Agenda and minutes

To receive any apologies for absence from Councillors.

Apologies for absence were received from Councillors Hazel Allen, Julie Bagwell, Judes Butt, Paul Hilliard, Gillian Martin, Chris Matthews, Sandra Moore, Rachel Pattinson-West, Judy Richardson, Vanessa Ricketts and Vikki Slade.

It was confirmed that Councillor Bobbie Dove was due to join partway through the meeting.

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.

None.

To confirm and sign as a correct record the minutes of the Meeting held on 11 February 2025.

RESOLVED: - That the minutes of the meeting held on 11 February 2025 be approved as a correct record.

Voting: Agreed with no dissent

To receive any announcements from the Chairman.

The Chairman updated Council on her activity since the meeting held on 10 December 2024, which included attendance at the following events:

•         Celebration of the Marriott Hotel refurbishment;

•         Opening Southbourne on the Green Christmas lights;

•         Soroptomist Christmas celebration;

•         Entertaining Glenmoor and Winton School pupils;

•         Hall and Woodhouse Community Chest distribution;

•         Holocaust Memorial Day at the Lighthouse;

•         Holocaust Memorial Day in the BCP chamber;

•         Business Awards;

•         Stained Glass Launch in Highcliffe Castle.

The Vice Chairman updated Council on his activity since the meeting held on 10 December 2024, which included attendansce at a celebration for the Vice-Chancellor of Arts University Bournemouth.

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 3 clear working days before the meeting (Wednesday 19 February 2025.)

The deadline for the submission of a statement is mid-day the working day before the meeting (Monday 24 February 2025.)

The deadline for the submission of a petition is 10 working days before the meeting (Monday 10 February 2025.)

Public Questions

Public Question from Clive Block

Can the Council clarify what plans are in place to replace the signs for Poole's lifting bridges? Furthermore, could the Council provide a clear timescale for when this will be completed?

Response by the Portfolio Holder for Climate Response, Environment and Energy, Councillor Andy Hadley

Thank you Mr Block for your question, which i understand you have also asked via your MP, and the Engineering team have already answered.

The team responsible for the bridge signs have been working over several years to try and rectify the malfunctions with the signs which have not been straightforward to resolve, as there has often been no single identifiable cause. I have also myself noticed incorrect information as I have crossed the bridge, from time to time, and have advised the bridge operators of the issue.

We apologise for the negative impact these malfunctions have had on the public, including yourself.

We have identified a way forward and plan, (subject to financial approvals and successful procurement), to replace the current rotating prism signs with modern LED alternatives in the coming financial year.

Public Question from Susan Stockwell

I am advised by White Ribbon that a council which has received their accreditation, is expected to be working towards a licensing policy on strip clubs with a presumption against licensing. Furthermore, BCP's first sex establishment licensing policy was quashed by Judicial Review, following the unlawful failure to consider complaints by women of harassment by strip club customers. Will this council now be apologising to those women?

If it can be arranged for both the cabinet member for diversity and the member for regulatory services to answer this, I would be grateful. It is not clear where responsibility for the decision making which led to the above Judicial Review lies between the two functions. 

Response by the Portfolio Holder for Housing and Regulatory Services, Councillor Kieron Wilson

Thank you for your question, Susan. When forming the previous sexual entertainment policy, Licensing Committee members considered all responses and consulted with the community safety colleagues and Dorset Police to assess the evidence of issues linked to the sexual establishment venues. These inquiries did not support the feedback received with little evidence of incidences.

To say that the Council disregarded women who said they were victims of harassment by strip club clients is incorrect. The consultation feedback focused on feelings of safety in the area which is busy in the nighttime economy location. The judicial review found the documented consideration of the feedback received was not prescriptive enough to outline why these views did not form a larger part of policy considerations. It does not mean that these views were disregarded. They were considered and the evidence did not support it. It was recognised at the conclusion of the judicial review as it was reached with some reluctance because BCP had taken an otherwise diligent and extensive consultation.

The judgement against our previous sexual entertainment policy does not have any impact on  ...  view the full minutes text for item 73.

Council is advised that a petition with 2000+ valid signatures has been received from Ms Joscelyn Holbrook requesting that:

“We the undersigned petition the council to stop the closure of Redhill paddling pool and secure it's long term future with sustainable funding.

Every year, thousands of parents bring their children to Redhill Park to enjoy the paddling pool. This well-loved family activity has become a cherished tradition for many residents in Bournemouth over the years. However, due to Council cuts, residents are facing the paddling pool permanently closing.

