Agenda and minutes

To receive any apologies for absence from Councillors.

Apologies for absence were received from Councillors H Allen, J Beesley, J Challinor, G Farquhar, D Farr and A Filer.

Councillors are requested to declare any interests on items included in this agenda. Please refer to the workflow on the preceding page for guidance.

Declarations received will be reported at the meeting.

Councillors Sara Armstrong, Paul Slade and Vikki Slade declared interests in Minute No. xx (Linwood Special School SEND Post 16 Provision at Ted Webster) and left the room for the discussion and voting thereon.

To confirm and sign as a correct record the minutes of the Meeting held on the 15 October 2024 and reconvened on the 4 November 2024.

The Minutes of the Council meeting held on15 October 2024, reconvened on 4 November 2024 were confirmed as a correct record.

To receive any announcements from the Chairman.

The Chairman reported the sad passing of former Councillor and Mayor Ron Parker who was elected to Poole Borough Council in 1988, was Mayor of Poole from 2001-2002 and a serving Poole Councillor until 2019.

Councillor K Rampton relayed personal experiences of Ron Parker following which Councillors stood in silent tribute.

The Chairman updated Council on her activities since the last meeting. These included attendance at: -

·       Launch Christchurch living advent calendar

·       Poppy appeal launce Bovington tank museum

·       Dorset legal service, attended by High Sheriff

·       Health science university launch attended by HRH Princess Anne

·       Bournemouth University graduation event

·       Remembrance 2-minute silence

·       Nurturing by nature, Poole, celebration event

·       Alpine lodge Christmas launch

·       Lunch meeting and introduction to BCP for Lord Lieutenant

·       Indian soldiers’ plaque unveiling, attended by Lord Lieutenant

·       Upton house celebration of success, attended by lottery fund representative

·      Bournemouth Arts University and soroptimists event and prize giving

The Vice-Chairman advised that he had attended: -

·       Lord Lieutenants awards evening

·      Remembrance Parade in Christchurch followed by the service at the Christchurch Priory

To receive any public questions, statements or petitions submitted in accordance with the Constitution. Further information on the requirements for submitting these is available to view at the following link: -

https://democracy.bcpcouncil.gov.uk/ieListMeetings.aspx?CommitteeID=151&Info=1&bcr=1

The deadline for the submission of public questions is mid-day Wednesday 4 December 2024 (12 noon, 3 clear working days before the meeting).

The deadline for the submission of a statement is mid-day Monday 9 December 2024 (mid-day the working day before the meeting).

The deadline for the submission of a petition is Tuesday 26 November 2024 (10 working days before the meeting).

The public questions and statements set out in the minutes below are printed as per the wording used within the submissions made in accordance with the constitution.

As a number of the public statements submitted were identical the statement was read once referencing all those who had submitted the statement.

Public Question from Sue Hobbs

In view of the current housing shortage, what are the Council’s plans to ensure that homes, including the significant proportion of social housing included in the original plans, are built on the Poole Power Station site as quickly as possible?

Are the Council pursuing grants and funds to pay for the clean up?

Does the Council have any plans to sell all or part of this land?

Response by the Leader of the Council, Councillor Millie Earl

The Council has developed a 5-year plan to deliver homes across numerous sites which includes the former Holes Bay power station site. We are working with the National Government Agency, Homes England to develop our proposals for the former Power Station site, which includes maximising much needed affordable housing. This includes interventions such as grant to mitigate the flood risk, remediate the site for development and establishing partnerships for planning and building out the homes. We are exploring a range of options for how we can bring the site forward at pace. 

With us, Homes England is fully committed to working in partnership with BCP Council to explore and unlock the regeneration potential of the significant landholding at Holes Bay. Recognising the complexity of the site we believe our collaborative approach can help deliver a landmark housing-led, mixed-use development that aligns with both local and national objectives. 

Public Question from Alex McKinstry

On 18 January 2024, the Planning Committee voted not to enter exempt session to discuss some legal advice; whereupon the monitoring officer stated that the advice remained exempt (under Schedule 12A LGA 1972) and could not be discussed openly. Had the Committee thought on its feet, and tabled a motion that the public interest in the advice outweighed the case for exemption - and had such a motion been carried - would the Committee, then, have been able to discuss the advice openly? In short, can committees overrule officers regarding whether documents are exempt?

