To receive Notices of Motion submitted under Standing Order No.12
a) This Council notes the alarming decline in number of hedgehogs and threat of extinction and pledges to:
(i) Adopt landscape management practices on land it owns and manages that are supportive to hedgehogs and their habitat.
(ii) Encourage other agencies/councils operating in Rushcliffe to do likewise.
(iii) Conduct a public awareness campaign to encourage the public to adopt supportive practices.
(iv) Include appropriate conditions and advisory notes on planning consents to support the species.
Councillor L Way
b) This Council understands the concerns that our residents have about infrastructure not being developed alongside housing and resolves to:
(i) Proactively work to ensure that developer contributions for the infrastructure items that are Rushcliffe’s responsibility, whether collected through S106 or CIL, are spent in a timely fashion to mitigate the impacts of development, providing regular progress reports.
(ii) Proactively monitor the contributions collected with respect to Rushcliffe housing developments on behalf of Nottinghamshire County Council and other agencies, (regardless of signatory), to likewise ensure that contributions are spent promptly and relevant to the developments.
(iii) By such timely spending on infrastructure, reduce over time the total amount of developer contributions held by Rushcliffe and any reliance on this to service the Council’s cash flow
(iv) Provide, as part of the budget reporting round, annual reports of S106 and CIL contributions held, collected and spent during the year, including which developments attracted the charges and what the money was spent on, with locations.
Councillor C Thomas
Minutes:
a. The following Notice of Motion was proposed by Councillor Way and seconded by Councillor J Walker.
“This Council notes the alarming decline in number of hedgehogs and threat of extinction and pledges to:
(i) Adopt landscape management practices on land it owns and manages that are supportive to hedgehogs and their habitat.
(ii) Encourage other agencies/councils operating in Rushcliffe to do likewise.
(iii) Conduct a public awareness campaign to encourage the public to adopt supportive practices.
(iv) Include appropriate conditions and advisory notes on planning consents to support the species.”
Councillor Way informed the Council in moving the motion that in the first half of the 20th century there were estimated to be over 30 million hedgehogs in Britain, but this number has now fallen to around one million. It was noted that, despite a petition for the government to review the inclusion of hedgehogs to be protected under section 5 of the Countryside and Wildlife Act 1981, local action could not be instigated to protect the species before the petition be debated in Parliament on 5 July 2021.
Councillor Way stated that much of the decline in the number of hedgehogs was due to the loss of habitat by developers. Councillor Way provided the example of the Rempstone Road development in East Leake where hedges had been removed and replaced by an open seeded grass area which is of no benefit to any wildlife. It was also noted that the guidance provided by the Council for developers stated that hedges should not be removed during hibernation periods in the winter however, hedges had been removed in February 2021 on Lantern Lane, East Leake. Councillor Way was concerned that despite the Council intending to prevent this from happening, there was little being done to ensure compliance.
It was suggested that the Council could protect hedgehogs by either reducing or eliminating strimming under hedges, which would save animals from injury, more areas could be included in the ‘no-mow’ scheme and the reduction of the use of pesticides. Additionally, areas where it was known that hedgehogs were known to be active would benefit from the use of road signs to encourage drivers to slow down. Also, it was noted that the Council should encourage its partners to follow this guidance and that with good practice others would follow. Councillor Way stated that a comprehensive and widespread publicity campaign needed to be undertaken and support given to groups trying to promote the welfare of hedgehogs. It was noted that the Council should encourage residents to provide hedgehogs with areas in their gardens to be reconnected such as planting hedges, providing rough areas for shelter or making small holes in walls or fences so they could move freely around in search of food and mates. Therefore, this would provide the public with advice on how to provide habitats for hedgehogs and inform them of the benefits of encouraging wildlife into their gardens.
Councillor J Walker seconded the motion and reserved the right to speak.
Councillor Brennan remarked that she had only seen one hedgehog whilst living in her current home of 15 years and recognised that the Council needed to help hedgehogs to foster their survival. Councillor Brennan supported the motion but noted that the Council was already trying to protect hedgehogs, for example, practices agreed recently by Cabinet as part of the Rushcliffe Nature Conservation Strategy and the inclusion of hedgehogs as a local bio-diversity action plan species which sought to support the habitats of wildlife currently in danger. It was also stated that the Council encouraged developers to include hedgehog gates and holes in fences in order for them to move around more freely. Councillor Brennan informed the Council that in 2019, Streetwise received training to avoid injury to hedgehogs whilst carrying out maintenance work.
