Meeting Details

Meeting Summary
Cabinet
23 Oct 2024 - 18:00 to 21:00
Occurred
  • Documents
  • Attendance
  • Visitors
  • Declarations of Interests

Documents

Agenda

Part A
Live Broadcast

Please follow this link to watch the meeting live on YouTube:

 

(107) ColchesterCBC - YouTube

1 Welcome and Announcements
The Chair will welcome members of the public and Councillors to the meeting and remind those participating to mute their microphones when not talking. The Chair will invite all Councillors and Officers participating in the meeting to introduce themselves.
2 Urgent Items
The Chair will announce if there is any item not on the published agenda which will be considered because it is urgent and will explain the reason for the urgency.
3 Declarations of Interest

Councillors will be asked to say if there are any items on the agenda about which they have a disclosable pecuniary interest which would prevent them from participating in any discussion of the item or participating in any vote upon the item, or any other registerable interest or non-registerable interest.

 

4 Minutes of Previous Meeting

Cabinet will be invited to confirm that the minutes of the meeting held on 4 September 2024 are a correct record.

 

895

RESOLVED that the minutes of the meeting held on 4 September 2024 be confirmed as a correct record.

 

5 Have Your Say! (Hybrid Cabinet Meetings)

Up to eight members of the public may make representations to Cabinet meetings on any item on the agenda or any other matter relating to the business of Cabinet. Each representation may be no more than three minutes. Members of the public wishing to address Cabinet must register their wish to address the meeting by e-mailing democratic.services@colchester.gov.uk by 12.00 noon on the working day before the meeting. In addition, a written copy of the representation should be supplied.

896

Councillor Alake Akinyemi attended and addressed Cabinet pursuant to the provisions of Meetings General Procedure Rule 5(1) to highlight and celebrate the work, achievements and contribution of people of colour to businesses and organisations in Colchester.  The threats of violence and disruption over the summer which were aimed at promoting division would have done some unseen damage to the fabric of the community, the residues of which were still being seen.  She respected the contributions of people of colour to health, education, research, business and entertainment and other areas that made Colchester progressive.  However she had observed that not much had been done by the Council to highlight Black History Month, which celebrated humanity in its different shapes and shades.  Colchester was a fast growing city  and the Council should also evolve in its representation.  She would like the Portfolio Holder for Communities to provide an assurance that more would be done in future  to highlight the positives of  Colchester’s diverse communities and celebrate what is good.

Councillor Sommers, Portfolio Holder for Communities, Heritage and Public Protection responded and stressed that the disturbances across the country in the summer had been very disturbing and understood they would have an ongoing impact on diverse communities. The Community Safety Partnership and the Council were working to ensure such events did not occur in Colchester and to mitigate any effects. 

In terms of Black History Month, in previous years the Council had largely promoted events put on by the major arts organisation in Colchester, and there had been less to promote this year.  However, the Council had provided funding and promotion for an event at the Minories and it had also promoted a Cultural Inauguration event . In addition funding had been provided for a sporting event.  It was appreciated that the Council could always do more and she would revisit this and what the Council could do if she were still in the role in the future. 

Nick Chilvers attended and addressed Cabinet pursuant to the provisions of Meetings General Procedure Rule 5(1) about the Waste Strategy.  He had watched the consideration of this by the Scrutiny Panel.  Questions about the impact on residents had not been answered. Overall the session lacked time, structure and completeness. Clarification was sought on what was meant by a “community led approach” as some areas, such as Old Heath, did not have a resident’s association or community council. How would the Council engage with such communities?  It was important not to just rely on social media but for officers to get out into communities and explain to residents face to face. Information about assisted service needed to be readily available and pitched appropriately.  Many of those in need of such a service would not be the most able or confident in dealing with official bodies. The implication was that that the onus was on the resident to find solutions to problems. Could further information be provided about the process to apply for assisted collections and how decisions would be made and explained. He did not object to the proposals but they needed to be introduced with sensitivity to residents and to Colchester’s heritage. 