I ask this, apprehensive that any reports into the FuturePlaces investigation might be withheld from public view or heavily redacted - as happened with the Bayside report. I note however that Pembrokeshire Council voted to debate an alleged fraud case in open session in March 2024, thereby overruling their statutory officers.

Response by the Portfolio Holder for Transformation, Councillor Jeff Hanna

Thank you for the question. I am always wary of responding to hypothetical questions, but I have taken advice from the Monitoring Officer and will do my best. 

The exemption applied to the report in question was under s5 Schedule 12A Local Government Act 1972 “Information in respect of which a claim to legal professional privilege could be maintained in legal  ...  view the full minutes text for item 44.

RESOLVED that members agree the draft policy as presented and that the full policy be presented to full Council on 10 December 2024 for ratification.

The Chair of the Licensing Committee, Councillor David Flagg presented the report on the Statement of Licensing Principles – Gambling Act Policy 2025-2028 and outlined the recommendations as set out on the agenda.

RESOLVED that the Statement of Licensing Principles – Gambling Act Policy 2025 – 2028 be approved.

Voting: Agreed with no dissent

RECOMMENDED that Council: -

(a)           note the confidential draft minutes and the recommendations of the Cross-Party Asset Disposal Working Group meeting held on the 4 October 2024; and

(b)           subject to a viable alternative being confirmed before the Council meeting on the 10 December 2024, approve the disposal on an open market basis of the former Westbourne Plus site including St Ambrose Cottage on such terms to be approved by the Director of Finance also acting in his capacity as Corporate Property Officer, in consultation with the Portfolio Holder for Finance.

The Portfolio Holder for Finance, Councillor Mike Cox presented the report on Westbourne Plus and outlined the recommendations as set out on the agenda.

In proposing the recommendations, the Portfolio Holder for Finance proposed an amendment to recommendation (b) so that recommendation (b) read as follows: -

(b)           Subject to a viable alternative being confirmed before the Council meeting on the 10 December 2024, approve the disposal on an open market basis of the former Westbourne Plus site including St Ambrose Cottage on such terms to be approved by the Director of Finance, also acting in his capacity as Corporate Property Officer, in consultation with the Portfolio Holder for Finance.

This was seconded by Councillor David Brown and debated as the substantive motion.

It is RESOLVED that Council: -

(a)           note the confidential draft minutes and the recommendations of the Cross-Party Asset Disposal Working Group meeting held on the 4 October 2024; and

(b)           approve the disposal on an open market basis of the former Westbourne Plus site including St Ambrose Cottage on such terms to be approved by the Director of Finance, also acting in his capacity as Corporate Property Officer, in consultation with the Portfolio Holder for Finance.

Voting: For:55, Against:1, Abstentions:9

The meeting adjourned at 7.43pm and reconvened at 7.50pm.

RECOMMENDED that: -

(a)           in relation to Issue 1 (Article 4 – The Full Council) the proposed amendments to Part 2, Article 4 (The Full Council), as set out in Appendix 1 to the report, be approved;

(b)          that the Council meeting scheduled for Tuesday, 25 February 2025 be designated as the Annual Budget Council Meeting and that an additional ordinary meeting of Council be scheduled for Tuesday, 11 February 2025 at 7.00pm;

(c)           in relation to Issue 2 (Part 3A Responsibility for Functions – Planning Committee) the proposed amendments to Part 3A (Responsibility for Functions), as set out in Appendix 2 to the report, be approved, subject to the addition of the words ‘part or all of’ in section 2.3.7 (a) to read:

“in the opinion of the Councillor making the request, the application raises material planning issues that affect part or all of their ward or would affect the wider public interest that would warrant debate and consideration by a planning committee; and”

(e)           any necessary and consequential technical and formatting related updates and revisions to the Constitution be delegated to the Monitoring Officer.

Note – resolution (d) was a resolved matter by the Committee

The Chair of the Audit and Governance Committee, Councillor Marcus Andrews presented the report on the Review of the Council’s Constitution – Recommendations of the Constitution Review Working Group and outlined the recommendations as set out on the agenda.

