Agenda and minutes

There were no apologies for absence.

Under the Code of Conduct members are reminded that in declaring interests you should make clear the nature of that interest and whether it is a disclosable pecuniary interest, registerable interest or other interest

Councillor T Eynon declared an interest in item 6 – Questions from Councillors as the Chair of Snibston Heritage Trust and had submitted a question that related to the Trust.

The Chair made the following announcements:

Under his new initiative to celebrate the success of staff, the Chair announced that he had recently presented the award to Helen Patrick who worked in the Customer Services Centre.  He invited any Councillors who were interested in accompanying him to the next presentation to contact him directly.

The Chair announced that the recent charity dinner had raised over £1000, he invited Members to the next dinner which would be taking place on 29 September.

Members are reminded that under paragraph 11.1 of part 4 of the Constitution, questions can be asked of the Leader and Cabinet Members without notice about any matter contained in any address.  Questions shall be limited to five minutes in total for each announcement.

The Leader of the Council, Councillor R Blunt, made the following announcements:

With the completion of Stenson House, the accommodation project was now concluded.  It was confirmed that the running costs of the Council’s buildings had reduced by half, the efficient buildings worked towards the Council’s green targets and the project had been completed within budget.  He thanked the Strategic Director for managing the project.  He reported that the next stage was to move forward with Stenson Square and options would be considered in due course.

Work was due to commence on the Marlborough Square Project which would bring the area back to life.  The delays were acknowledged and the support from Members and public was appreciated.

To conclude, Councillor R Blunt announced that Work on the Ivanhoe line was slowly moving forward.  He referred to a letter he had drafted to the North West Leicestershire Member of Parliament to support the opening of the trainline and invited the Leader of the Labour Group to add his signature to it.  Councillor S Sheahan agreed to sign the letter and was happy to see that things were moving forward.

In response to a suggestion to name the Ivanhoe line the ‘Stephenson Line’ to represent the history of the area, Councillor R Blunt explained that the Ivanhoe Line was more than just Coalville as it would travel through the surrounding areas, therefore he felt the ‘Ivanhoe Line’ was more appropriate.

A challenge was made on the comments made in relation to the accommodation project being delivered within budget and reference was made to the report considered by Corporate Scrutiny Committee which reported that there was an overspend.

To receive questions from members of the public under procedure rule no.10.  The procedure rule provides that members of the public may ask members of the Cabinet any question on any matter in relation to which the Council has powers or duties which affect the District, provided that three clear days’ notice in writing has been given to the Head of Legal and Commercial Services.

There were three questions asked which are set out below together with the responses.  Each member of the public who asked a question was invited by the Chair to ask one supplementary question which is also set out together with the response.

Question from Mr Palmer

‘My name is Stephen Palmer and I live in Donington Le Heath. In our Parish of Hugglescote and Donington Le Heath and running through the villages we have a very small river, the River Sence. This is little more than a stream, locally referred to as the ‘brook’ and more and more regularly it smells of sewage.

Severn Trent’s EDM (Event Duration Monitoring) data for 2022 shows 361 deliberate discharges of raw sewage with a total duration of 2,466 hours into the River Sence. Children play in this water and it runs through two nature reserves.

These are not spills and neither are they storm discharges.

The increasing incidence of deliberate discharges has less to do with the weather but more to do with the huge increases in the Parish (and beyond) of both residential and industrial development with zero new infrastructure.

Can the Portfolio Holder explain what powers the LPA has ensure that waste from old, new and proposed dwellings is treated and disposed of properly and to halt new and future developments until Severn Trent can give assurances that sufficient infrastructure is in place to enable all sewage to be treated properly and not deliberately discharged into our villages’ waterways?’

Response by Councillor A Saffell

Responsibility for ensuring that waste flows from housing that is connected to mains sewers are disposed of correctly lies with the relevant sewage undertaker, Severn Trent Water (STW) who, under the Water Resources Act 1991, have a legal duty to comply with its sewage treatment works and storm overflow discharge permits, issued by the Environment Agency (EA). Failure to comply with Permit conditions can result in enforcement action being taken by the EA.

The essence of STW’s legal duty to provide and extend our sewerage network and sewage treatment capacity is laid out below.

Severn Trent Water has a general duty under section 94 (cluses 1a and 1b) of the Water Industry Act 1991:

a)     To provide, improve and extend such a system of public sewers (whether inside its area or elsewhere) and so to cleanse and maintain these sewers and any lateral drains which belong to or vest in the undertaker as to ensure that the area is and continues to be effectually drained; and

b)     To make provision for the emptying of those sewers and such further provision (whether inside its area or elsewhere) as is necessary from time to time for effectually dealing, by means of sewage disposal works or otherwise, with the contents of those sewers.