Councillor Goss, Portfolio Holder for Waste, Neighbourhood Services and Leisure, explained that the issues about the Scrutiny Panel were for the Chair of Scrutiny to address. It was very important that the council got the communications on the strategy right.  It needed to take account of all communities and households.  It had experience of doing this through the changes to the garden waste service.  The changes would be rolled out in a controlled manner.  Assisted collections were in place now and over 1000 households used the service,  it was expected that this would increase when the new proposals were introduced.  Details would be included in the communications about the new service, but this was not a hidden service. 

Alan Short attended and addressed Cabinet pursuant to the provisions of Meetings General Procedure Rule 5(1).  Whilst the issues he raised were concerned with Middlewick, they were concerns about how business was handled in terms of transparency and accountability and were therefore relevant to Cabinet. He been attempting to get an explanation of why a letter from Natural England was withheld from Full Council when it approved the Local Plan in July 2022.  The letter contained important information including a threat to oppose any planning application for the development of Middlewick. He had been promised a written reply from the responsible officer.  He had received an unsatisfactory response from the Portfolio Holder for Planning, Environment and Sustainability and had raised the issue with the Monitoring Officer. He had also received a response from the Portfolio Holder for Waste, Neighbourhood Services and Leisure which had advised him to be careful with his language. 

In addition it was now clear that the MOD had commissioned a report in 2017 which advised them that building houses on the site would mean not meeting their biodiversity requirements.  They had then commissioned the Stantec report, which gave a different opinion, but which was now described as “rubbish” by the Portfolio Holder.  This first report was also not disclosed to Full Council on the grounds that it was received after the Local Plan Committee had already met. Therefore when the Council made its decision it was missing two important pieces of information. 

Councillor Luxford Vaughan, Portfolio Holder for Planning, Environment and Sustainability, responded and explained that she felt the response she provided was helpful and full and gave the context of the decisions taken at the time. She had raised his concerns with the Monitoring Officer who had confirmed that no complaint had been received. She had set out her involvement in decision making at the relevant time.  She had been clear in her response that she could not have circulated the letter at the time as she did not know it existed. She had explained the process in which the letter arrived.  Her role was to oversee the Local Plan process, which was a very rigid process with set opportunities for residents and consultees to feed in their views.  Natural England were a statutory consultee who would be asked to comment on the inclusion of the site in the Local Plan.  They had responded but she was advised this was in the form of a standard letter.  They had the opportunity to put in an objection and to attend the examination by the Inspector.  The Inspector could also compel them to attend if he considered it appropriate. Anybody could also mount a legal challenge to the conclusion of the Inspector. Therefore by the time the letter was received ,the Local Plan had been through this process, with many opportunities to for Natural England to challenge the inclusion of the site. She had not even been a councillor at the time the initial report was received and therefore could not be held responsible for how it was handled. Officers were working hard to collate new ecological evidence and on the the review of the Local Plan underway, which was a considerable task but every time they were asked to deal with these issues, it took them away from that work. 

Councillor Goss, Portfolio Holder for Waste, Neighbourhood Services and Leisure explained that an allegation had been made that he suppressed the letter from Natural England in his role as the relevant Cabinet member at the time.  He had never been a Cabinet member for Planning. He had been Chair and Vice Chair of Local Plan Committee.. The only Cabinet positions he had held was as portfolio holder with responsibility for waste.  When Mr Short raised this issue on 8 October the Scrutiny Panel had directed that the relevant Portfolio Holder respond to him and had not directed that he or the Monitoring Officer respond.  He had sent a fairly curt response which advised he needed to be careful with his language, as he had not suppressed the letter and had referenced it in his speech moving the motion to Full Council. The earlier MOD report was subject of a separate investigation. 

Gordon Kerr attended and addressed Cabinet pursuant to the provisions of Meetings General Procedure Rule 5(1) to follow up comments he had made at Full Council on 16 October about the evolution and corruption of the constitution and legislation. For example under the terms of legislation, local authorities were liable to meet the liabilities and duties of residents, but did not do so. He believed that councils did not have the authority to issue demands for the payment of council tax, and corporate officers were not indemnified against prosecution for doing so.  His use of the word “grooming” at Council had not had a sexual connotation. 

