Agenda and minutes

Please declare any disclosable pecuniary interests or personal interests that you may have relating to any specific matters which may be discussed at the meeting.

No declarations were made.

To confirm and sign the minutes of the Ordinary Meeting held on 30 June 2021 and the Extraordinary Meeting held on the same date.

Subject to amending the attendance records on the minutes to include Cllr Jeremy Hilton, the minutes for both the Ordinary Meeting and Extraordinary Meeting held on 30 June 2021 were confirmed and signed as a correct record.

a)    Olympics and Paralympics 2021

            To congratulate the Olympians and Paralympians from Gloucestershire     who took part in the Olympics and Paralympics in Toyoko.

b)    Emergency Services Day

The Council will be flying the Emergency Services Day flag over Shire Hall on 9 September 2021.

c)    Municipal Journal and Local Government Chronicle awards

Trevone House, the Council’s new-style accommodation for young care leavers, has been shortlisted for two prestigious national awards. The Council is a finalist in the ‘Innovation in Children’s Services’ category at the Municipal Journal Local Government Achievement Awards.  It has also been shortlisted in the ‘Children’s Services’ category at the Local Government Chronicle Awards.

d)    Fire evacuation procedure and meeting protocols

To invite Simon Harper, Head of Democratic Services, to inform members of the arrangements for the meeting.

a)    Olympics and Paralympics 2021

The Chair congratulated the Olympians and Paralympians from Gloucestershire who took part in the Olympics and Paralympics in Tokyo. Special mention was made of Charlotte Dujardin who had been granted the title of Honorary Freewoman of the District by the Forest of Dean District Council following her success at the Olympics.

b)    Emergency Services Day

The Council would be flying the Emergency Services Day flag over Shire Hall on 9 September 2021.

c)    Municipal Journal and Local Government Chronicle awards

Trevone House, the Council’s new-style accommodation for young care leavers, had been shortlisted for two prestigious national awards. The Council was a finalist in the ‘Innovation in Children’s Services’ category at the Municipal Journal Local Government Achievement Awards.  It had also been shortlisted in the ‘Children’s Services’ category at the Local Government Chronicle Awards.

d)    Fire evacuation procedure and meeting protocols

Simon Harper, Head of Democratic Services, informed members of the arrangements for the meeting.

e)    Collection of items for Afghan refugees

Cllr Sue Williams was collecting items for GARAS.

f)     Imogen Ainslie

The Chair formally welcomed Imogen as the new Conservative Political Assistant. This was her first Council meeting since starting the role in July.

Twenty one public questions had been received. The following supplementary questions were asked:

Question 1 – Alick Miskin expressed his view of the need for a 20mph speed limit in areas within Rodborough. He asked with no funding for traffic calming or proper pavements, how could the Council encourage residents to stop using cars?

Cllr Vernon Smith responded by providing assurances that the County Council took road safety seriously and was always looking to improve. 20mph speed limits were just one item in the tool kit to reduce speeds and make roads safer. Environment Scrutiny would be looking at these issues at its meeting tomorrow and he would be happy to talk to Mr Miskin on any specific issues in his area.

Cllr Paul Hodgkinson to present a petition from residents of Bourton-on-the-Water calling for a weight limit to be installed in part of the village due to the increasing disruption due to heavy goods vehicles.

To receive any other petitions from members without discussion.

Cllr Paul Hodgkinson presented Cllr Vernon Smith, Cabinet Member for Highways and Flood, with a petition calling for a weight limit to be installed in Bourton-on-the-Water due to the increasing disruption due to heavy goods vehicles.

Cllr Nick Housden presented Cllr Tim Harman, Cabinet Member for Public Health and Communities, with a petition calling for the ‘old Library’ on Elm Road in Stonehouse to be brought back into use by the community.

Cllr David Willingham presented Cllr David Norman, Cabinet Member for Public Protection, Parking and Libraries, with a petition calling for a safe road crossing near Edinburgh Place, Cheltenham into the King George V Playing Field.

Cllr Stephen Davies, Cabinet Member for Children’s Safeguarding and Early Years, to present the corporate parenting report.

Cllr Stephen Davies, Cabinet Member for Children’s Safeguarding and Early Years, presented the Corporate Parenting report.

The report updated members on the activity of the Corporate Parenting Group. In particular, at its last meeting, the Group relaunched the One Page Profile; considered the Independent Reviewing Officer (IRO) Annual Report 2020/21; and received the Fostering Service Annual Report 202/21.