The decision to no longer financially support BCP pools has been met with dismay by the local community. Redhill paddling pool is not just a place for children to have fun, it supports the local café and is a destination people want to visit to allow children to play.

Residents understand that budget constraints are real, however, believe there must be other ways to address these financial challenges without depriving the community of such an essential amenity. Residents urge the Council to reconsider their decision and explore alternative funding solutions.

We, taxpaying residents are not happy at this decision to no longer fund the pool. Council tax is rising but we are seeing less and less for our money. The playgrounds have significantly deteriorated due to lack of funding over the years. The pool is such as well used community assist it needs to be saved from permanent closure.”

In accordance with the Constitution a petition with 2,000 + signatures will be referred for debate at a meeting of full Council. Council is asked to consider the petition and to determine next steps.

Consideration was given to a petition calling for BCP Council to continue funding of the Redhill Paddling Pool.

The petition organiser, Ms Joscelyn Holbrook, provided Council with background relating to the submitted petition.

Members thanked the petition organiser for bringing the petition to Council, and Councillor T Slade moved the following motion:

“Ask Overview and Scrutiny to commission a new Task and Finish Group to investigate how we arrived at this situation, propose a long-term financial plan within council resources, and report back to Full Council at a later date.”

Councillor C Adams seconded the motion.

Council debated the motion, and Councillor C Rigby moved an amendment to the motion, to delete words so that the motion read:

“Ask Overview and Scrutiny to commission a new Task and Finish Group toinvestigate how we arrived at this situation, propose a long-term financial plan within council resources, and investigate ways to keep the paddling pool open and report back to Full Council at a later date.”

The proposed amendment to the motion was accepted by Councillor T Slade and Council unanimously voted to approve the amendment.

Council debated the substantive motion and this was unanimously agreed.

RESOLVED: - That Council ask Overview and Scrutiny to investigate how we arrived at this situation, and investigate ways to keep the paddling pool open and report back to full Council.

Voting: Agreed with no dissent

Councillor B Dove joined the meeting at 19:44.

The Chairman confirmed that, as set out in correspondence from Democratic Services, agenda items 7 & 9 had been added to the agenda in error. These items had been resolved at the Council meeting held on 10 December 2024 and had therefore been withdrawn.

The Chairman agreed to vary the order of the agenda to take item 11 first, followed by item 8, as these items were linked.

Due to reasons of urgency, this item was resolved at the Council meeting on 10 December 2024. It has been duplicated on this agenda in error and has therefore been withdrawn.

The item was added to the agenda in error and was withdrawn prior to the meeting.

Hawkwood Road:

RECOMMENDED to Council that

a) Approval of an increase in the authorised borrowing limit of the Council to accommodate the £6.1m in the HRA for social rent/shared ownership and £3.2m in the general fund of prudential borrowing for Option 1 of this scheme and the proposal in the business cases for the financing of this debt;

OR

b) Approval of an increase in the authorised borrowing limit of the Council to accommodate the £6.9m in the HRA for social rent/shared ownership of prudential borrowing for Option 2 of this scheme and the proposal if the business cases for the financing of this debt Option 1 cannot be delivered.

(Recommendation c) has been deferred, pending further investigation and due diligence. The recommendation will be brought to a future meeting of Council in due course.)

The Chairman of the Audit and Governance Committee, Councillor M Andrews presented the report on the Hawkwood Road and Housing Delivery Council Newbuild Housing and Acquisition Strategy (CNHAS) and outlined the revised recommendations circulated to all members prior to the meeting.

RESOLVED: - That Council agrees the

(a)           Approval of an increase of £9.3m in the authorised borrowing limit of the Council to accommodate in the HRA £6.1m for social rent/shared ownership and £3.2m in the general fund of prudential borrowing for Option 1 of this scheme and the proposal in the business cases for the financing of this debt; OR

(b)           Approval of an increase of £6.9m in the authorised borrowing limit of the Council in the HRA for social rent/shared ownership of prudential borrowing for Option 2 of this scheme and the proposal of the business cases for the financing of this debt if Option 1 cannot be delivered.