Councillor Cory, Portfolio Holder for Resources, indicated that he accepted his explanation on the use of the word “grooming.”  Whilst he would look at the points raised and the legislation quoted, Councils were established to provide services to local residents, and councillors were also local residents who paid council tax. Councillors undertook their role to try and support their local community and ensure residents were provided with a good range of services.  There was not a written codified constitution built up from Magna Carta and successive charters and legislation.  

Sir Bob Russell attended and addressed Cabinet pursuant to the provisions of Meetings General Procedure Rule 5(1) to express his concern about the delegation of authority from councillors to officers. When residents stood for election they did so to better their communities, but too much power to do so was given away to officers who were not answerable to the electorate. Councillors were the people’s servants and officers were the servants of councillors but this now appeared to be reversed.  Recent examples of this included the decision to close the toilets in Lower Castle Park, without consulting ward councillors, the work on the Albert Roundabout where the greenery was being removed and replaced by non-native pants and sand and the closure of the gates to the cemetery. Concerns were also expressed about a recent decision at the Planning Committee where the wishes of the Committee had been overturned by an officer.

Councillor Cory, Portfolio Holder for Resources, responded and  explained that officer decisions were taken in accordance with an agreed scheme of delegation.  In some areas, such as planning, councillors had the opportunity to call in decisions to ensure they were taken by councillors.   He stressed the importance of communication with ward councillors in decision making and he would pick this up. Sometimes it was necessary for officers to take action in emergency situations.

Councillor Goss, Portfolio Holder for Waste, Neighbourhood Services and Leisure, explained that in respect of the decision to close the toilets in Lower Castle Park, he had been consulted on this decision and had agreed it.  It was spart of a programme of budget savings, and the alternative would have been redundancies which would have a direct impact on the delivery of front line services.   He had received no correspondence on the issue to any of his official council communication channels.  The works to the Albert Roundabout were the last element of the Fixing the Link programme.  He had cancelled the remainder of the programme but this element had been designed by Beth Chatto, who was a well respected garden designer. He would check whether ward councillors had been consulted on this. 

Ismail Çufoglu attended and addressed Cabinet pursuant to the provisions of Meetings General Procedure Rule 5(1) to thank the Council and Essex Police for their work on several community safety projects and operations.  The information on community partnership surveys and community safety campaigns on the Council’s website needed to be brought up to date.  Further information was requested on how to become a member of the Community Safety Partnership and on how much of the funding it received would be invested in anti-racism, diversity and inclusion themed projects.  It was suggested that a Hate Crime report section should be added to Community Safety page on the Council‘s webpage.  Disappointment was expressed about the lack of promotion by the Council of Hate Crime Awareness Week and Black History Month.  In respect of the Essex Police Quarter 4 Public Perception Surveys, clarification was sought as to what percentage were hate crime incidents, and how the Council and Essex Police would look to improve the results.

Councillor Sommers, Portfolio Holder for Communities, Heritage and Public Protection, indicated a written response would be sent to the detailed queries. The information on the website would be reviewed.  The issues around Black History Month had been covered in her response to an earlier speaker.  The statistics showed an decrease in anti social behaviour.  The importance of reporting issues was stressed so that statistics reflected the experience of residents and to ensure action was taken. 

 


6 Decisions Reviewed by the Scrutiny Panel
The Councillors will consider the outcome of a review of a decision by the Scrutiny Panel under the call-in procedure. At the time of the publication of this agenda, there were none.
7 Waste, Neighbourhood Services and Leisure

Cabinet is invited to adopt the new Recycling and Waste Strategy for Colchester 2025-40, following public consultation.  It is also invited to adopt the Service Delivery Plan to implement the Strategy and the new Domestic Recycling and Waste Collection Policy to support the delivery of the new Strategy and Service Plan.

 

897

The Head of Neighbourhood Services submitted a report a copy of which had been circulated to each Member.