Councillor Kieron Wilson highlighted an omission in relation to Appendix 1, paragraph 4.3.2 whereby an additional item should be included prior to 6 to ‘agree the budget’.

In addition Councillor Wilson highlighted a grammatical error at Appendix 1, paragraph 4.3.2 point number 5(i) where it should read (i) Revenue budget (including dfees and charges…).

Council was advised that any grammatical errors would be picked up as set out in recommendation e.

RESOLVED that: -

(a)          in relation to Issue 1 (Article 4 – The Full Council) the proposed amendments to Part 2, Article 4 (The Full Council), as set out in Appendix 1 to the report, be approved;

(b)          that the Council meeting scheduled for Tuesday, 25 February 2025 be designated as the Annual Budget Council Meeting and that an additional ordinary meeting of Council be scheduled for Tuesday, 11 February 2025 at 7.00pm;

(c)          in relation to Issue 2 (Part 3A Responsibility for Functions – Planning Committee) the proposed amendments to Part 3A (Responsibility for Functions), as set out in Appendix 2 to the report, be approved, subject to the addition of the words ‘part or all of’ in section 2.3.7 (a) to read:

(d)          “in the opinion of the Councillor making the request, the application raises material planning issues that affect part or all of their ward or would affect the wider public interest that would warrant debate and consideration by a planning committee; and”

(e)          any necessary and consequential technical and formatting related updates and revisions to the Constitution be delegated to the Monitoring Officer.

Voting: Agreed with no dissent

To consider the recommendations arising from the Cabinet meeting scheduled for 10 December 2024. The recommendations will be circulated as soon as practicably possible following the meeting of the Cabinet. A copy of the reports and appendices to the Cabinet have been published and are available on the Councils website on the following link: https://democracy.bcpcouncil.gov.uk/ieListDocuments.aspx?CId=285&MId=5906&Ver=4

Cabinet 10 December - Minute No. 87 – BCP Council Plan for Play

Recommended that Council:

(c)           The allocation of £548,047 of capital funds from various planning obligations and reserves to the Improvement Plan;

(d)           The allocation of £3,390,609 from Strategic Community Infrastructure Levy to the Improvement Plan; and

(e)           Both (c) and (d) are subject to receiving the subsequent endorsement of the Director of Finance based on the availability of the necessary cash.

Note – resolutions (a) and (b) were resolved matters by the Cabinet.

Cabinet 10 December – Minute No. 93 – Linwood Special School SEND Post 16 Provision at Ted Webster

RECOMMENDED that Cabinet recommends approval of the scheme by Council to develop a satellite of Linwood Special School at the former Ted Webster Children’s Centre providing a total of 60 Post 16 places requiring a capital budget of £1.55m to develop the scheme. The scheme is fully funded from the council’s grant allocation of High Needs Provision Capital and will progress in line with the project programme set out at paragraph 12.

Cabinet 10 December - Minute No. 94 – Transforming Urgent and Emergency Care Services

RECOMMENDED that Council: -

(a)          Notes the summary of the diagnostic review, including improved outcomes for residents and financial benefits for the Council.

(b)          Notes that anticipated benefits are significantly in excess of costs to the Council.

(c)          Delegates to the Corporate Director for Wellbeing, in consultation with the Portfolio Holder for Health and Wellbeing, the Director of Law and Governance and the Director of Finance, authority to finalise and enter into the Partnership Agreement to undertake the proposed transformation programme.

Council was advised that there were three items from the Cabinet meeting earlier that day with recommendations to Council.

Minute No. 87 – BCP Council Plan for Play

The Portfolio Holder for Communities and Partnerships, Councillor Sandra Moore presented the report on BCP Council Plan for Play and outlined the recommendations as set out in the supplementary agenda papers.

Council debated the item and whilst members were supportive of the paper the following aspects were raised: -

·      Would have liked more information on strategic CIL

• There is no mention of paddling pools and in particular the Redhill paddling pool

RESOLVED that Council approved: -

(c)           the allocation of £548,047 of capital funds from various planning obligations and reserves to the Improvement Plan;

(d)           the allocation of £3,390,609 from Strategic Community Infrastructure Levy to the Improvement Plan; and

(e)           both (c) and (d) are subject to receiving the subsequent endorsement of the Director of Finance based on the availability of the necessary cash.