Voting: Agreed with no dissent

It is RECOMMENDED that Council: -

(a)          approve option 1 for the Hawkwood Road development scheme for 68 units and a clinical facility at a total scheme cost of £28.7m (preferred option);

(b)           approve option 2 (fully residential) to be delivered at total scheme cost of £26.6m in the event we are unable to deliver Option 1 (the mixed-use scheme which includes the clinical facility);

(c)           approve the financial strategy for the scheme for both options inclusive of borrowing level over 50 years from both the Housing Revenue Account and the General Fund;

(d)           approve the procurement of construction works of Hawkwood Road Ph2 through an open and competitive tender for the preferred option, subject to securing Homes England Affordable Housing Grant and a viable HRA business plan;

(e)           approve of the delegation to the Chief Operations Officer in conjunction with the Director of Finance and the Director of Law& Governance authority to enter contracts for building works, the Memorandum of Understanding with the NHS Dorset and the lease for the Clinical Facility, providing all key parameters (including delivery within approved capital budget) are met;  

(f)            Approval of the appropriation of part of the main Hawkwood Road south site for housing purposes under section 19 of the Housing Act 1985 following its appropriation for planning purposes, once the required car parking area has been formally closed; and

(g)           Approval of the transfer of the land to be held for housing purposes from the General Fund (GF) to the Housing Revenue Account (HRA) for an appropriate certified financial consideration.

The Portfolio Holder for Housing and Regulatory Services, Councillor K Wilson presented the report on Hawkwood Road Phase 2 and outlined the recommendations as set out on the agenda.

RESOLVED that Council: -

(a)           approve option 1 for the Hawkwood Road development scheme for 68 units and a clinical facility at a total scheme cost of£28.7m (preferred option);

(b)           approve option 2 (fully residential) to be delivered at total scheme cost of £26.6m in the event we are unable to deliver Option 1(the mixed-use scheme which includes the clinical facility);

(c)           approve the financial strategy for the scheme for both options inclusive of borrowing level over 50 years from both Housing Revenue Account and the General Fund;

(d)           approve the procurement of construction works of Hawkwood Road Ph2 through an open and competitive tender for the preferred option, subject to securing Homes England Affordable Housing Grant and a viable HRA business plan;

(e)           approve of the delegation to the Chief Operations Officer in conjunction with the Director of Finance and the Director of Law & Governance authority to enter contracts for building works, the Memorandum of Understanding with the NHS Dorset and the lease for the Clinical Facility, providing all key parameters (including delivery within approved capital budget) are met;

(f)            Approval of the appropriation of part of the main Hawkwood Road south site for housing purposes under section 19 of the Housing Act 1985 following its appropriation for planning purposes, once the required car parking area has been formally closed; and

(g)           Approval of the transfer of land to be held for housing purposes from the general fund (GF) to the Housing revenue Account (HRA) for an appropriate certified financial consideration.

Voting: Agreed with no dissent

Due to reasons of urgency, this item was resolved at the Council meeting on 10 December 2024. It has been duplicated on this agenda in error and has therefore been withdrawn.

The item was added to the agenda in error and was withdrawn prior to the meeting.

RESOLVED that:-

The Scrap Metal Dealer Policy 2025-2030 be approved.

The Chairman of the Licensing Committee, Councillor D Flagg presented the report on the revised Scrap Metal Dealer Policy and outlined the recommendations as set out on the agenda.

RESOLVED: - That the Scrap Metal Dealer Policy 2025-2030 be approved.

Voting: Agreed with no dissent

RECOMMENDED that Council: -

(d)  Approve the phase two fleet replacement programme of £19.857m over 3 years;

(e)  Approve the use of £18.692m new prudential borrowing for the Fleet Replacement Plan and the capital investment necessary in increasing associated EV charging infrastructure recognising the impact of this on the annual revenue budget requirement; and

(f)   Approve use of capital receipts from the sales of vehicles of £1.165m to fund part of the phase 2 fleet replacement plan.

Note: resolutions a) to c) were resolved matters by Cabinet.

The Portfolio Holder for Climate Response, Environment & Energy, Councillor A Hadley presented the report on Phase 2 - Council Sustainable Fleet Management Strategy and Fleet Replacement Programme and outlined the recommendations as set out on the agenda.

RESOLVED that Council: -

(d)           Approve the phase two fleet replacement programme of £19.857m over 3 years;

(e)           Approve the use of £18.692m new prudential borrowing for the Fleet Replacement Plan and the capital investment necessary in increasing associated EV charging infrastructure recognising the impact of this on the annual revenue budget requirement; and

(f)            Approve use of capital receipts from the sales of vehicles of £1.165m to fund part of the phase 2 fleet replacement plan.

Voting: For: 50, Against: 1 (12 abstentions)

Note: resolutions a) to c) were resolved matters by Cabinet.