Councillor Goss, Portfolio Holder for Waste, Neighbourhood Services and Leisure introduced the report. There were several factors behind the need for a new Recycling and Waste Strategy for Colchester.  Essex County Council, as the waste disposal authority, had launched their own new strategy, and the Environment Act 2021 was imposing new duties on local authorities to ensure a consistent approach to waste and recycling collection across the country. 

The new Recycling and Waste Strategy would mean a change in the way waste and recycling was collected to make it easier for residents with the use of wheeled bins for all waste streams and for all recycling except for glass and food waste, which would still be separated. This would generate £1 million pounds in savings and would also be good for staff, as the use of wheeled bins had been demonstrated to reduce the number of musculoskeletal injuries. 

The new arrangements would be evaluated in a pilot scheme in 2025, which would allow for lessons to be learnt and any issues addressed before it was rolled out more widely in 2025. A consultation on the strategy had had widespread engagement and had shown support for a less complex system of collection.

It was recognised that there some areas of the city where the use of multiple wheeled bins may not be appropriate and these areas had been identified.  Alternative arrangements would be used in these areas in line with the proposed policy within the report.

The proposals had been subject to consideration by the cross party Scrutiny Panel.  A suggestion had been made by a resident at Full Council about the colour of the bins and this would be actioned.

Councillor Harris attended and with the consent of the Chair addressed Cabinet to express his support for the new strategy. He asked whether devolution would have an impact on the division of responsibilities between waste collection and waste disposal authorities? The trial period was welcomed as it would allow service managers to address issues around the arrangements for homes that could not manage three wheeled bins. It was hoped that the strategy would help improve recycling rates from flats.  Confirmation was sought as to the anticipated rise in recycling rates that would be achieved.  Would it be possible for an extra recycling bin to be provided for those households who generated high levels of recycling.  Would government help with the cost of the new wheeled bins?

In response Councillor Goss explained that improvements to collections form flats was an important element of the strategy. It required the collection of food waste from flats so arrangements were being made to inspect all bin stores for flats and to see how they could be adjusted to allow for the collection of food waste.  It would be possible for households to request an additional bin or a larger bin for recycling.  In conjunction with the new Waste Strategy for Essex it was hoped that recycling rates could rise to 70%. Whilst funding had been received from government to help with previous schemes, it was unlikely that funding would be received for the supply of wheeled bins.

In discussion, Cabinet members expressed their support for the new strategy.  The use of wheeled bins for garden waste had allayed some concerns about the use of wheeled bins more widely.  The importance of clear and accessible communication to residents was stressed as was the need to ensure councillors were fully briefed so that they could help residents. Clarification was sought on the arrangements for assisted collections and whether these could be arranged on someone else’s behalf, and to what extent that bins could personalised. The close working relationship with Essex County Council was welcomed.  This contrasted well with previous periods when the respective county and district strategies diverged, which was not in the best interests of either party. 

Councillor Goss confirmed that assisted collections would be well promoted. It was possible to nominate another household for an assisted collection.  However, this did not extend to sorting waste and recycling.   The point on the personalisation of bins would be checked. 

RESOLVED that:- 

(a) The Recycling and Waste Strategy for Colchester 2025 to 2040 at Appendix A to the Head of Neighbourhood Services report, be adopted post the public consultation  

(b) The Service Delivery Plan for implementation of the Strategy be adopted as set out in the Head of Head of Neighbourhood Services report.

(c) The new Domestic Recycling and Waste Collection Policy to support the delivery of the new Strategy and Service Plan, at Appendix C to the Head of Neighbourhood Services report, be adopted. 
 
REASONS 

The updated strategy enables Colchester City Council to drive significant change to reach ambitious targets and ensure alignment with national policy. The strategy has been realigned to ensure respondents’ comments and feedback have been fully considered in the strategy, policy and operational development and delivery. This new Recycling and Waste Strategy for Colchester, covering the period up to 2040, positions Colchester to better meet future waste management challenges, align with national policies, and continue to deliver high-quality, sustainable and affordable waste services to its residents.

ALTERNATIVE OPTIONS 


The current strategy is retained and is not subject to any significant update.