Councillor Brennan proposed an amendment to the motion:
“This Council notes the alarming decline in number of hedgehogs and threat of extinction and pledges to:
(i) Strengthen landscape management practices on land it owns and manages that are supportive to hedgehogs and their habitat.
(ii) Encourage other agencies/councils operating in Rushcliffe to do likewise.
(iii) Build on existing plans to conduct a public awareness campaign to encourage the public to adopt supportive practices.
(iv) Continue to include appropriate conditions and advisory notes on planning consents to support hedgehogs and keep these under review in the event of changes to the protected status of the species.”
Councillor Barney seconded the amendment to the motion and thanked the Councillors for welcoming him as a member of the Council. In thanking Councillor Way for moving the original motion however, he agreed with Councillor Brennan that the Council’s current efforts should be acknowledged. Councillor Barney was also pleased to note that local Facebook groups had been set up to support the species.
In responding to the amendment, Councillor Way thanked Councillor Brennan for supporting the majority of the motion.
Councillor Jeffreys encouraged Councillors to not use slug pellets as hedgehogs may eat the poisoned slugs.
There was no further debate. After being put to the vote, the amendment to the motion was accepted and became the substantive motion.
Councillor Way requested that enforcement be necessary if developers were not compliant to planning conditions in regard to protecting hedgehogs and their habitat.
Councillor Brennan proposed that the substantive motion be amended to:
“This Council notes the alarming decline in number of hedgehogs and threat of extinction and pledges to:
(i) Strengthen landscape management practices on land it owns and manages that are supportive to hedgehogs and their habitat.
(ii) Encourage other agencies/councils operating in Rushcliffe to do likewise.
(iii) Build on existing plans to conduct a public awareness campaign to encourage the public to adopt supportive practices.
(iv) Continue to include appropriate conditions, enforcement where possible and advisory notes on planning consents to support hedgehogs and keep these under review in the event of changes to the protected status of the species.”
Councillor Robinson seconded the proposal.
There was no further debate. After being put to the vote, the amendment to the substantive motion was accepted.
Councillor Gowland congratulated the Council working in Abbey Ward to increase the presence of wildlife.
Councillor R Mallender supported the motion and noted that despite streets on new developments in West Bridgford being called Hedgehog Gardens, Magpie Close, and Foxfield way it was those developments that were contributing to the destruction of wildlife and their habitats.
On being put to the vote the substantive motion was carried.
b. The following Notice of Motion was proposed by Councillor Thomas and seconded by Councillor Major.
“This Council understands the concerns that our residents have about infrastructure not being developed alongside housing and resolves to:
(i) Proactively work to ensure that developer contributions for the infrastructure items that are Rushcliffe’s responsibility, whether collected through S106 or CIL, are spent in a timely fashion to mitigate the impacts of development, providing regular progress reports
(ii) Proactively monitor the contributions collected with respect to Rushcliffe housing developments on behalf of Nottinghamshire County Council and other agencies, (regardless of signatory), to likewise ensure that contributions are spent promptly and relevant to the developments
(iii) By such timely spending on infrastructure, reduce over time the total amount of developer contributions held by Rushcliffe and any reliance on this to service the council’s cash flow
(iv) Provide, as part of the budget reporting round, annual reports of S106 and CIL contributions held, collected and spent during the year, including which developments attracted the charges and what the money was spent on, with locations.”
Councillor Thomas informed Council, in moving the motion that residents were very concerned about the development of appropriate and necessary infrastructure to support new developments within or adjacent to their communities. This included pavements and crossings, community centres, play parks and access to public transport. Residents were aware that developers were required to make contributions to infrastructure projects and that this funding was held by the Borough Council. Councillor Thomas informed Council that developing the necessary infrastructure to support both new and existing communities was of paramount importance. She pointed out that there was no transparent way of residents finding out how much money had been contributed by developers as this information was not routinely published for residents to scrutinise. Whilst she accepted that there was a significant amount of work involved in managing these funds, it was not sufficient for the Council to act as an efficient banker. The purpose of this motion was to avoid large sums of unspent money sitting in the Council’s bank account and to provide traction to move spending along.