Council is asked to approve the appointments of Councillors to external bodies.

The Leader of the Council, Councillor M Earl, presented the report on appointments to Outside Bodies, and outlined the recommendations as set out on the agenda. The amended appointments found in the supplementary appendix were highlighted.

It was agreed that members would forward any further amendments to Democratic Services for review.

RESOLVED that Council:-

(a)           approves the appointment of individual Councillors to the external bodies as set out Appendix 1 of this report; and

(b)           Council delegates the appointment of any listed vacancies or any individual changes to the Monitoring Officer in consultation with the Leader and appropriate Group Leaders

Voting: Nem. Con.

Councillor C Goodall left the meeting at 21:01.

Councillor C Goodall returned to the meeting at 21:05.

Council adjourned at 21:05.

Councillors J Challinor, A Filer, D Flagg, B Hitchcock, M Phipps and C Weight left the meeting.

Council reconvened at 21:15.

Councillor A Martin returned to th meeting at 21:24.

The deadline for questions to be submitted to the Monitoring Officer is Wednesday 19 February 2025.

Question from Councillor Gavin Wright

Owing to the growing controversy in the local newspaper and on social media regarding the traffic wands on Wimborne Road, Poole. As well as the unwanted difficulties these impediments cause to the residents where the wands have been installed.

I would like to ask what consultation process had been carried out specifically regarding the wands. How were the residents directly affected consulted, before the wands were installed. If more of these wands are going to be installed around BCP how the council consult and engage with the residence that are going to be affected.

Response from the Portfolio Holder for Climate Response, Environment and Energy, Councillor Andy Hadley

Councillor Wright. Thank you for your question.

As Ward Councillor for the area, I understand that residents at 8 properties along this road complained about the location of the wands outside their homes. The positioning was reviewed and adjusted by the team as a result. That does not constitute a controversy on this topic, and there have been no further concerns raised in the last 7 weeks.

The Councillor knows very well that there was an in-person consultation with the public, he was at the meeting and gave me his view on the scheme at some length. In addition, there were online materials and multiple letter-drops to the residents along the road. The letter was sent on 7th September 2023.

The design was adjusted to reduce the risk of flooding into residents gardens and homes.

A few people continue to park inside the wands, across the cycleway and pavement. This is illegal. Double yellow line restrictions apply to the back of the highway boundary.

Given the increasing width of vehicles, and the manner of driving by some, the use of measures like wands to protect schoolchildren in particular, is an important tool, and where officers recommend their use, they will form part of the consultation process on future schemes.

Wands are a cost- effective measure of installing some form of physical barrier to protect vulnerable road users. Re-aligning kerbs and drainage is preferable, but more expensive.

Supplementary Question from Councillor Gavin Wright

As you mentioned about vehicles using their cycle lanes, I'd like to know what the correct procedure is, or advice for cars, vans and lorries delivering to the addresses along Wimbledon Road. There's now no room to stop on the highway as it's too narrow so that packages from cars, vans and lorries can't safely be delivered. Are delivery vehicles supposed to negotiate their way down the cycle lane which they wouldn't be able to do in the case of lorries anyway because the bollards are too close together? Or are they supposed to stop in the driving lane which would block it completely on one side? This is a particular problem for building materials as has been mentioned by a couple of residents as they're delivered by HIAPs, lorry mounted cranes. They can't reach over the cycle lane and path to their houses and  ...  view the full minutes text for item 82.

1.      Motion to Expand the Scope of the Public Inquiry into Failings Leading to Violent Crimes

The following motion submitted in accordance with Procedure Rule 10 of the Meeting Procedure Rules has been proposed by Councillor J Salmon and seconded by Councillor S Armstrong.

Council Notes:

1. The Prime Minister, Keir Starmer, has ordered a public inquiry into the failures that allowed Axel Rudakubana to commit the Southport killings, with a focus on systemic failings across multiple agencies, including Prevent, social services / children's services , and the justice system.
2. The tragic murder of Thomas Roberts in Bournemouth by Lawangeen Abdulrahimzai, a convicted murderer who had evaded detection despite being wanted for murder in Serbia and having a history of violent behaviour, also raises serious questions about systemic failures in asylum, policing, social services / children’s services and border security.
3. The UK government has committed to an internal Home Office review into the red flags missed in Abdulrahimzai’s case, but this falls short of the independent public scrutiny required to fully understand and address the failings that led to the murder of Thomas Roberts.
4. These concerns about the shortcomings of the internal home office review and subsequent inquest into Thomas Roberts killing are felt strongly by his family who have consistently called for a full public inquiry into the circumstances of his murder.

