Agenda and minutes

1.    Uttlesford District Council affirms its belief that everyone has the right to be treated with dignity and respect, whether in the workplace or beyond, which includes not being subject to harassment.

The Council notes the wide definition of harassment contained in the Equality Act, 2010, which includes unwanted conduct that has the purpose or effect of creating an intimidating, hostile, degrading, humiliating or offensive environment for a person or violating their dignity.

2.    The Council also notes and rejects recent comments made by Cllr Tina Knight in two radio interviews which put forward a much narrower view of harassment, excluding much of the behaviour defined as harassment by the Equality Act, and which appeared to condone the behaviour of guests at the Presidents’ Club Dinner.

3.    The Council further notes that the Standards Committee may have to deal with complaints of harassment against councillors at district, town or parish level within Uttlesford.

4.    In the light of the above, the Council does not feel that Cllr Knight’s comments were consistent with the role of Chairman of its Standards Committee and resolves to remove her from this office.

5.    It therefore calls for nominations to replace Cllr Knight as Chairman of the Standards Committee.

Public Speaking

Statements were made by the following public speakers, and summaries of statements are appended to these minutes:  Susan Perry, Sophie Durlacher, Martin Day, Katy Mendes-Day, Janina Vigurs, Sue Lawson, Justin Rhodes, Sarah Ellis, Doug Perry, Amelie Gerard, Angela Foster and Anthony Robertson. 

The Chairman changed the order of the agenda to bring forward the item regarding the chairmanship of the Standards Committee. 

Councillor Asker queried why the agenda papers had been reissued with a change to the wording of the motion.

The Chief Executive said the initial circulation of the agenda did not correctly record the wording of the motion submitted by Councillor Rolfe.  It had been reissued with the correct wording, which had been submitted by Councillor Rolfe before the deadline.   

Councillor Rolfe introduced the motion which sought to replace the Chairman of the Standards Committee, in light of comments Councillor Knight had made in two radio interviews on the subject of harassment.  He acknowledged Councillor Knight’s contribution as a district councillor for 13 years but said that the comments made were inconsistent with her role of Chairman of the Council’s Standards Committee. 

Councillor Dean seconded the motion.  The issue was not one of freedom of speech but of whether the views she had expressed compromised Councillor Knight’s ability as Chairman of Standards Committee to consider complaints of harassment similar to those on which she had commented.  In his view the Council should appoint a new Standards Committee chairman. 

Councillor Lodge said he spoke on behalf of the Residents for Uttlesford Group, which had a consolidated view.  Freedom of speech was an important principle but councillors also had responsibilities.  Equality was another important principle.  Decisive action was needed, and the Residents Group had submitted its own motion, proposing the establishment of an Equality Committee.  . 

Councillor Harris said she would abstain from the vote on replacement of the Chairman of the Standards Committee as she felt anyone had the right to a private life, and that she considered Councillor Knight to be a victim of harassment herself.

Councillor Jones said he was opposed to the motion primarily due to the way the matter had been handled, and he considered Councillor Knight should have been given the opportunity to meet with people and explain the views she had expressed, to allow a fair hearing. 

Councillor Loughlin said she respected Councillor Knight, but was concerned at the comments she had made in public, given her position as Chairman of the Standards Committee.  Public perception was the main issue.  She hoped Councillor Knight remained on the Standards Committee as she was a valuable member of it. 

Councillor Ranger said Councillor Knight’s comments had shown a lack of judgment, and she should not chair the Standards Committee. 

Councillor Redfern said whilst she had agonised over her response, she had to support the motion in view of the comment Councillor Knight had made that groping did not constitute sexual harassment. 

Councillor Knight asked for a short break to organise her papers  ...  view the full minutes text for item 18.

To receive any apologies and declarations of interest.

Apologies were received from Councillors Anjum, J Freeman and Lemon.

Councillor R Freeman declared a personal interest in relation to any items involving Saffron Walden in that he was a member of Saffron Walden Town Council. 

Councillor S Barker declared a personal interest in relation to the budget items, in that she was a member of Essex County Council.

To receive the minutes of the meeting held on 7 December 2017.

The minutes of the meeting held on 7 December 2017 were received and approved as an accurate record subject to the following amendment: 

Minute C50:  the surname of Mary Rowe had been spelled wrongly. 

To receive any announcements from the Chairman.