Councillor Major stated that the motion spoke for itself so in the interests of transparency and to benefit the local communities as intended, she would be happy to second the motion and reserve her right to speak.
Councillor Moore stated that all members of the Council were aware of the infrastructure pressures that new housing developments brought to the Borough. He informed Council that a framework for allocating CIL funding would be considered at scrutiny in October 2021, and a firm proposal would be submitted to Cabinet in December 2021, which would enable the Council to distribute funds early in the new year. Councillor Moore went on to inform Councillor Thomas that parish councils were already able to access the proportion of funding due to them and that the Council had a dedicated Planning Contributions Officer to monitor the funding and ensure it was channelled to where it was needed. He added that the Council was legally obliged to publish a s106 and CIL statement by 31 December each year. The statement detailed all cash flow including payments made to other bodies such as the County Council but that the Borough Council could not control how fast other bodies converted this funding into action. Councillor Moore moved to proceed to the next item on the agenda under Standing Orders – Council 14.11 and that this be put to the vote.
Councillor Robinson seconded the proposition and reiterated the comments made by Councillor Moore and advised Councillors that the Government was considering combining CIL and Section 106 monies, new guidelines would be issued, and it was therefore not timely to consider this at the moment.
The Mayor used her discretion to allow short statements from other political groups.
Councillor J Walker felt this was a timely motion which would hopefully result in clarity for local communities. She reported that she had attended a parish council meeting earlier in the week where there had been many questions regarding CIL and Council was advised that parishes did not have the information they needed to access funding and, as a consequence, it was not being used. She concluded her remarks by informing Council that it was clear to her that this motion would have a direct impact on the communities represented in this Chamber and requested that a recorded vote be taken on the request to move to the next item on the agenda.
Councillor R Mallender informed Council that he understood the frustration behind this motion. He understood the trade-off between additional housing and a new school or health centre, which would benefit both the existing and new communities but all too often new housing was built without the necessary infrastructure being developed alongside. More transparency of information would help manage residents’ expectations.
Councillor Thomas reported her disappointment that there was a desire to move this motion straight to a vote without a proper debate. She felt that this displayed a misunderstanding about how Rushcliffe residents felt about the issue.
Councillor Major also stated that she understood the sentiment behind the motion and did not believe that transparency was a big ask. She also felt that taking this item through scrutiny would delay the process.
Councillor Robinson reminded Council that the Borough Council could only spend a small proportion of the CIL and s106 funds. The majority of money was for partners in health and the County Council to spend, Rushcliffe was just a banker. Therefore, the Council’s efforts need to be focused on influencing its partners. He concluded his remarks by stating that information about the amount of CIL and s106 funding collected each year is available on the Council’s website as it had to publish this annually by law.
In accordance with Standing Orders - Council 14.11, a recorded vote was taken to move to the next item on the agenda:
FOR: Councillors R Adair, S Bailey, M Barney, K Beardsall, A Brennan, R Butler, N Clarke, T Combellack, G Dickman, A Edyvean, L Healy, R Inglis, Mrs C Jeffreys, A Major, R Mallender, D Mason, G Moore, A Phillips, F Purdue-Horan, S Robinson, D Simms, J Stockwood, Mrs M Stockwood, R Upton, D Virdi, R Walker, D Wheeler and J Wheeler
AGAINST: Councillors B Bansal, N Begum, M Gaunt, P Gowland, J Murray, K Shaw, C Thomas, J Walker and L Way
ABSTENTIONS: Councillor S Mallender
The vote was carried and there was no further debate.
Councillor J Walker requested a recorded vote on the motion.
In accordance with Standing Orders - Council 16.4, a recorded vote was taken on the motion as follows:
FOR: Councillors B Bansal, N Begum, M Gaunt, P Gowland, A Major, J Murray, K Shaw, C Thomas, J Walker and L Way
AGAINST: Councillors R Adair, S Bailey, M Barney, K Beardsall, A Brennan, R Butler, N Clarke, T Combellack, G Dickman, A Edyvean, L Healy, R Inglis, Mrs C Jeffreys, D Mason, G Moore, A Phillips, F Purdue-Horan, S Robinson, J Stockwood, Mrs M Stockwood, R Upton, D Virdi, R Walker, D Wheeler and J Wheeler
ABSTENTIONS: Councillors R Mallender and S Mallender
The motion was lost.