In effect, this places an absolute obligation upon STW to provide such additional capacity as may be required to treat additional flows arising from new domestic development.

In terms of the Local Plan Review, the Council  ...  view the full minutes text for item 35.

To receive members’ questions under procedure rule no.11.  The procedure rule provides that any member may ask the Chairman of a board or group any question on any matter in relation to which the Council has powers or duties which affect the District, provided that three clear days’ notice in writing has been given to the Head of Legal and Commercial Services.

There were five questions asked which are set out below together with the responses.  Each Member who asked a question was invited by the Chair to ask one supplementary question which is also set out together with the response.

Question from Councillor Sheahan

‘The Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman has been reported by the BBC as saying councils are frequently failing to use their powers to tackle anti-social behaviour. In the same report, the Local Government Association were quoted as saying, “…it is vital all agencies – including the Government – ensure all measures in the ASB Plan launched earlier this year are adequately resourced.” Paragraph 40 of the Government’s ASB Plan, says, “while the police, local authorities and other agencies have a range of powers to tackle anti-social behaviour, they do not use them consistently, or, at times, enough.

Does the Council recognise these issues?’

Response from Councillor M Wyatt

‘All local authorities within Leicester, Leicestershire and Rutland have committed to following a shared procedure relating to tackling antisocial behaviour to ensure that there is both consistency and best practice applied across the area.

The procedure requires councils and the police to apply an incremental approach to tackling ASB. The approach details the breadth of powers available which range from informal approaches such as providing advice and the issuing of warning letters through to using formal legal powers such as community protection notices, injunctions, closures, and public space protection orders.

When tackling ASB officers start with an informal approach and move along the range of powers incrementally until a resolution can be reached.

When officers consider the use of legal powers the Council’s legal team are engaged and the views of the Joint Action Group (JAG) are sought before acting. The membership of the JAG includes a range of agencies namely the police, schools, social care, youth justice and others as required.

The Council has a track record of making use of the full range of informal resolutions and formal legal powers to resolve ASB issues. The issue of advice and warning letters are a regular occurrence and were most recently used with recent injunctions to resolve a serious issue in June this year into ASB and violence between neighbours in Coalville.

In conclusion, I can confirm that this Council does not recognise the issues in the quote from Paragraph 40 of the Government’s ASB Plan and sees that its practice of managing ASB accords with the best practice highlighted above.

Full details on the Council’s ASB policy can be found at Anti-social Behaviour Policy (nwleics.gov.uk)’

Supplementary question and response

Councillor S Sheahan asked for evidence including benchmarking information to prove that the council accords with best practice.  Councillor M Wyatt confirmed he would be happy to provide the information outside of the meeting.

Question from Councillor J Legrys

‘At Council on the 20 June 2023, I asked Councillor Saffell a question about the reopening of the Right of Way between London Road to Stephenson Way Coalville.  ...  view the full minutes text for item 36.

To consider the following motion received from Councillor S Sheahan:

This Council calls upon Andrew Bridgen to resign as the MP for North West Leicestershire.

Whether or not they supported Mr Bridgen in the 2019 General Election, people generally knew what they were voting for, and it was clear that Mr Bridgen won the support of the largest body of opinion in the North West Leicestershire Constituency, as measured by the votes cast.

This was his democratic mandate, and it was that which gave him the credibility accorded an MP in the eyes of those he would be representing, those he would be making representations to and those he would be working in partnership with, such as this Council.

However, in May of this year, Mr Bridgen joined Reclaim, turning his back on the mandate he was elected on. Soon after, he announced that he would not be standing down to enable a by-election to take place.  We believe that this is an affront to democracy and places the people of North West Leicestershire at a real disadvantage, when it comes to influencing important decisions.

Clearly we need a representative with a valid mandate who will restore credibility to the position of our Member of Parliament. Although he has hitherto rejected calls to resign his seat in order to trigger a by-election, we trust Mr Bridgen has had time to properly reflect on the difficulties he has placed himself and his constituents in.

Therefore, we call on him now – don’t obstruct democracy; do the right thing for the people of North West Leicestershire.

The following motion was received from Councillor S Sheahan:

‘This Council calls upon Andrew Bridgen to resign as the MP for North West Leicestershire.

Whether or not they supported Mr Bridgen in the 2019 General Election, people generally knew what they were voting for, and it was clear that Mr Bridgen won the support of the largest body of opinion in the North West Leicestershire Constituency, as measured by the votes cast.

This was his democratic mandate, and it was that which gave him the credibility accorded an MP in the eyes of those he would be representing, those he would be making representations to and those he would be working in partnership with, such as this Council.

