory to the Nottinghamshire Violence Against Women and Girls Strategy which has been developed in a multi-agency approach.

This Council will:

·          report progress on the implementation of the Action Plan of the Strategy back to the Corporate Overview Group within the 2024/25 municipal year; and

·          seek re-accreditation (as an employer) as a White Ribbon UK organisation within the same timeframe.

b)               Councillor Chewings

Rushcliffe Borough Council recognises with grave concern the challenging circumstances local authorities have faced as a direct consequence of reductions in council funding from central government since 2010. The Council further acknowledges the issuance of Section 114 notices by Northamptonshire County Council, Croydon Council, Slough Borough Council, Nottingham City Council, Thurrock Council, and Birmingham City Council, alongside warnings from numerous councils regarding their increasingly unsustainable budget shortfalls. In response to these financial pressures, Rushcliffe Borough Council has had to raise taxes and implement budget reductions.

Accordingly, Rushcliffe Borough Council resolves to:

1.  Formally communicate with Government to assert the necessity for adequate funding to local councils, ensuring the provision of services to our communities.

2. Advocate for the establishment of multi-year funding settlements, enabling local authorities to effectively plan for the future with greater certainty and stability.

The following notice of motion was proposed by Councillor Calvert and seconded by Councillor Inglis.

“Violence against women and girls (VAWG) remains far too high in our society.  In Rushcliffe we are determined to change this.

This Council is a signatory to the Nottinghamshire Violence Against Women and Girls Strategy which has been developed in a multi-agency approach.

This Council will:

• report progress on the implementation of the Action Plan of the Strategy back to the Corporate Overview Group within the 2024/25 municipal year; and
• seek re-accreditation (as an employer) as a White Ribbon UK organisation within the same timeframe.”

Councillor Calvert reminded Council that this motion had originally been brought to the meeting on 7 December 2023, and following a lengthy debate, at the suggestion of Councillor Richard Mallender, it had been agreed to take both the motion and amendment away and work cross-party to find a proposal that everyone could support.  The minutes of that meeting had detailed that all Councillors were in agreement with the sentiment of the motion but were anxious to get the wording right to ensure that the most effective action could be taken. 

Councillor Calvert advised that since then very positive discussions had taken place with Labour Group members, Councillor Inglis and officers, and he was now very pleased to move this new motion, which acknowledged that violence against women and girls remained far too prevalent.  The recently published Nottinghamshire Violence Against Women and Girls (VAWG) Strategy and Action Plan, developed by a range of partner organisations set out an ambitious but achievable programme, and it was important that Councillors would have the opportunity to monitor progress of the Action Plan through the Corporate Overview Group.  Councillor Calvert stated that it was important that all partner organisations regularly reviewed their internal practices, and with that in mind, the Council would seek reaccreditation as a White Ribbon UK organisation.

In seconding the motion, Councillor Inglis felt that everyone was in agreement, thanked Councillor Calvert and the Labour Group for this positive cross-party working and Councillor Richard Mallender for his pragmatic suggestion.  Councillor Inglis referred to the measures Rushcliffe already had in place and its very active role in multi-agency partnerships, and he considered it timely that the VAWG Strategy and Action Plan was being republished.  Council was reminded of the campaigns Rushcliffe was involved with, including “Ask for Angela”, the White Ribbon accreditation, the Domestic Abuse Housing Alliance (DAHA) and future training for Councillors.  Councillor Inglis stated that it should also be recognised that violence was not only directed against women and girls, and not always carried out by men and physical violence was not the only form of abuse.

Councillor Gowland stated that it was vitally important that work was undertaken with young people to make it clear that banter, teasing and harassment should not be normalised and was unacceptable.

Councillor Polenta referred to the problems in society that allowed this to happen and stated that on average one woman was killed by  ...  view the full minutes text for item 59.

To answer questions submitted by Councillors

a)               Question from Councillor Plant to Councillor Upton

“There are significant pressures on the Disabled facilities Grant service and budget- demand exceeds the Council's grant allocation. Building more adapted and affordable housing would help alleviate pressures on this grant. The Council's Local Plan Part 2 policy (Housing standards), states that in developments of more than 100 dwellings at least 1% should comply with building regulation requirements M4(3)a-which is a purpose-built adapted property. How many of such properties have been built on currently completed sites?” 

Councillor Upton responded by advising that there were two related building regulations, being M4(3)(b) and M4(3)(a) and confirmed that Councillor Plant’s question referred to M4(3)(a) in relation to what properties could be adapted but he would like to take the opportunity to include M4(3)(b) in his answer, which related to properties built as adapted at turnkey. Councillor Upton explained that of the schemes completed by the Council since Policy 12 of Local Plan Part 2 came into force, five developments included provision for both wheelchair adaptable or wheelchair accessible dwellings. Of these, he said that three schemes had a combined total of 12 wheelchair accessible dwellings M4(3)(b), of which nine had already been built and that two schemes had provision for a combined total of five wheelchair adaptable dwellings, none of which had yet been built. He said that this amounted to a total of 17 properties.

In relation to the Gamston development, Councillor Upton said that the scheme should deliver a further 40 homes totalling 4000 dwellings and stated that this totalled 57 adapted properties either in existence or to be build.

The Mayor asked if Councillor Plant had a supplementary question.

Councillor Plant asked if she could receive Councillor’s Upton’s response in writing and whether the provision detailed by him in his response met the 1% requirement.

Councillor Upton confirmed that he would provide a written response and that the provision did meet the 1% requirement.

b)               Question from Councillor Way to the Leader, Councillor Clarke

“Following the Competition and Marketing Authority's report on the Housebuilding Market, what?decisive action?will Cabinet now take?to stop unfair practices relating to management charges on Rushcliffe's new housing estates?” 

The Leader responded by agreeing with the importance of this issue, which had resulted from a correct policy having unforeseen consequences. He referred to scrutiny work which was taking place, and which would result in a report to Cabinet setting out what the Council could do to respond, which would hopefully involve trying to raise standards with management companies and developers across the Borough. The Leader stated that he had also written to the Secretary of State, Michael Gove, to raise this matter, and that it had already been raised within the LGA and he would be raising it with the District Council’s Network, and given that this was a national issue, he would also be lobbying Government. He also thought that the situation had reached the stage where some management companies were drawing back from  ...  view the full minutes text for item 60.