The Chairman thanked members for attending his Civic Dinner, and thanked officers for arrangements made to enable the event to take place at Chesterford Research Park.  He had received a letter from the Lord Lieutenant saying how much he had enjoyed the dinner and how important Chesterford Research Park would be as an asset for the Council.  He had also attended a civic dinner given by the Chairman of Essex County Council.  He had attended a production of The Wizard of Oz at Saffron Walden County High School, which had been fantastic.  He reported on a meeting of Essex Air Cadets.  He said the meal had been prepared by students at Waltham Forest, and hoped that future students at Stansted Airport College would cater for such events one day.

The Chairman said it was the 100^th anniversary of women getting votes.  He also noted it would be the 100^th anniversary of World War 1 in November.  The Lord Lieutenant had asked him to assist with finding someone with Commonwealth connections to participate in Commonwealth Day on 12 March, so members should please let him know if they knew of anyone.

The Chairman said he wished particularly to thank Susan Kempster, Melanie Maguire and Dan Barden for the help they had given in connection with the Civic Dinner.  He said £3,500 had been raised for two charities, Support for Sight and the Essex Wildlife Trust.    

To receive matters of report from the Leader and members of the Executive.

Councillor Rolfe said he had no announcements to make.

To receive questions from members for the Executive and committee chairmen.

Councillor Foley asked whether the Leader had had the opportunity to look at the recent CPRE funded report, regarding large numbers of brownfield sites.

Councillor Rolfe said there were not many brownfield sites in Uttlesford, other than at Carver Barracks which had been discussed at Council before and represented an opportunity.  He asked that the report be sent to him. 

Councillor Dean asked Councillor Ryles as Portfolio Holder for Economic Development how much income the Council would receive in the current financial year 2017/18 in Stansted’s Lower Street car park from the owners of The Maltings and private apartments, and would have been the equivalent income from parking charges for those spaces for the years 2018/19 and 2019/20. 

Councillor Ryles said the spaces were leased for 21 years, the first two years rent-free.  The first rent would start to be payable on 2 December 2018.  Residential spaces would pay approximately £12,000 and medical spaces a similar amount. 

Councillor Dean said it was a pity the agreement was for zero rent for two years. 

To consider matters concerning joint arrangements and external organisations.

The Chairman said no matters about joint arrangements or external organisations had been notified to him.

To consider proposals for the Members’ Scheme of Allowances for 2018/19.

The Chairman of the Independent Remuneration Panel, David Brunwin, introduced the recommendations of the Panel’s report on the Scheme of Member Allowances.

He summarised the main three recommendations, the increase of 1% in the basic allowance and special responsibility allowances; the establishing of a special responsibility allowance (“SRA”) for members of the Licensing and Environmental Health Committee; and the adoption of a revised scheme for reimbursement of refreshments and travel costs.

He said the Panel had decided not to recommend linking the increase in the basic allowance and SRAs to future local government pay awards but to continue proposing regular modest increases in the level of the basic allowance, as this was seen to be preferable to proposing larger increases less often.  Regarding the new SRA for members of the Licensing and Environmental Health Committee, it was apparent that the workload of the committee was not shared equally by all its members.  Following an interview with the Chairman of that Committee, Councillor Chambers, a modest SRA was recommended to reflect the commitment and responsibility which the role involved and the need to be available for unscheduled meetings at fairly short notice.  Regarding the changes to the scheme of allowances for travel, meals and refreshments, the recommendations made it clear that hospitality for guests would not be reimbursed, and set limits to the amounts which could be claimed. 

Consideration of the introduction of allowances for substitutes was given, but the Panel felt the substitute system needed to have been underway for longer before it could reach any conclusions about payment to the members concerned, and intended to return to this subject. 

The Panel also considered the role of deputies, but felt there was no justification for an SRA given that collective decision making tended to operate. 

The Panel finally supported the Council’s intention to fund all elected councillors as “data controllers” in order to cover their personal liability when conducting Council business.  

The Chairman thanked David Brunwin and the panel members for their work during the past few months. 

Councillor Chambers also thanked the panel, in particular for taking notice of his comments regarding the Licensing and Environmental Health Committee.  It was understood that not all members were able to attend the extraordinary meetings of the Committee, but the introduction of a small Special Responsibility Allowance was a welcome recognition for those members who attended those meetings.  He proposed the recommendations. 

Councillor Rolfe seconded the recommendations. 

Councillor Morris spoke as a member of the Licensing and Environmental Health Committee.  She said she had had to return to a day job, and that often could not attend the extraordinary committee meetings, but supported the new Special Responsibility Allowance.  However, given that many residents endured budgetary pressures, she could not support the increase in allowances overall.

Councillor Rolfe thanked the Independent Remuneration Panel for their dedication.  External review of remuneration was important, and their recommendations should be followed unless there was disagreement.  He agreed that allowances should keep pace with public sector  ...  view the full minutes text for item 25.