However, in May of this year, Mr Bridgen joined Reclaim, turning his back on the mandate he was elected on. Soon after, he announced that he would not be standing down to enable a by-election to take place.  We believe that this is an affront to democracy and places the people of North West Leicestershire at a real disadvantage, when it comes to influencing important decisions.

Clearly we need a representative with a valid mandate who will restore credibility to the position of our Member of Parliament. Although he has hitherto rejected calls to resign his seat in order to trigger a by-election, we trust Mr Bridgen has had time to properly reflect on the difficulties he has placed himself and his constituents in.

Therefore, we call on him now – don’t obstruct democracy; do the right thing for the people of North West Leicestershire.’

Councillor S Sheahan spoke to and then formally moved the motion.  It was seconded by Councillor J Legrys. 

A discussion ensued on the recent behaviours of the North West Leicestershire Member of Parliament and comments were made both in support and against the motion.  Acknowledgement was given to the Member of Parliament’s change of political allegiance and some public opinion that a by-election was the right way forward, however it was also noted that constituents were represented irrespective of political preference and Parliament had its own rules to deal with behaviour.

The motion was put to the vote.  A recorded vote having been requested; the voting was as detailed below.

The result of the vote was tied, therefore in accordance with the Council’s Constitution, the Chair exercised his second and casting vote.

The motion was LOST.

To receive petitions in accordance with the Council’s Petition Scheme. 

No petitions were received.

To confirm the minutes of the meeting of the Council held on 20 June 2023.

Consideration was given to the minutes of the meeting held on 20 June 2023.

It was moved by Councillor R Morris, seconded by Councillor Horn and

RESOLVED THAT:

The minutes of the meeting held on 20 June 2023 be approved and signed by the Chair as a correct record.

Report of the S151 Officer.

Councillor N J Rushton presented the report to Members.

Objections were raised by a Member regarding the inclusion of a charge for the use of public toilet facilities, the cashless method of payment and the lengthy amount of time it would take to recoup the system installation cost.  Following advice from the Deputy Monitoring Officer on how the recommendations could be amended to reflect this objection, Councillor S Lambeth moved the following amendment to recommendation 2:

‘That Council approve the updated Capital Programme as detailed in appendix 1, including the new schemes as set out in paragraphs 3.2 and 3.3, provided that £23,000 provided for public conveniences.’

It was seconded by Councillor S Sheahan.  The Chair opened the debate on the proposed amendment.

A debate ensued and strong views were shared against charging members of the pubic to use public conveniences and the lack of consultation on the proposal.  A comment was made that the report had previously been considered by Corporate Scrutiny Committee and therefore comments should have been raised then, however it was noted that the detail on the proposed use of the funds was not included in the report.

Further discussions were had on process in relation to notice periods for amendments to motions.  It was confirmed by the Deputy Monitoring Officer that the amendment had been proposed in accordance with the Council’s Constitution.

The amendment was put to the vote.  A recorded vote having been requested; the voting was as detailed below.

The result of the vote was tied, therefore in accordance with the Council’s Constitution, the Chair exercised his second and casting vote.

The amendment was LOST.

The Chair re-opened the debate on the recommendations within the report as previously moved by Councillor N J Rushton.  It was seconded by Councillor R Blunt.

No further comments were made.

RESOLVED THAT:

1)    The supplementary estimates detailed in paragraph 2.2 which were above £250,000 and externally funded be approved.

2)    The updated Capital Programme as detailed in appendix 1, including new schemes as set out in paragraphs 3.2 and 3.3 be approved.

Report of the Strategic Directors

Councillor K Merrie presented the report to Members.

It was seconded by Councillor K Horn.

A comment was received on the format of the report and the discussions already had on the improvements that could be made moving forward to engage with the public.

RESOLVED THAT:

The Annual Scrutiny Report be noted.

Report of the Monitoring Officer

Councillor K Merrie presented the report to Members.

It was seconded by Councillor R Blunt.

Comments were made that although Members were appointed to Community Bodies, the Council did not receive any reports or feedback of the work being undertaken.  A request was made to receive regular reports in future.  The Portfolio Holder agreed to discuss this further with officers to ascertain the best approach to take with this matter.

RESOLVED THAT:

1)    Councillor M Wyatt be appointed to the Employee Joint Consultative Committee.

2)    Councillor L Windram be appointed to the vacant substitute seat on the Employee joint Consultative Committee.

3)    Councillor A Woodman be appointed as the Council’s representative on the Leicester, Leicestershire and Rutland Police and Crime Panel.

4)    Councillor T Gillard be appointed as Councillor A Woodman’s substitute on the Leicester, Leicestershire and Rutland Police and Crime Panel.