Meeting Details

Precious Adeyinka addressed Council pursuant to the provisions of Council Procedure Rule 6(1) to highlight the cumulative pressures experienced by women across key life stages, including childhood, relationships, marriage, employment and parenthood. Whilst these stages could be fulfilling, they generated significant stress which had substantial implications for women’s mental, emotional and social wellbeing, but was largely unacknowledged. Supporting women’s wellbeing contributed positively to families, communities and wider society, whereas neglect exacerbated pressure on public services, including the NHS. Her organisation, Cura, was developing a community hub dedicated to women’s wellbeing, where women could decompress, feel supported ad access preventative mental health and community resources before stress escalated into mental health crisis. This would reduce pressure on public services, strengthen families and empower women to thrive. Cura was a preventative, community-based space designed to provide emotional support, connection, and early intervention before issues escalated into crisis. The Council should consider providing community grant funding to enable the expansion of such preventative initiatives. 

Councillor Law, Portfolio Holder for Communities and Public Protection, thanked Precious and emphasised that the preventative work undertaken by Cura was in line with the Council’s values.  She had already arranged links for her to the Council’s Communities Team who would be able to provide support and links to similar organisations.


Carinna Cooper, Colchester Council Watch, addressed Council pursuant to the provisions of Council Procedure Rule 6(1) to question whether the Council was fit to execute emergency policies.  A reappraisal and audit of the declared climate emergency was overdue.  An escalation notice had been served on the Council regarding emergency management and governance.  The Council’s response to the original notice did not address the issues raised. A formal letter of notice of a threat of emergency regarding food security and resilience also highlighted issues of strategic risk and emergency management.  Speakers at Local Plan Committee in February had highlighted food security and the risks of developing valuable agricultural land. Farmland was strategic infrastructure. Net zero targets had unrealistic financial commitments and contributions from specialists with opposing views had been rejected.  The Council may wish to consider collaboration with other councils to share the effort and resources involved with a re-evaluation of the climate emergency.  Ignoring the notices they had served would be a breach of councillors’ fiduciary duties. 

Councillor King, Leader of the Council and Portfolio for Strategy, responded and explained that the Council had an established framework for emergency management. The Council was as open as it could be in responding to Colchester Council Watch and others. It had been agreed that progress on the Climate Emergency would be reviewed.  In terms of partnership and ways of working the Council was progressing towards local government reorganisation and the Council would continue to respond in an open and democratic way and look at the opportunities it provided and work across borders where appropriate. 

Cheryl Taylor addressed Council pursuant to the provisions of Council Procedure Rule 6(1) to raise concerns about transparency, accountability and public trust. Concern was expressed abut published government guidance on behaviour change and how debate in the Council Chamber was framed. Residents needed confidence that decisions were made openly.  Other councils were reconsidering aspects of local government reorganisation.  Where major governance changes were discussed in shadow boards or private meetings it raised concerns that transparency was being reduced at the point where democratic confidence most needed strengthening. What actions were planned to increase life expectancy and improve health outcomes for residents in the Heart of Greenstead pilot scheme and what transparent monitoring process would be used to measure whether those actions were working?  If the Council was proposing to share residents’ data as part of the scheme how would that data be protected?  Would the Council commit to clear transparency about any behaviour change approaches used locally and ensure that major governance changes were taken forward only with full public consent?

Councillor King, Leader of the Council and Portfolio Holder for Strategy, responded and explained that were was considerable information about the Heart of Greenstead project in the public domain. The Council would work in an open transparent and accountable way. The only way to deliver the project effectively would be by being clear on the objectives and by securing the consent of local residents.  Local government reorganisation was a national issue, but had been subject to extensive open debate at Council meetings and with regular updates to the public.  A cross-party working group had also been established. The Council had to work within the national framework but sought to strike a distinctive path for Colchester. 

Sebastian Wood addressed Council pursuant to the provisions of Council Procedure Rule 6(1).  In July 2019 the Council had declared a climate emergency, recognising that a global crisis required local democratic engagement.  However artificial intelligence posed a challenge at least as great, moving faster and with less democratic oversight. The leaders of the companies building AI warned it posed an extinction level risk to humanity.  Decisions about how the technology were being built were being made without democratic input, but by a small number of companies and governments.  Despite warnings of the risk, the UK had no binding AI law.  This was not a future problem as decisions were being made now about how intelligence was being governed.  The Council should put AI governance on its agenda.  It had shown it could engage on global issues and it should lead on this one. 

Councillor Pearson, Portfolio Holder for Economic Growth and Transformation, responded to acknowledge concerns around artificial intelligence.  Central government was working on a proposal on AI and whilst concerns were understood, there had also been significant benefits, particularly in the medical field.  He had raised the issue with the Council’s digital lead and had requested that a public discussion on how the Council deals with AI be progressed.