To consider the Corporate Plan 2018 – 2022.

The Leader presented a report on the Corporate Plan 2018-2022, which had been considered at the meeting of Cabinet on 15 February 2018.  He referred to the themes of the corporate plan which he trusted all members had read, and the delivery plan as set out in the report.

RESOLVED  to approve the Corporate Plan for 2018-2022, containing the Council’s vision and priorities.

To consider the Investment Strategy 2018/19.

Councillor Howell introduced a report on the investment strategy 2018/19, which had been endorsed by the Scrutiny Committee.  He said it was a requirement for the Council to set an annual investment strategy.  It was an important first step in setting out a framework.

At this point in the meeting, the Chairman sought the view of members in accordance with Rule 8 as to continuing the meeting in light of Rule 8 regarding the continuation of meetings beyond two hours.  A vote was taken.

RESOLVED to continue the consideration of all business on the agenda. 

RESOLVED  to approve the Investment Strategy 2018/19. 

To consider the Budget report for 2018/19 and the accompanying Equality Impact Assessment.

Councillor Howell thanked the Director of Finance and Corporate Services and the Assistant Director – Resources for their hard work in producing the budget reports.  He said that, subject to the wish of members, this report enabled a single vote to be taken, on all items within the budget, other than the Investment Strategy, which was not part of the budget, and the General Fund Budget and Council Tax item, on which a separate vote was required. 

Councillor Howell introduced the budget reports, highlighting the Equality Impact Assessments, and the fact that the reports had been considered by Scrutiny and Cabinet.  He emphasised certain points, including the fact that the strategy to pursue garden communities would require ongoing investment.  He thanked his predecessor, Councillor Chambers, and put the motion. 

Councillor Chambers seconded the motion. 

Councillor Morris asked a question regarding taxi and licensing fees, which had been the subject of a consultation, the closing date of which was today.  She asked how, in view of the timescale, any representations made during the consultation would be considered, and therefore wished to know how it was possible to include in the budget resolution the increase in fees. 

Councillor Howell said the budget would not start until April, by which time the consultation would have concluded, and although no pre-judgment of the decision of the Licensing and Environmental Health Committee on fees and charges was possible, the budget had been prepared on the assumption that the increases in fees were adopted.  If it transpired the increase in fees was not adopted, then efficiencies would have to be found somewhere else.

Councillor Chambers as Chairman of the Licensing and Environmental Health Committee confirmed the figures were still out to consultation, but there would be sufficient money within the budget to accommodate a different decision on fees than that proposed in the consultation. 

Councillor Dean said he had many questions, but in view of the hour, he confirmed he supported the budget, and would therefore make only two points.  He asked that next year the budget reports include graphic representation of information to enable easier understanding of trends; and in respect of funding of PCSOs, he asked that reasonable efforts be made to secure more than one PCSO.

Further members’ questions were put as follows:  

Councillor Artus asked what the maximum reserve for Garden Communities would be. 

Councillor Hargreaves asked whether business rates income would be ring-fenced, and requested that the Council Tax letters make it clear as to which element related to District Council services and which to Essex County Council. 

Councillor Howell said he agreed with the suggestion for budget reports to include charts.  Regarding PCSOs, it was the intention to maximise the funding allocated and with match funding from local communities he hoped that would allow more than one PCSO to operate, depending on timings and engagement of personnel.  Regarding garden communities the report set out reference in the General Fund Reserve the amount of £105,000 per annum from 2018/19 to 2022/23  ...  view the full minutes text for item 28.

To consider robustness of reserves and adequacy of estimates 2018/19.

The resolution was taken as part of the Budget 2018/19 report, as shown in the minute for that item (above). 

To consider the Medium Term Financial Strategy 2018/19.

The resolution was taken as part of the Budget 2018/19 report, as shown in the minute for that item (above). 

To consider the Treasury Management Strategy for 2018/19.

The resolution was taken as part of the Budget 2018/19 report, as shown in the minute for that item (above). 

To consider the Capital Programme 2018/19 – 2022/23.

The resolution was taken as part of the Budget 2018/19 report, as shown in the minute for that item (above). 

To consider the Housing Revenue Account budget for 2018/19 and the accompanying Equality Impact Assessment.

The resolution was taken as part of the Budget 2018/19 report, as shown in the minute for that item (above). 

To consider the General Fund budget and Council Tax 2018/19 resolutions as set out in the report.