This option would involve maintaining the existing waste management framework and practices that have been in place since the adoption of the 2015 Waste Vision and 2016 Waste Strategy. Retaining the current strategy would mean not addressing the emerging challenges and opportunities identified through recent operational experiences and feedback, such as the need for increased operational resilience, adaptability to population growth, and alignment with new national waste policies. This could result in continued inefficiencies, reduced service effectiveness, and potential non-compliance with evolving government regulations like the Environment Act (2021). Moreover, the current approach may not adequately address community concerns about waste management, and the potential environmental impact of existing practices. Consequently, the Council could face increased operational costs, missed opportunities for improved sustainability, and diminished public satisfaction with waste services.


 
8 Strategy

Cabinet will consider a report which proposes changes to the Strategic Plan Delivery Plan (SPDP) which underpins delivery priorities and overarching outcomes of the Strategic Plan 2023-26 .

 

898

The Strategic Director submitted a report a copy of which had been circulated to each Member. 

Councillor Cory, Portfolio Holder for Resources, introduced the report.  It proposed changes to the Strategic Plan Delivery Plan, which underpinned the delivery priorities and outcomes of the Strategic Plan, to reflect the Fit for the Future programme.  It was emphasised that no changes were proposed to the six strategic outcomes set out in the Strategic Plan.   The Delivery Plan set out 49 specific actions.  These would be closely monitored and managed and performance was reported to Scrutiny Panel and to Cabinet.

Councillor Smith, Portfolio Holder for Housing, highlighted that in respect of the Strategic Plan priority “Delivering homes for those most in need,” the first families had been moved into former student accommodation, as outlined at the last Cabinet meeting.  This was a significant improvement in the standard of accommodation they were being provided with and he thanked all the officers involved. 
 
RESOLVED that the changes to the priority actions which are monitored in support of the delivery of the Council’s Strategic Plan be agreed,. 

REASONS 
 
To ensure delivery against the Strategic Plan 2023-26 including the allocation of appropriate resources. 

It is good practice and necessary to annually review and refresh the steps taken and activities which need focus to best achieve the desired Strategic Plan Outcomes.    

ALTERNATIVE OPTIONS 

It is essential that an adequately resourced delivery plan is in place to ensure delivery of the Council’s Strategic Plan. There are a range of actions that could deliver against the Strategic Plan, but the proposed actions represent those that deliver most effectively with the available resources. The action plan can also be reviewed throughout the year if alternative actions emerge.

The Council could make no changes to the existing Strategic Plan Delivery Plan.  This would result in actions and activities that risk being out of date or do not effectively reflect the work needed to drive forward the Councils ambitions, it would also make monitoring of progress and achievement difficult going forward.    

 

 

Cabinet will consider a report inviting it to approve a new Social Media Strategy that sets out the approach the council will take over the next two years to ensure that activity aligns with and supports the vision and priorities of the council.

 

899

The Strategic Communications and Marketing Manager submitted a report a copy of which had been circulated to each Member.

Councillor Cory, Portfolio Holder for Resources, introduced the report and welcomed the new Social Media Strategy. This built on a more modern and more community focused approach over the last eighteen months, which had been successful in engaging with residents.  For example Facebook reach had increased 35.5% since 2023 and by 8500% since 2022.  The new approach was clearly working.

Councillor Goss, Portfolio Holder for Waste, Neighbourhood Services and Leisure, welcomed the new approach and thanked the Communications and Marketing Team.  This would help with the roll out of the Recycling and Waste Strategy. 

RESOLVED that the Social Media Strategy 2024-26 be approved as the principal policy document for communication with residents, businesses and stakeholders through the council’s corporate social media channels.  

REASONS 

Social media supports all the council’s priorities as it is a key communication tool for the council to engage with communities and stakeholders. It enables a positive and proactive flow of information on council developments and activities.  It is a set of marketing tools that helps drive interest, footfall and income, for Council owned companies and the Museum service and for the council’s partners, and businesses across Colchester.
 
ALTERNATIVE OPTIONS 

Without a social media strategy, the council faces several significant risks. 