Angus Allan addressed Council pursuant to the provisions of Council Procedure Rule 6(1).  The Council’s finances had not been audited for several years.  Given that an independent annual financial audit was a legal obligation, why was the law being repeatedly broken?

Councillor Cory, Portfolio Holder for Resources and Assets, explained that the Council was working with its auditors on securing audited accounts. He had been assured by the Section 151 Officer and the Monitoring Officer that the Council was complying in full with the external auditors. Relevant updates had been posted on the government’s website.  Since the loss of the Audit Commission there had been difficulties with auditing right across the public sector.  The Council was not alone in experiencing delays with auditing, and was having to use disclaimed accounts, which was not ideal.  The Governance and Audit Committee continued to monitor the situation.

RESOLVED that the minutes of the meeting held on 4 December 2025 be confirmed as a correct record.  

The Mayor announced the following events:-

Essex Concert Band at the Town Hall, 14 March 2026
The Mayor’s Variety Show, 12 April 2026, Mercury Theatre

The Mayor’s Chess Tournament on 21 February 2026 had been a great success.

RESOLVED that Council Procedure Rule 14(3) be suspended to allow one speaker from each group to speak untimed on this item only.

It was proposed by Councillor Cory that the recommendations contained in the reports from the Section 151 Officer entitled Final 2026/27 General Fund Budget and Medium-Term Financial Forecast (MTFF) to 2030/31 (including Capital Programme and Housing Revenue Account) and Council Tax Setting 2026/27, together with the recommendations in minute 1007 from the Cabinet meeting of 28 January 2026, be approved and adopted.

Councillor Sunnucks moved Main Amendment 1 as set out in the Supplementary Information for the meeting. 

Councillor Cory indicated that Main Amendment 1 was not accepted.

Councillor Barber moved Main Amendment 2 as set out in the Supplementary Information for the meeting.

Councillor Cory indicated that Main Amendment 2 was not accepted.

Councillor Rowe moved Main Amendment 3 as set out in the Supplementary Information for the meeting. 

Councillor Cory indicated that Main Amendment 3 was not accepted.

Councillor Naylor moved Main Amendment 4 as set out in the Supplementary Information for the meeting. 

Councillor Cory indicated that Main Amendment 4 was not accepted.

On being put to the vote Main Amendment 1 proposed by Councillor Sunnucks was lost (EIGHTEEN voted  FOR, TWENTY-SEVEN voted AGAINST and THREE ABSTAINED from voting).

Further to the provisions of Council Procedure Rule15(3) a named vote was taken and the voting was as follows:-

FOR:  Councillors Barber, Bentley, Buston, Calverley, Davidson, Dundas, Hagon, Kelly, Laws, Maclean, Naylor, Parsons, Powling, Rowe, Smithson, Sunnucks, Tate and Willetts. 

AGAINST: Councillors  Alake-Akinyemi, Appleton, Bourne, Cory, Çufoglu, Goacher, Goss, Harris, Jay, King, Kirkby-Taylor, Law, Luxford Vaughan, McCarthy, McLean, Moffat, Osborne, Pearson, Rippingale, Scordis, Smith, Sommers,  C. Spindler, M. Spindler, Warnes, J. Young and T. Young.

ABSTAINED from voting: Councillor Scott-Boutell, the Deputy Mayor (Ellis) and the Mayor (Lilley).

On being put to the vote Main Amendment 2 proposed by Councillor Barber was lost (EIGHTEEN voted  FOR, TWENTY-SEVEN voted AGAINST and THREE ABSTAINED from voting).

Further to the provisions of Council Procedure Rule15(3) a named vote was taken and the voting was as follows:-

FOR:  Councillors Barber, Bentley, Buston, Calverley, Davidson, Dundas, Hagon, Kelly, Laws, Maclean, Naylor, Parsons, Powling, Rowe, Smithson, Sunnucks, Tate and Willetts. 

AGAINST: Councillors  Alake-Akinyemi, Appleton, Bourne, Cory, Goacher, Goss, Harris, Jay, King, Kirkby-Taylor, Law, Luxford Vaughan, McCarthy, McLean, Moffat, Osborne, Pearson, Rippingale, Scordis, Scott-Boutell, Smith, Sommers,  C. Spindler, M. Spindler, Warnes, J. Young and T. Young.

ABSTAINED from voting: Councillor Çufoglu, the Deputy Mayor (Ellis) and the Mayor (Lilley).

On being put to the vote Main Amendment 3 proposed by Councillor Rowe was lost (SEVENTEEN voted  FOR, TWENTY-SEVEN voted AGAINST and THREE ABSTAINED from voting).