Councillor Howell presented the report, which was seconded by Councillor Chambers.  A recorded vote was taken, the outcome being as follows: 

For the motion:  Councillors Artus, Asker, G Barker, S Barker, Chambers, Davey, Davies, Dean, Fairhurst, Farthing, Felton, Foley, R Freeman, Gerard, Gordon, Hargreaves, Harris, Hicks, Howell, Jones, LeCount, Lees, Lodge, Loughlin, Mills, Morris, Oliver, Ranger, Redfern, Rolfe, Ryles, Sell and Wells.

Against the motion:  Cllr Light.

Abstained:  no abstentions were recorded.

The motion was passed by 33 votes to one against.

RESOLVED to approve:

1.    The Council Tax resolution set out in appendix G to the report;

2.    The General Fund Council Tax requirement for the Council’s own purposes for 2018/19 (excluding town/parish precepts) of £5,330,374 as summarised in paragraphs 17 – 24 of the report, an increase of 2.99% on the average band D equivalent.

3.      To approve the schedule of fees and charges as set out in Appendix F of the report.

To consider the procurement strategy 2018/19.

Members having considered the report which was presented by Councillor Howell, it was

                        RESOLVED to approve the Procurement Strategy 2018/19.

To consider the Business Rate Relief policy amendments 2018/19.

Members having considered the report which was presented by Councillor Howell, it was

RESOLVED to approve the amendments to the criteria of the Business Rates Relief Schemes as follows:

a)    that the Revaluation Relief Scheme is awarded automatically to qualifying businesses, by withdrawing the application process.

b)    that the Pub Relief is awarded after all other reliefs have been applied.

To consider the Pay Policy.

Members having considered the report which was presented by Councillor Howell, it was

                        RESOLVED to approve the Pay Policy as set out in the report.

To consider a proposal that Councillor Farthing be appointed to be a substitute on Planning Committee in place of Councillor Ranger.

Members having considered a proposal to appoint Councillor Farthing as a substitute member on Planning Committee, in place of Councillor Ranger, it was

RESOLVED to appoint Councillor Farthing as a substitute Conservative member to Planning Committee.

To approve the continuation of the appointment of the Monitoring Officer including delegated powers.

Councillor Howell presented a report proposing the continuation of appointment of Mr Simon Pugh as the Council’s Monitoring Officer, following his appointment to the permanent position of Assistant Director – Governance and Legal.

Councillor Chambers seconded the motion.

RESOLVED that the Council continue the appointment of Mr Simon Pugh as Monitoring Officer and continue the delegation of power to grant dispensations under s.33 Local Government Act 2011 to district, parish and town councillors who have disclosable pecuniary interests to speak and/or vote on issues relating to such interests and to grant dispensations under the Code of Conduct to district, parish and town councillors with other pecuniary interests to speak and/or vote on issues relating to such interests.

To consider the timetable of Council and Committee meetings for 2018/19.

The motion to adopt the timetable of meetings for the Council and its committees for the year 2018/19 was proposed and duly seconded.

                        RESOLVED to adopt the timetable of meetings for the year 2018/19.

To consider an amendment to the constitution regarding the election of the Chairman and the Vice Chairman.

Councillor Oliver presented a report seeking adoption of an amendment to the constitution regarding the election of the Chairman and Vice Chairman. 

Councillor Hargreaves said he supported the motion as when he had first joined the Council, he had felt strongly that new councillors should participate in the nominations for these positions. 

RESOLVED  to adopt the changes to Article 5 of the Council’s Constitution as follows: 

5.1.1. The Chairman and Vice-Chairman will be elected by the Council annually as the first business at its annual meeting.

5.1.2. Nominations for the posts of Chairman and Vice- Chairman for the Council year shall be made at the last ordinary meeting of the Council prior to the annual meeting.

and at the annual meeting the Chairman and Vice- Chairman shall be elected from those so nominated. If any person nominated as Chairman or Vice-Chairman shall no longer be a Member of the Council at the date of the annual meeting or informs the Chief Executive that he or she no longer wishes to be considered for such office at or before the annual meeting then alternative candidates may be proposed at the meeting.

5.1.3. Any casual vacancy in the office of Chairman or Vice-Chairman shall be filled at the first ordinary meeting of the Council after such vacancy occurs.

To consider the following motion on notice proposed by Councillors Light, Anjum, Asker, Fairhurst, R Freeman, Gerard, Hargreaves, LeCount, Lees, Lodge and Morris.

This Council agrees to establish a Committee dedicated to positively promoting equality and to ensuring that all Council actions and policies not only comply with current legislation but actively foster inclusivity.