It was understood that there had been significant growth in the Children in Care population, and therefore caseloads had remained high due to this increase in demand. The ‘Language that Cares’ campaign had been launched focusing on the language used to communicate with and about care experienced children and young people. Additionally, a fast track assessment had now been introduced to address the decline in foster carer enquiries across the County.

Members were asked to complete One Page Profiles which could be shared with Children in Care. Council would be updated on progress with these at future meetings.

One member queried why there were more children in care now than 7 years ago. In response, Cllr Davies acknowledged that there were a number of causes, including as a result from previous problems with the service. There had also been a post-Covid increase in cases, and it was an issue that was being addressed.

Following a query as to whether members should be DBS checked, it was explained that it was not mandatory and that the role of members was not to engage one on one with young people without the involvement of Children’s Services.

One member asked what the response would be to the issues raised in the IRO report, which included too many unplanned voluntary care admissions in an open-ended timescale, and too many changes of social worker experienced by children in care. The Cabinet Member explained that the service was on a journey and that there were still areas to improve. Measures were being introduced to address these issues, including the introduction of the social workers university which provided training, particularly for newly qualified social workers.

A further question was asked as to whether there was an understanding of the population of children in care placed in Gloucestershire from out of County, to which it was explained that the responsibility for these children remained with the originating local authority.

Several members queried whether this report to Council reflected the true position of children’s services performance, and whether the report to Council needed to be more transparent. In response, Cllr Davies acknowledged that the service was not where it wanted to be and that it was on a journey of improvement; Children’s Services was subject to scrutiny through the Improvement Board and Children’s Scrutiny Committee, both of which receive extensive, detailed reports on performance.  This report to Council tried to highlight the most pertinent and relevant points affecting Children in Care. Nevertheless the report would be looked at to ensure that it was comprehensive.

The Council’s Constitution provides for a maximum of two hours for debate on motions.  The time limit for member speeches is three minutes and the time limit for proposing a motion is five minutes.

In accordance with Procedural Rule 10.2 in Part 4 of the Council Constitution, the Chief Executive has prepared a short accompanying note for each motion in respect of any implications for climate change, resources, human rights and any other pertinent factors they may wish to include in accordance with the Council’s Policy Framework.

Motion 880 - Call to scrap the Government’s Planning White Paper Proposed by Cllr Paul Hodgkinson

Seconded by Cllr Paul Baker

The Council notes:

·         The significant concerns expressed by communities, including at the recent by-election in Chesham and Amersham, over the Conservative Government’s Planning Reforms.

·         The concessions already made to Conservative backbench MPs over concerns about the impact of planning deregulation on home counties.

·         Local resident concerns about their reduced ability to object to building works under Permitted Development Rights which have been extended under this Government.

·         Widespread concern and condemnation of the Planning White Paper proposals across Local Government, the Planning and Architecture Sector and organisations concerned with protecting green spaces and heritage.

The Council is concerned that:

·         The Government is not using the Planning White Paper to improve environmental outcomes from planning and building standards fast enough. This is at odds with the declaration of a climate emergency by many local authorities, including Gloucestershire County Council.

·         Government proposals to deregulate planning will water down the rights of residents to influence development where they live.

·         The Government's proposals will put at risk the character of Gloucestershire’s city, towns and villages.

The Council believes that:

·         Residents have the right to a say over developments that will change the area they live in.

·         Local councils, in consultation with their businesses and residents, are best placed to understand the issues in their area and respond with a housing strategy tailored to that area.

The Council calls for the Leader of the Council to write to the Government to scrap its Planning White Paper and instead:

·         Undertake a wholesale review of Permitted Development Rights.

·         Introduce rules which enable local areas to achieve much higher environmental standards in planning.

·         Make the Planning Inspectorate more accountable to local people.

·         Implement stronger controls to ensure Ministers making decisions on planning applications are not connected either financially or personally with the developers or related parties to the application.

Motion 881 - Tackling poverty and deprivation in Gloucestershire

Proposed by Cllr David Willingham

Seconded by Cllr Jeremy Hilton

This Council notes that despite Gloucestershire being a relatively affluent county, based upon the 2019 Indices of Multiple Deprivation for England, there are 12 areas in the 10 per cent most deprived areas.  These areas account for 19,415 people which is 3.1 per cent of the county’s population. 

This Council further notes that some areas have been in the 10 per cent most deprived areas in the 2010, 2015 and 2019 Indices of  ...  view the full agenda text for item 36.