It may struggle to effectively communicate with residents, missing out on opportunities to share important updates, emergency information, and community events. This can lead to a lack of transparency and trust between the council and its residents. 

The absence of a social media presence can result in a failure to engage with younger demographics who primarily use these platforms for information. This can create a disconnect and reduce community involvement. 

Without a proactive approach to social media, the council may be ill-prepared to manage crises or misinformation, potentially exacerbating issues and damaging its reputation. 

The lack of a social media strategy can hinder the council’s ability to promote local initiatives, services, and tourism, ultimately impacting economic growth and community wellbeing.

 


9 Economic Growth and Transformation

Cabinet will consider the Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman Annual Review Letter, which provides information on the number of complaints it has received regarding Colchester City Council. 

 

900

The Head of Governance and Monitoring Officer submitted a report a copy of which had been circulated to each Member.

Councillor Jay, Portfolio Holder for Economic Growth and Transformation, introduced the report, which set out the details of the Council Annual Review Letter from the Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman for 2024.  This set out details of the complaints made to the Ombudsman. It was noted that anyone could choose to make a complaint to the Ombudsman.  Twenty-two complaints had been made in the reporting period, which was a small number in the context of the overall number of customer interactions.  Five complaints had been upheld, none of which included a finding of maladministration.  It was noted that a more robust approach was being taken by the Ombudsman, especially in respect of housing, reflecting a rise in the standards expected.  The Council had complied with all recommendations made by the Ombudsman. 
 
RESOLVED that the contents of the Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman’s Annual Review Letter for 2024 be noted.
 
REASONS 

To inform the Cabinet of the contents of the Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman’s Annual Review Letter relating to Colchester City Council for 2024.  
 
ALTERNATIVE OPTIONS 

No alternative options were proposed to Cabinet. 

 

 

Cabinet will consider a recommendation from the Member Development Group that the Council should seek reaccreditation for Member Charter Status.

 

901

The Head of Governance submitted a report a copy of which had been circulated to each Member.

Councillor Jay, Portfolio Holder for Economic Growth and Transformation, introduced the report to endorse the recommendation from the Member Development Group that the Council seek reaccreditation for Member Charter Status. Member Charter Status demonstrated that the Council’s member development processes were in line with good practice and provided reassurance to residents that members were supported to help them undertake their role.  She thanked the members of the Group. 

Councillor Cory, Portfolio Holder for Resources, supported the recommendation and highlighted  the wide ranging training and briefing offered to members and the support provided by the Democratic Services team.
 
RESOLVED that:- 

(a) The Council should commit to seeking reaccreditation for Member Charter Status 
(b) The Council should not seek accreditation at the Charter Plus level at this time. 
 
REASONS 
 
The benefits of Charter Status are that it demonstrates that the Council’s member development processes are in line with good practice.  This provides reassurance to current and potential members, and to other external inspections such as Peer Reviews. It also provides a reassurance to residents that their elected representatives are provided with effective support to enable them to undertake their roles and responsibilities effectively.  

ALTERNATIVE OPTIONS 

Cabinet could decide not to seek reaccreditation for Charter Status or to do so at the Charter Plus level.

 

 
10 General

Cabinet will consider a report inviting it to approve the calendar of meetings for the 2025-26 municipal year.

 

902

The Head of Governance submitted a report a copy of which had been circulated to each Member.

Councillor Cory, Portfolio Holder for Resources introduced the report.  He explained that he had received a submission from Councillor Pearson, who was unable to attend, requesting that that the calendar be aligned with Essex County Council term dates and that meetings be avoided during half term holidays, Easter and Christmas holidays. For those who worked in education or had family members who worked in that sector, these opportunities to take a break. He believed that Council had set such a policy, but it was noted that meetings were scheduled in the forthcoming October half term.

