Agenda and minutes

The Chair called for a minute’s silence as a mark of respect for all those affected by the recent violence in Israel.

The Chair congratulated former Councillor Cheetham on her appointment as Honorary Alderwomen of Uttlesford District Council.

Councillor Barker praised former Councillor Cheetham’s long and exemplary history in local government. She had held senior roles during her time as councillor, including deputy Leader of the Council and Chair of the Planning Committee.

She was presented with a certificate of office for her distinguished service to the public and the Council.

To receive any apologies and declarations of interest.

Apologies for absence were received from Councillors Armstrong, Asker, Bagnall, Emanuel, Moran, Haynes, Dean and Loveday.

There were no declarations of interest.

To receive the minutes of the previous meetings held on 18 July and 24 August 2023.

The minutes of the meeting held on 18 July and 24 August 2023 were approved as correct records.

To receive any announcements from the Chair.

The Chair said he had been on two engagements since the previous meeting.

He had attended the Mayor of Rochford’s dinner and a Civic Service for the High Sheriff of Essex.

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

The Leader provided an update on the Mortimer’s Gate electricity sub-station issue and said Bloor Homes’ representatives had agreed to contribute to the noise mitigation works. She said the Ukrainian scheme was now up and running and the first Ukrainian guest was receiving their rent guarantee and were in their own home. She provided further updates in relation to the Electric Car scheme, which would allow people to rent an electric car and was going live next month.

Councillor Coote asked Scrutiny Committee to review the matters raised by Mr Perry relating to Walden Place. Councillor Gregory said he was happy to do so.

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

In respect of Question 1, Councillor Loughlin said her question was separate from Councillor Dean’s query and warranted a separate answer. She said she had not implied that there had been any reputational damage to the Council. She asked that if any debtors reneged on their debts in future, that members be informed.   .   

In respect of Question 3, Councillor Silcock asked that the minutes of the Norse Partnership Board meetings be made available to members in a confidential manner, such as through the Scrutiny or Audit and Standards Committee.

In respect of Question 4, Councillor Sell asked that members were kept informed of any operation difficulties in respect of waste collection.

In response to Councillor Barker’s question, asked on behalf of Councillor Moran, Councillor Evans said maximum effort was being put into clear the backlog of enforcement cases.

In response to Councillor Martin’s clarification question, Councillor Hargreaves said the CBRE report had been published with the written answer papers. He explained that the asset was valued differently depending on whether one was looking at the Aspire or Council accounts.

To consider any reports referred from the Executive and the Council’s committees and receive questions and answers on any of those reports.

No matters were received from the Executive or the Council’s Committees.

To consider matters concerning joint arrangements and external organisations.

No matters were received regarding Joint Arrangements.

To consider the appointments of Independent Persons to the Audit and Standards Committee (Standards functions).

Councillor Oliver presented the report regarding the appointment of an Independent Person under s28(7) of the Localism Act 2011 to fulfil the various roles that could be required in the event of Code of Conduct complaint against district, town or parish councillors, and in the capacity of a “relevant Independent Person” for the purposes of the Statutory Officer Discipline and Dismissal Panels. He proposed approval of the recommendation set out in the report.

Councillor Barker seconded the proposal.

The proposal was approved unanimously.

RESOLVED to appoint Daniel Paul to the position of an Independent Person under s28(7) of the Localism Act 2011 with regard to Code of Conduct complaints, and in the capacity of a “relevant Independent Person” for the purposes of the Statutory Officer Discipline and Dismissal Panels as set out in the Council’s disciplinary procedures for statutory officers in Part 4 of the council’s Constitution.

To consider the provision of substitutes for the Local Joint Panel.

Councillor Coote presented the report regarding the provision and appointment of substitutes to the Local Joint Panel, a working group of Council. He proposed approval of the recommendations set-out in the report.

Councillor Hargreaves seconded the proposal.

The proposal was approved unanimously.

RESOLVED to:

I.              Amend the Local Joint Panel’s Terms of Reference in order to permit the appointment of a substitute member for each participating political Group (Appendix A);

II.                 Appoint Councillors Lees (Residents for Uttlesford), Barker (Conservative) and Sell (Liberal Democrat) as the nominated substitute members.

To consider the member motion regarding the Cost of Living Crisis as submitted by Councillor Fiddy.

Councillor Fiddy spoke to her motion regarding the Cost of Living Crisis and the impact it was having on low and medium income households in the district. She said national data demonstrated the fall in disposable income experienced by households, and this was also true of local data from the Uttlesford Food Bank which showed the rise in struggling families. She said high interest rates and inflation were eroding resilience in the community and people were utilising savings to get by. She called on the Government to tackle these issues and proposed her motion as set out in the agenda papers.

Councillor Sutton seconded the motion.

Councillor Barker had given notice of an amendment and was invited to speak. She thanked councillor Fiddy for the motion and commended the research behind it. She said the issue with the motion was that the Government had no additional monies to fund local authorities and therefore it was up to the Council to reprioritise its own budget to support struggling residents, rather than calling for more funding. She also asked for the motion to call for assistance for families across the UK. She moved the following amendment:

“Council therefore resolves:

To reprioritise our Budget to free up additional funds to support those most in need.

To call on the UK Government and our local Members of Parliament to effectively tackle the cost-of-living crisis facing Uttlesford families and those across the United Kingdom and act now to support them with the following specific measures;

a) Introduce a guarantee that benefits will cover the essentials so that people don’t have to resort to debt or emergency charitable support to meet their basic needs, and that deductions will never pull benefits below this level, and thereafter ensure that benefits are uprated in line with inflation.

b) Unfreeze Local Housing Allowance (LHA) and bring Housing Benefit back in line with rents so it covers at least the cheapest 30% of private rents in every part of the country and uprate it every year to reflect changes in rents.

c) Increase in Discretionary Housing Payment, which provides additional financial support for claimants who are in properties with rents above LHA rates

d) Household Support Grant is allocated proportionately to District Councils in line with local needs. For example, those in receipt of Housing Benefit only were not eligible to claim the cost of living payments

e) To ensure that New Burdens administration funding is sufficient to deliver new initiatives effectively

f) A new revised local government settlement that adequately funds local councils to protect and operate vital front line services.”

Councillor Gooding seconded the amendment. He said Uttlesford was often held up as a comparably wealthy district, as shown by comparative deprivation indices, but he was aware of pockets of deprivation. He said the motion was well intended but the Government would not single out Uttlesford for preferential treatment and the amendment would enhance the motion.

Councillor Tayler said he was puzzled by the amendment; it was central  ...  view the full minutes text for item C52