Motion 880 - Call to scrap the Government’s Planning White Paper

Cllr Paul Hodgkinson proposed and Cllr Paul Baker seconded the motion included on the agenda.

Cllr Hodgkinson stated that the failure to build a sufficient number of houses had long been an issue. It was important to build houses in the right places, particularly to benefit young people and their families. He stated that he had hoped that the proposals would make a positive difference but that they actually made things worse. Councils have approved a significant number of housing applications where none of the houses have been built; developers were land banking instead. The proposals also did not sufficiently reference the climate change emergency.

He further stated that there was already an affordability crisis in this county. What was needed were good quality sustainable buildings. Whilst it looked like there might be a back bench revolt on this issue, this could not be relied upon and it was therefore important for this council to engage with this issue.

Cllr Baker stated that he was a Cheltenham Borough Council planning committee member. The climate change emergency must be central to planning applications. The White Paper was a developer’s charter, supporting land banking; the white paper had been widely derided. He questioned whether the government was brave enough to tackle this issue. It would be important to reduce flood risks, add to biodiversity, and be carbon neutral in future developments.

Some members stated that the planning system did need reforming but that this white paper was not the way to do it. It was commented that an environmentalist had not been involved in the development of the white paper.

Cllr David Gray proposed the following amendment, Cllr Mark Hawthorne seconded the amendment: -

The Council notes:

·      The significant concerns expressed by communities,MPs and Councils  including at the recent by-election in Chesham and Amersham, over the Conservative over the Government’s Planning Reforms.

·      The concessions already made to Conservative backbench MPs over concerns about the impact of planning deregulation on home counties.

·      Local resident concerns about their reduced ability to object to building works under Permitted Development Rights which have been extended under this Government.

·      Widespread concern and condemnation of the Planning White Paper proposals across Local Government, the Planning and Architecture Sector and organisations concerned with protecting green spaces and heritage.

·      That districts are the primary planning authorities, and that under current legislation the County Council is only responsible for Minerals and Waste Planning

·      That there is a real need to deliver more homes in our county, so that future generations can enjoy the security of owning their own homes

The Council is concerned that:

·      The Government is not using the Planning White Paper to improve environmental outcomes from planning and building standards fast enough. This is at odds with the declaration of a climate emergency by many local authorities, including Gloucestershire County Council.

·      Government proposals to deregulate planning will water down the rights of residents to influence development where  ...  view the full minutes text for item 36.

Up to 30 minutes is allowed for this item.

To answer any written member questions about matters which are within the powers and duties of the County Council.

The closing date for receipt of questions is 10am on Wednesday, 1 September 2021. Please send questions to the Chief Executive marked for the attention of Andrea Clarke (email andrea.clarke@gloucestershire.gov.uk)

Questions received and proposed responses do not accompany this agenda but will be circulated prior to the meeting.

Forty five member questions had been received. The following supplementary questions were asked:

Question 6 – Cllr David Willingham asked whether in relation to the house fire on Arle Road there would be a review which would then be published?

Cllr Dave Norman replied that this was not the role of Gloucestershire Fire and Rescue Service.  He advised the member to speak to cabinet colleagues.

Question 10 – Cllr Chris McFarling stated that it would take time for the trees to grow and so far no form of carbon capture had been cost effectively trialled, he asked what other forms of carbon sequestration were  feasible in Gloucestershire to hit net zero?

Cllr David Gray replied that he would speak to the member outside the meeting on this complicated issue.

Question 11 – Cllr Chloe Turner asked what the data was there that related to customer satisfaction in Gloucestershire in addition to the national surveys referenced in the answer to the question.

Cllr David Gray would speak to the member after the meeting but outlined that this was the best data available.

Question 13 – Cllr Chloe Turner asked what the target was for Definitive Map Modification orders and whether it had been met in the last reporting period.

Cllr Vernon Smith replied that there was a meeting on 8 October with public rights of way officers to go through this in more detail. He put on record his thanks to the Commons and Rights of Way Team.

Question 16 – Cllr Cate Cody asked how much of the £321,757 grant was spent to make cycling easier in the Tewkesbury area?

Cllr David Gray replied he did not have the information immediately available and would come back to the member.

Question 19 – Cllr Cate Cody asked if the council could formally encourage members and staff to invest in non plastic reusable drinks bottle.

Question 20 – Cllr Paul Hodgkinson asked if the Leader was aware of the media stories around a circuit breaker lockdown at the end of October and was he aware of any plans going forward?