Note – resolutions (a) and (b) were resolved matters by the Cabinet.

Voting: Unanimous

Minute No. 93 – Linwood Special School SEND Post 16 Provision at Ted Webster

The Portfolio Holder for Children, Young People, Education and Skills, Councillor Richard Burton presented the report on the Linwood Special School SEND Post 16 Provisions at Ted Webster and outlined the recommendations as set out in the supplementary agenda papers.

RECOMMENDED that Cabinet recommends approval of the scheme by Council to develop a satellite of Linwood Special School at the former Ted Webster Children’s Centre providing a total of 60 Post 16 places requiring a capital budget of £1.55m to develop the scheme. The scheme is fully funded from the council’s grant allocation of High Needs Provision Capital and will progress in line with the project programme set out at paragraph 12.

Voting: Unanimous

(Councillors Sara Armstong, Paul Slade and Vikki Slade declared interests in this item and left the meeting for the discussion and voting thereon).

Councillor Julie Bagwell joined the meeting at 8.20pm part way through the debate on this item and therefore did not participate in the vote.

Minute No. 94 Transforming Urgent and Emergency Care Services

The Portfolio Holder for Health and Wellbeing, Councillor David Brown presented the report on Transforming Urgent and Emergency Care Services and outlined the recommendations as set out in the supplementary agenda papers.

Comprehensive discussion took place on the item with some members raising concerns with regards to the associated risks.

RESOLVED that Council: -

(a)           notes the summary of the diagnostic review, including improved outcomes for residents and financial benefits for the Council;

(b)           notes that anticipated benefits are significantly in excess of costs to the Council; and

(c)           delegates to the Corporate Director for Wellbeing, in consultation with the Portfolio Holder for Health and Wellbeing, the Director of Law and Governance and the Director of Finance, authority to finalise and enter into the Partnership Agreement to undertake the proposed transformation programme.

Voting: For:58, Against:6, Abstentions:2

Councillor Bobbie Dove joined  ...  view the full minutes text for item 48.

The Council is asked to consider and approve the review of the political balance of the Council, the allocation of seats on Committees to each political group, the appointment of Councillors on Committees and appointments to outside bodies following the result of the by-election in the Muscliff and Strouden Park Ward on 24 October 2024.

The Leader of the Council, Councillor Millie Earl presented a report, a copy of which had been circulated to each Member and a copy of which appears as Appendix 'A' to these Minutes in the Minute Book.

Council was requested to consider and approve the review of the political balance of the Council, the allocation of seats on Committees to each political group, the appointment of Councillors on Committees and the appointments to outside bodies following the result of the by-election in the Muscliff and Strouden Park Ward on 24 October 2024.

RESOLVED that: -

(a)           the revised political balance of the Council, as set out in Table 1 to this report be noted;

(b)           the number of seats on each committee, as set out in Table 2 to this report, be approved;

(c)           the allocation of committee seats to each political group, as set out in Table 3 to this report, be approved;

(d)           the appointment of Councillors to Committees and Boards in accordance with the wishes of the political groups, as detailed in Table 4 to this report, be approved;

(e)           the allocation of seats to each political group on the outside bodies, as detailed in Table 5 to this report, be approved;

(f)            the appointment of Councillors to the outside bodies in accordance with the wishes of the political groups, as detailed in Table 6 to this report, be approved;

(g)           subject to (c) above the appointment of the unaligned Members to the Committees and Boards as shown in table (d) be approved.

Voting: Agreed with no dissent

This report seeks Council’s approval of the Scheme of Allowances for 2025-2026 Municipal Year and incorporates the recommendations of the Independent Remuneration Panel (IRP) on their review of the Members’ Scheme of Allowances for 2025/26.

Council was advised that further to the interim report shared with Council in July that the Independent Remuneration Panel had now submitted its report for consideration, a copy of which had been circulated to each Member and a copy of which appears as Appendix 'B' to these Minutes in the Minute Book.