Further to the provisions of Council Procedure Rule15(3) a named vote was taken and the voting was as follows:-

FOR:  Councillors Barber, Bentley, Buston, Calverley, Davidson, Dundas, Hagon, Kelly, Laws, Maclean, Naylor, Parsons, Powling, Rowe, Sunnucks, Tate and Willetts. 

AGAINST: Councillors  Alake-Akinyemi, Appleton, Bourne, Cory, Goacher, Goss, Harris, Jay, King, Kirkby-Taylor, Law, Luxford Vaughan, McCarthy, McLean, Moffat, Osborne, Pearson, Rippingale, Scordis, Scott-Boutell, Smith, Sommers,  C. Spindler, M. Spindler, Warnes, J. Young and T. Young.

ABSTAINED from voting: Councillor Çufoglu, the Deputy Mayor (Ellis) and the Mayor (Lilley).

On being put to the vote Main Amendment 4 proposed by Councillor Naylor was lost (SEVENTEEN voted FOR, TWENTY-SIX voted AGAINST and FOUR ABSTAINED from voting).

Further to the provisions of Council Procedure Rule15(3) a named vote was taken and the voting was as follows:-

FOR:  Councillors Barber, Bentley, Buston, Calverley, Davidson, Dundas, Hagon, Kelly, Laws, Maclean, Naylor, Parsons, Powling, Rowe, Sunnucks, Tate and Willetts. 

AGAINST: Councillors  Alake-Akinyemi, Appleton, Bourne, Cory, Goacher, Goss, Harris, Jay, King, Kirkby-Taylor, Law, Luxford Vaughan, McCarthy, McLean, Moffat, Osborne, Pearson, Rippingale, Scordis, Smith, Sommers,  C. Spindler, M. Spindler, Warnes, J. Young and T. Young.

ABSTAINED from voting: Councillors Çufoglu, Scott-Boutell, the Deputy Mayor (Ellis) and the Mayor (Lilley).

The substantive motion moved by Councillor Cory was then put to the vote and was carried  (TWENTY-FIVE voted FOR, NINETEEN voted AGAINST and FOUR ABSTAINED from voting).

Further to the provisions of Council Procedure Rule15(3) a named vote was taken and the voting was as follows:-

FOR: Councillors Alake Akinyemi, Appleton, Bourne, Cory, Goss, Harris, Jay, King, Law, Luxford Vaughan, McCarthy, McLean, Moffat, Osborne, Pearson, Rippingale, Scordis, Scott-Boutell, Smith, Sommers, C. Spindler, M. Spindler, Warnes, J. Young, and T. Young.

AGAINST: Councillors Barber, Bentley, Buston, Calverley, Çufoglu, Davidson, Dundas, Hagon, Kelly, Laws, Maclean, Naylor, Parsons, Powling, Rowe, Smithson, Sunnucks, Tate and Willetts.

ABSTAINED from voting: Councillors Goacher, Kirkby-Taylor, the Deputy Mayor (Ellis) and the Mayor (Lilley).

RESOLVED that the recommendation contained in minute 994 of the Cabinet meeting of 10 December 2025 be approved and adopted (TWENTY-TWO voted FOR, TWELVE voted AGAINST and SIX ABSTAINED from voting).

RESOLVED that the recommendations contained in minute 996 of the Cabinet meeting of 10 December 2025 be approved and adopted (TWENTY-ONE voted FOR, SEVENTEEN voted AGAINST and SEVEN ABSTAINED from voting).

RESOLVED that the recommendations contained in minute 999 of the Cabinet meeting of 10 December 2025 be approved and adopted and that accordingly Councillor Smith be nominated for appointment as Deputy Mayor of the City of Colchester for the 2026-27 municipal year (MAJORITY VOTED IN FAVOUR).

RESOLVED that the recommendation contained in draft minute 1008 of the Cabinet meeting of 28 January 2026 be approved and adopted.

RESOLVED that the recommendation contained in minute 533 of the Governance and Audit Committee meeting of 16 December 2025 be approved and adopted.

RESOLVED that the recommendation contained in minute 534 of the Governance and Audit Committee meeting of 16 December 2025 be approved and adopted.

RESOLVED that In accordance with Section 100A of the Local Government Act 1972 the public, including the press, be excluded from the meeting for the following item as it involved the likely disclosure of exempt information as defined in paragraph 3 of Part 1 of Schedule 12A to the Local Government Act 1972.    

RESOLVED that the recommendation contained in minute 1001 of the Cabinet meeting of 10 December 2025 be approved and adopted. 

RESOLVED that In accordance with Section 100A of the Local Government Act 1972 the public, including the press, be excluded from the meeting for the following item as it involved the likely disclosure of exempt information as defined in paragraph 3 of Part 1 of Schedule 12A to the Local Government Act 1972.    

RESOLVED that the recommendation contained in minute 1010 of the Cabinet meeting of 28 January 2026 be approved and adopted.