Cllr Mark Hawthorne stated that there was no evidence of a lockdown at this time, there was continued focus of vaccine rollout and there would be further campaigns focusing on those that had not been vaccinated. He spoke about the focus on hospital numbers in decision making.

Question 21 – Cllr Paul Hodgkinson asked what had been delivered particularly for residents of Siddington and South Cerney.

Cllr Vernon Smith replied that there were £58m worth of flood alleviation schemes and he would happily show the member the work being carried out on gullying emptying and flood alleviation.

Question 22 – Cllr Roger Whyborn asked whether the S106 funding was driving the timescales and whether the focus was on the Hatherley Lane. He asked for some information to be fed back to himself and Borough members.

Cllr Dave Norman explained he would discuss with officers and ensure they were in contact with  ...  view the full minutes text for item 37.

Cllr Phil Awford, Chair of Corporate Overview and Scrutiny Committee, will present the report which provides a summary of recent scrutiny committee activities. Scrutiny Committee Chairs to answer questions:

Cllr Philip Awford, Corporate Overview and Scrutiny

Cllr Andrew Gravells, Health  

Cllr Stephen Hirst, Adult Social Care and Communities

Cllr Andrew Miller, Children and Families

Cllr Dom Morris, Environment

Cllr Matt Babbage, Economic Growth

Cllr Jeremy Hilton, Fire and Rescue

Cllr Phil Awford, Chair of Corporate Overview and Scrutiny Committee, presented the report which provided a summary of recent scrutiny activities.

It was understood that work plans were being developed by each scrutiny committee to address issues of relevance to residents of Gloucestershire; the new Fire and Rescue Scrutiny Committee had made a strong start looking at the challenges facing Gloucestershire Fire and Rescue Service; Cllr Andrew Gravells was welcomed back as Chair of the Health Overview and Scrutiny Committee which was looking at a range of issues including temporary service changes; and the Restoring our Rivers Task Group had been established.

One member expressed the view that the scrutiny report should be more comprehensive rather than listing the items on scrutiny committee agendas alongside links to the agenda papers.

Cllr Hilton, as Chair of the Fire and Rescue Service Committee, informed members of the success of the Committee’s first meeting, and Cllr Gravells, as Chair of HOSC, reminded members that those sat on scrutiny committees could feed back to other members in their political group.

Members were reminded of the upcoming Gloucestershire Fire and Rescue Service Members Awareness Session taking place at Gloucester South Fire Station and SkillZone on 19 November 2021.

To consider the Cabinet Decision Statements for the meetings held on 23 June 2021 and 21 July 2021 including the following recommendation made by Cabinet on 21 July relating to the Youth Justice Plan:

RESOLVED to recommend the Youth Justice Plan 2021-22 to Council for approval (report attached).

One member asked whether the Cabinet Member for Finance and Change could make arrangements for members to see a log of applications and approvals for the Community Grants Scheme. The Cabinet Member replied that they would look into whether a system like this could be arranged.

One member asked for clarification as to what was being done to address the overspend as detailed in the Financial Monitoring Report received by Cabinet on 21 July 2021, as well as on the wording used to describe the decrease in funds in the capital programme.

Another member question was raised as to how the amount of carbon used to move food to specific sites was assessed in food waste contracts. The Cabinet Member for Environment and Planning replied that they would liaise with officers regarding the specifics.

In response to a further question on the procurement of low or zero carbon replacement fire engines, the Cabinet Member for Public Protection, Parking and Libraries explained that there was currently no electric fire appliance or emergency vehicle on the market.

Cllr Mark Hawthorne sought clarification as to the purpose of this item on the Council agenda and whether the Cabinet Decision Statements were for noting or discussion. The Monitoring Officer clarified that this item was for noting and not for questioning.

Several members queried the point of having this item on the Council agenda if members were not given the opportunity to ask questions. Cllr Hawthorne suggested that the issue be considered by the Constitution Committee.

Cllr Stephen Davies, Cabinet Member for Children’s Safeguarding and Early Years, presented the recommendation from the Cabinet meeting on 21 July 2021 that Council approve Gloucestershire’s Youth Justice Plan 2021/2022.

On being put to the vote, it was

RESOLVED that the Youth Justice Plan 2021/22 be approved.

To consider the decision statements for the period 1 June 2021 to 31 August 2021.

RESOLVED to note the Individual Cabinet Member Decision Statements for the period 1 June 2021 to 31 August 2021.