In addition, Council was made aware of a typo on page 141 whereby the recommended allowance to the leader should read £40,000.

Council was advised that the submitted report had come directly to council and had not been shared prior to this meeting with any councillor.

Further to this Council was advised that the report sought Council’s approval of the Scheme of Allowances for 2025-2026 Municipal Year and incorporated the recommendations of the Independent Remuneration Panel (IRP) on their review of the Members’ Scheme of Allowances for 2025/26.

The Leader spoke against the recommendations contained within the report stressing that the report should be rejected on the basis that the Council is already experiencing significant budget pressures and that it wasn’t the appropriate time to consider any potential changes to the members allowances which would result in additional expenditure.

Comprehensive discussion took place with the following aspects being raised: -

• The importance of the Independent Panel to review allowances
• The complex and large amounts of time councillors put into their duties
• Concern that the report didn’t address the difference in effort put in by individual councillors – allowances should be reflective of the time and effort people put in
• Councillors should be remunerated in a way which doesn’t just mean someone has to take a pay cut or give up work.
• Being a councillor is hard work and deserves to be rewarded

·      Are there ways in which councillors could deal with queries and issues more efficiently by having easy points of contact and matters resolved more swiftly.

·      Concern that the way in which the allowances are distributed is wrong, there is an imbalance

Councillor Chris Rigby proposed that the report be deferred until such time as the pay and reward matters had been resolved. This proposal was seconded by Councillor David Flagg.

RESOLVED that the report be deferred until such time as pay and reward has been finalised.

Voting: For:51, Against:15, Abstentions:1

The meeting adjourned at 9.14pm and reconvened at 9.37pm

Councillors Julie Bagwell, Brian Hitchcock and Pete Miles left the meeting at 9.14pm

This report is for information and provides the Council with details of a complaint where the subject councillor has failed to comply with a determination requesting that an apology be made following the informal resolution stage of the complaints process. 

The Chair of the Standards Committee presented a report, a copy of which had been circulated to each Member and a copy of which appears as Appendix 'C' to these Minutes in the Minute Book.

Council was advised that the report was for information and provided the Council with details of a complaint where the subject councillor had failed to comply with a determination requesting that an apology be made following the informal resolution stage of the complaints process.

RESOLVED that the report was noted.

Voting: For:55, Against:0, Abstentions:9

The Hurn Neighbourhood Plan was subject to independent examination May to August 2024. The examiner’s report received on 9 August 2024, concluded that subject to modifications, the neighbourhood plan meets basic and legal conditions. Cabinet on 4 September 2024 agreed the examiner’s modifications, together with the council’s decision statement and approved the modified plan for referendum.

The referendum took place on 24 October 2024 within the Hurn area.

The referendum question asked:

‘Do you want BCP Council to use the Neighbourhood Plan for Hurn to help it decide planning applications in the neighbourhood area?’ 

Since the result of the referendum was positive, with more than 50% of those voting, agreeing with the above question, the council must now bring the plan into force so that it forms part of the statutory development plan. It will be used alongside the Local Plan to determine planning applications in the Hurn Neighbourhood area.

The Leader of the Council presented a report, a copy of which had been circulated to each Member and a copy of which appears as Appendix 'D' to these Minutes in the Minute Book.

Council was advised that the Hurn Neighbourhood Plan was subject to independent examination May to August 2024, and that the examiner’s report received on 9 August 2024, concluded that subject to modifications, the neighbourhood plan meets basic and legal conditions.

Further to this Council was informed that Cabinet on 4 September 2024 agreed the examiner’s modifications, together with the council’s decision statement and approved the modified plan for referendum, and that the referendum had taken place on 24 October 2024 within the Hurn area.

In relation to this Council was advised that the referendum question asked:

‘Do you want BCP Council to use the Neighbourhood Plan for Hurn to help it decide planning applications in the neighbourhood area?’ 

As a result of this Council was informed that since the result of the referendum was positive, with more than 50% of those voting, agreeing with the above question, the council must now bring the plan into force so that it forms part of the statutory development plan, it will also be used alongside the Local Plan to determine planning applications in the Hurn Neighbourhood area.

Thanks were expressed to the Lead Member for Local Plan Delivery, Councillor Margaret Phipps for all her hard work.