Council Believes:

1. The failures in both the Rudakubana and Abdulrahimzai cases demonstrate serious deficiencies in the ability of UK authorities to prevent individuals, especially young people, with violent histories from posing a danger to the public.
2. A limited inquiry focusing only on the Southport killings would miss an opportunity to comprehensively assess the systemic issues across immigration control, law enforcement, and public safety agencies.
3. The families of victims, including Thomas Roberts, deserve full transparency and accountability in understanding how these tragic failures were allowed to occur and what measures will be implemented to prevent future occurrences.

Council Resolves:

To request that the Leader of the Council write to the Prime Minister, Keir Starmer, asking him to ensure that the public enquiry is comprehensive and covers all failures to ensure that future safeguards are put in place to prevent similar tragedies from occurring, and urging him to widen the scope of the public inquiry into systemic failings in the UK’s handling of violent offenders to:-

a)    Include the case of Thomas Roberts and other similar cases where institutional failings played a significant role in how events unfolded;

b)    Ensure that any review or inquiry examines the processes that allowed Abdulrahimzai to enter the country undetected, the adequacy of police responses to prior warnings about his behaviour, the adequacy of children's services responses to prior warnings about his behaviour and the wider implications for border security and asylum vetting procedures.

2.      Motion: Support for the Safer Phones Bill and Local Policy Development

The following motion submitted in accordance with Procedure Rule 10 of the Meeting Procedure Rules has been proposed by Councillor J Salmon and seconded by Councillor Alasdair Keddie.  ...  view the full agenda text for item 83.

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

Motion to expand the scope of the public enquiry into failings leading to violent crimes

The following motion submitted in accordance with Procedure Rule 10 of the Meeting Procedure Rules was proposed by Councillor J Salmon and seconded by Councillor S Armstrong.

Council debated the motion and it was:

RESOLVED that Council resolves to request that the Leader of the Council write to the Prime Minister, Keir Starmer, asking him to ensure that the public enquiry is comprehensive and covers all failures to ensure that future safeguards are put in place to prevent similar tragedies from occurring, and urging him to widen the scope of the public inquiry into systemic failings in the UK’s handling of violent offenders to:-

(a)           Include the case of Thomas Roberts and other similar cases where institutional failings played a significant role in how events unfolded;

(b)           Ensure that any review or inquiry examines the processes that allowed Abdulrahimzai to enter the country undetected, the adequacy of police responses to prior warnings about his behaviour, the adequacy of children's services responses to prior warnings about his behaviour and the wider implications for border security and asylum vetting procedures.

Voting: For: 55, Against: 0 (2 abstentions)

Motion for support for the Safer Phones Bill and local policy development

The following motion submitted in accordance with Procedure Rule 10 of the Meeting Procedure Rules was proposed by Councillor J Salmon and seconded by Councillor A Keddie.

In moving the motion Councillor J Salmon amended the motion to remove reference to the Bill’s banning of phones, as this was not factual.

Cllr Burton moved an amendment so that the proposed resolution read:

“This Council resolves to:

1. Instruct the Leader of the Council to write to the Secretary of State for Education and the Secretary of State for Science, Innovation, and Technology, urging them to support and champion the Safer Phones Bill.
2. Request that the Leader of the Council also writes to the head teachers of all local schools within BCP to encourage discussion on the implementation of stronger smartphone policies.recognise the efforts that they have already made to protect their students from the potential harm of smartphone usage and ask schools to review their phone policies to ensure that they are in line with the Bill.
3. Establish a local task force, in collaboration with schools, parents, and relevant stakeholders,Request the Portfolio holder for Children, Young People, Education and Skills to
   • discuss the requirements of the Bill at the next appropriate Headteachers Breakfast Meeting, to help to develop a suitably consistent, conurbation-wide policy on smartphone use in educational settings, ensuring best practices are shared and implemented.
   • and seek the views of the youth parliament ensuring that they are considered when forming any policy.”

Council agreement was sought to confirm the amendment as the substantive motion which was subsequently carried without dissent.

Council proceeded to debate the substantive motion, where it was:

RESOLVED:- that this  ...  view the full minutes text for item 83.

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

The Chief Executive advised Council that one urgent decision had been taken since the previous meeting, to appoint Executive Directors to the Tricuro board.