Councillor Light proposed the motion “To establish a committee dedicated to positively promoting equality and to ensuring that all Council actions and policies not only comply with current legislation but actively foster inclusivity”.  She said a committee established to promote these principles would inform decisions which affected groups disproportionately such as women, or those living in poverty or isolation.  A committee was needed as existing committees were unable to deal with equalities issues fully, and consideration by a working group or Scrutiny Committee was not enough.  This committee should be balanced, and should include representatives drawn from the community. 

Councillor S Barker said the issue was more wide-ranging than simply equality, and to deal with it via a committee would confine rather than restrict the need to be responsible for these principles.  She proposed amending the motion, to read as follows: 

“This Council continues to be committed to positively promoting equality and to ensuring that all Council actions and policies not only comply with current legislation but actively foster inclusivity. 

This Council calls on the Cabinet Member for Equality to bring a report on this important matter back to Full Council following the Internal Audit of Equalities and Diversity later this year, and to then consider how this important requirement is monitored.”

Councillor Fairhurst claimed that the amendment was out of order, as its effect was to negate the motion. 

The Assistant Director – Legal and Governance said an amendment negating the motion was, in effect, inserting the word “not” in circumstances where voting against the motion would effectively achieve the same result.   This amendment did not negate the motion, as it was relevant to the motion and proposed an alternative course of action.

The Chairman said the legal advice was clear. 

Councillor Rolfe seconded the amendment, which was then debated. 

Councillor Ranger said another committee was not necessary, as all decisions were taken through the appropriate decision-making process, and if there were any concern about inequality, could be referred to the Scrutiny Committee. 

Councillor Dean said the amendment did not negate the proposal.  There might be a role for the Scrutiny Committee in considering how to address equalities matters.

Councillor Asker said it was disappointing that the opportunity had not been taken earlier to bring this item forward when the public were present.  She could not support the amendment because the public would be disappointed in that outcome.

The Chairman said he had noted that request but the budget was the most important item of business at this meeting.

Councillor Jones said it would have been beneficial to have engaged the Council’s own audit committee to look at this item, but consideration by an external body would provide greater confidence. 

Councillor Hicks said he had been a councillor for many years and considered equality had been dealt with very effectively.  He could see no benefit to appointing a new committee.  The change of governance from committees to Cabinet was meant to reduce the number of committees, partly because of  ...  view the full minutes text for item 42.

To receive any items that the Chairman considers to be urgent.

There were no items of urgent business. 

The meeting ended at 10.50pm

PUBLIC SPEAKING – SUMMARIES OF STATEMENTS

Susan Perry spoke in favour of the motion to remove Councillor Knight as Chairman of the Standards Committee, raising the following points:

The radio interviews given by Councillor Knight show a lack of knowledge of basic law around sexual harassment which was not commensurate with chairing the committee effectively; the absence of a required level of competence for members of Standards Committee is of concern; the lack of understanding Councillor Knight showed of the principle that people had the right to be able to work in a non-threatening environment was greatly concerning.

Sophie Durlacher spoke in favour of the same motion, raising the following points:

Councillor Knight was wrong to have stated that groping was not a crime and should have issued a correction after the interview in which she made this point; she was free to make the comments she did, but they were not appropriate for someone who held public office and in particular the role of chairman of a Scrutiny Committee; an unpleasant anonymous letter referred to those objecting to her comments as being part of a “new Holocaust”, and being Jewish, Ms Durlacher asserted the objections to the statement Councillor Knight had made were not fascist, but were made with democratic intention to hold her to account for her ill-chosen words.

Martin Day spoke in favour of the same motion, raising the following points:

As a business owner and father, it was important to provide an environment for young people which did not normalise behaviour which objectified women or constituted sexual harassment.  Those working in the hospitality industry were often low-paid and had few options for taking on other employment, so did need protection in the workplace.  It was no excuse that the Presidents’ Club dinner had raised large sums of money for charity.

Katy Day spoke in favour of the same motion, raising the following points:

Councillor Knight’s comments appeared to perpetuate the view that female employees at events such as the Presidents’ Club dinner should “put up or shut up”, and that the wallet justified the behaviour of the guests.  No woman in future should feel she had to accept such conditions.  Given the comments she had made, how would Councillor Knight be able to deal with a referral to the Scrutiny Committee of a complaint of harassment?

Janina Vigurs spoke in favour of the same motion, raising the following points:

Having experienced sexual harassment, there is a lasting effect on the victim and a perpetuation of an environment in which serious sexual crime can be more likely, if people are allowed to get away with similar less serious behaviour unchallenged. If Councillor Knight has dedicated her efforts to supporting women, she should realise the impact on them of such behaviour.  Comments indicating that “most” women can deal with this behaviour contribute to the reasons why women do not report crime, and fuel a culture of  ...  view the full minutes text for item 43.