RESOLVED that Council: -

(a)           noted the results of the Hurn Neighbourhood Plan referendum held on 24 October 2024 (Declaration of Result of Poll - Appendix 1);

(b)          agreed to make the Hurn Neighbourhood Plan (Appendix 2), that was subject to referendum on 24 October 2024, part of BCP Council’s statutory development plan so that it can be used alongside the Local Plan to determine planning applications in the Hurn neighbourhood area; and

(c)          approved the Local Planning Authority’s Decision Statement (Appendix 3) and delegate publication and circulation of the Decision Statement to the Director of Planning and Transport in consultation with the Portfolio Holder for Dynamic Places.

Voting: Unanimous

Housing Targets

The following motion submitted in accordance with Procedure Rule 10 of the Meeting Procedure Rules has been proposed by Councillor P Broadhead and seconded by Councillor B Dove: -

This Council is proud of the extensive work that was put into our recently submitted Draft Local Plan. This Local Plan was the first for the BCP Council area and was broadly realistic but also aspirational in its future housing needs, especially concerning annual housing targets.

It plans for 1600 homes per annum through the life of the Plan, which is already a 35% increase on the maximum number of homes ever delivered in the BCP area, to date, in a one year period. This figure was calculated on actual housing need from our independently produced Housing Needs Sensitivity report.

This Council is therefore concerned about the new Labour Government’s announced plans to centralise housing targets. This plan, as outlined in their new Revised Planning Policy Framework, will remove the ability for our local area to decide our own housing numbers, and instead impose a new, Westminster-dictated figure of almost 3000 homes per year. This is almost TRIPLE the number ever delivered in our best year, and almost DOUBLE the number in our submitted Local Plan.

There is simply no way these numbers can be delivered without widescale change to the physical fabric of our delicate geography.

The new Government also plans to remove the protection of our precious Green Belt by providing for the option for it to be redefined as Grey Belt. It is clear that these new targets will require extensive Green Belt release, and destruction, to provide for these new centralised targets.

This Council therefore:

Argues strongly that housing targets should remain decided locally and not dictated by Government.

Asks the Lead Member for Local Plan Delivery to write to the Secretary of State Angela Raynor to:

·         ask her to think again on these plans to remove the ability for local areas to decide their own housing figures

·         inform her that we strongly oppose the new centrally imposed figure of 2962 new homes per annum being forced to be built in the BCP Council Area

·         tell her that we want our Green Belt protected and not redefined as Grey Belt

We also ask the Council the publicly publish its formal response to the Government’s Consultation to the proposed revised NPPF for transparency purposes.

Remote Attendance and Proxy Voting

The following motion submitted in accordance with Procedure Rule 10 of the Meeting Procedure Rules has been proposed by Councillor P Broadhead and seconded by Councillor J Challinor: -

The Government has recently opened a consultation on “Enabling remote attendance and proxy voting at local authority meetings”. Typically for Government, the deadline for consultation responses is very tight, with the consultation due to close on 19^th December – only 9 days away from today’s meeting.

In the Ministerial foreword, the Minister states:

“The attendance of elected members at local authority meetings is a core part of  ...  view the full agenda text for item 53.

Council was advised that four motions had been received on this occasion.

Housing Targets

The following motion was submitted in accordance with Procedure Rule 9 of the Meeting Procedure Rules and was moved by Councillor Philip Broadhead and seconded by Councillor Toby Slade.

This Council therefore:

Argues strongly that housing targets should remain decided locally and not dictated by Government.

Asks the Lead Member for Local Plan Delivery to write to the Secretary of State Angela Raynor to:

• ask her to think again on these plans to remove the ability for local areas to decide their own housing figures
• inform her that we strongly oppose the new centrally imposed figure of 2962 new homes per annum being forced to be built in the BCP Council Area
• tell her that we want our Green Belt protected and not redefined as Grey Belt

We also ask the Council the publicly publish its formal response to the Government’s Consultation to the proposed revised NPPF for transparency purposes.

Councillor Marcus Andrews proposed an amendment to the motion with the addition of a fourth bullet point to read: -

• tell her to take urgent action to consider the number of empty homes in an area in calculating local housing numbers and to outline plans to bring such homes back into use

This amendment was seconded by Councillor Kieran Wilson.