The Democratic Services Manager explained that  the Essex County Council term dates were shown on the calendar.  As the report stated, it was policy to avoid Full Council meetings in the school holiday periods, but he was not aware of a policy to avoid other holidays.  Given the number of meetings it was necessary to schedule this would be impractical.  There were also statutory deadlines that needed to be accommodated in the scheduling of some meetings,  For 2025-26 there were comparatively few meetings scheduled in the holidays identified.  These included two meetings of the Planning Committee.  These were on a regular three week cycle designed to ensure that planning applications were deal with in a timely manner and in accordance with performance targets and it was not recommended that these be rescheduled. There was also a Crime Disorder Committee meeting scheduled in February half term.  The timetabling of this was based on the receipt of statistical information to inform the Committee but it could be looked at again if Cabinet wished.

Cabinet members noted that arrangements were in place to allow members to be substituted if they could not attend. It was also noted that the Local Government Boundary Commission had not recommended an increase in the number of Councillors, which would have helped with workload issues.  It was right that Full Council meetings were not scheduled in the school holidays and this should be maintained but it was impractical to restrict the scheduling of meetings further. 

It was noted that there was only one Crime and Disorder Committee meeting scheduled.  The Democratic Services Manager reported that this had been agreed with the team supporting the Community Safety Partnership, and until recently, there had only been one meeting per year.  However, further consideration would be given to this. 
 
RESOLVED that:- 

(a) The draft Calendar of Meetings for the next municipal year, from May 2025 to April 2026  as set out at Appendix A to the Head of Governance’s report be approved, subject to further consideration of an additional Crime and Disorder Committee meeting.

(b) Authority to cancel meetings be delegated to the Chair of the relevant Committee/Panel in conjunction with the Head of Governance.

 REASONS 

The Calendar of Meetings needed to be determined so that decisions for the year can be timetabled into the respective work programmes and the Forward Plan.

Advance notice of the Calendar of Meetings needs to be made available to Councillors and to external organisations, parish councils and other bodies with which the Council works in partnership, and to those members of the public who may wish to attend meetings of the Council and make representations.

Rooms will also need to be reserved as soon as possible so that room bookings can be made for private functions by private individuals, external organisations and internal Council groups. 

A formal arrangement needs to be in place for the cancellation of meetings that no longer need to be held.
 
ALTERNATIVE OPTIONS 

This proposal has been largely devised based on the current meeting structure and frequency.  It would be possible to devise alternative proposals using different criteria. 

 

 

Cabinet will consider a report setting out the progress of responses to members of the public who spoken under the Have Your Say provisions at recent meetings of Council, Cabinet and the Council's Committees and Panels.

 

903

The Democratic Services Manager submitted a progress sheet a copy of which had been circulated to each Member.

RESOLVED that the contents of the Progress Sheet be noted.

REASONS

The progress sheet was a mechanism by which the Cabinet could ensure that public statements and questions were responded to appropriately and promptly. 
 
ALTERNATIVE OPTIONS

No alternative options were presented to the Cabinet. 

 

 
11 Exclusion of the Public (Cabinet)
In accordance with Section 100A(4) of the Local Government Act 1972 and in accordance with The Local Authorities (Executive Arrangements) (Meetings and Access to Information) (England) Regulations 2012 to exclude the public, including the press, from the meeting so that any items containing exempt information (for example personal, financial or legal advice), in Part B of this agenda (printed on yellow paper) can be decided. (Exempt information is defined in Section 100I and Schedule 12A of the Local Government Act 1972).
Part B
12 Minutes - Part B

Cabinet will be invited to approve the not for publication extract from the minutes of the meeting of 4 September 2024.

 

904

RESOLVED that the not for publication extract from the minutes of the meeting held on 4 September 2024 be confirmed as a correct record. 

 


04-09-24 not for publication extract
  • This report is not for publication by virtue of paragraph 3 of Part 1 of Schedule 12A to the Local Government Act 1972 (financial / business affairs of a particular person, including the authority holding information).

Attendance

Attended - Other Members
Apologies
NameReason for Sending Apology
Councillor David King  
Absent
NameReason for Absence
No absentee information has been recorded for the meeting.

Declarations of Interests

Member NameItem Ref.DetailsNature of DeclarationAction
No declarations of interest have been entered for this meeting.

Visitors

Visitor Information is not yet available for this meeting