The proposer and seconder of the original motion advised that they accepted the amendment. Council agreement was sought to confirm the amendment as the substantive motion which was subsequently carried without dissent.

Comprehensive discussion took place on the motion with members expressing concern with regards to what was deemed to be unrealistic housing targets.

This Council therefore:

Argues strongly that housing targets should remain decided locally and not dictated by Government.

Asks the Lead Member for Local Plan Delivery to write to the Secretary of State Angela Raynor to:

• ask her to think again on these plans to remove the ability for local areas to decide their own housing figures
• inform her that we strongly oppose the new centrally imposed figure of 2962 new homes per annum being forced to be built in the BCP Council Area
• tell her that we want our Green Belt protected and not redefined as Grey Belt
• tell her to take urgent action to consider the number of empty homes in an area in calculating local housing numbers and to outline plans to bring such homes back into use

We also ask the Council the publicly publish its formal response to the Government’s Consultation to the proposed revised NPPF for transparency purposes.

Voting: For:48, Against:10, Abstentions:6

Councillor Judes Butt left the meeting at 10.20pm

Remote Attendance and Proxy Voting

The following motion was submitted in accordance with Procedure Rule 9 of the Meeting Procedure Rules and was moved by Councillor Philip Broadhead and seconded by Councillor Cameron Adams.

This Council believes:

·      While there are benefits to virtual and/or hybrid meetings, especially for informal meetings and training sessions, the current regulations which  ...  view the full minutes text for item 53.

The deadline for questions to be submitted to the Monitoring Officer is Monday 2 December 2024.

Question from Councillor Duane Farr (at the Chairs discretion the question was read out by Councillor Cameron Adams in Councillor Farrs absence)

An elderly resident who requires a Blue Badge card contacted me raising his concerns about the difficulty dealing with BCP Council customer services. After numerous attempts to speak to someone on the telephone and being cut off after a lengthy wait he was informed it could take 12 weeks to receive his new Blue Badge if successful.

12 weeks wait seems excessive. In the private sector to order a new debit card from a bank it usually takes 3 days. Why such a long wait. What can be done to improve on the service for our residents?

Response from the Portfolio Holder for Customer, Communications and Culture, Councillor Andy Martin

Thank you Cllr Farr for your question. 

I am very aware as cabinet member for customer services that our Blue Badge Service is not currently where we want it to be. Indeed, I have personally dealt with a number of residents in recent weeks after they have raised their concerns with me and in most cases I have spoken with them at length on the phone - the latest on Sunday morning. 

So can I say at the outset as portfolio holder and on behalf of the council I am very sorry for the delays some residents are experiencing and thank them for their patience whilst the workload is progressed. 

I know delays can be stressful. 

The process of assessing blue badge applications is proscribed by the Department of Transport and requires a range of evidence to be provided in order to determine an applicant’s eligibility for a blue badge. 

For the majority of cases the same process applies whether an applicant is applying for the first time or if it is a renewal. 

The council receives in the region of 1000 applications each month and consequently the workload is significant. 

The DoT expects applications to be determined within 12 weeks, hence the advice given to the applicant in this case, but recent increases in demand along with staff sickness has meant that processing has taken as long as 14 or 15 weeks. 

The recent introduction of a temporary streamlined assessment process for renewals has brought the turnaround time down to around the 12 week mark and this is expected to reduce further over the next month.  

The Blue Badge service was recently discussed at length at Overview and Scrutiny committee and it was agreed I would write to the Secretary of State for Transport to express the council’s frustration at the process that is required and the time it can take, when in many cases applicants have life long conditions that will necessitate repeat blue badges. 

We recently had a response from the Future Roads Minister and I will share that with Cllr Farr. 

The Blue Badge team are working hard to process applications as quickly as possible and are currently prioritising renewals. 

The week beginning Nov  ...  view the full minutes text for item 54.

To consider any urgent decisions taken by the Chief Executive in accordance with the Constitution.

Council was advised that no urgent decisions had been taken by the Chief Executive in accordance with the Constitution since the last meeting of the Council.