Agenda and minutes

To confirm and sign the minutes of 18 September 2019.

The minutes of the meeting of 18 September were confirmed and signed subject to the following comment:

·         On page 5 under item 8 of the agenda pack, Councillor Booth said the minutes should read that he had actually asked how many new businesses had relocated to Fenland as a result of making enquiries. 

For information only.

Councillor Mrs Mayor drew members’ attention to the civic activities undertaken by herself and the Vice-Chairman in the weeks preceding Full Council. 

Councillor Mrs Mayor thanked all members who attended the Macmillan Coffee Morning on 26 September 2019.  The event was extremely well attended and as a result in excess of £753 was raised for this vital charity.

Councillor Mrs Mayor reminded members that she will be hosting the Chairman’s Community Carol Service at St John’s Church in March on Sunday 8^th December at 3pm. All are welcome to attend for a traditional Carol service followed by refreshments. 

The Thursday Club Whittlesey have written a letter expressing their thanks to members for their generous donation of £490, which will help to ensure that they can offer isolated and often vulnerable members of the community free transport, a meal and entertainment each month. The Club asked that Councillor Mrs Mayor pass on their sincere appreciation of the donation.

Finally, members will be aware that the General Election has now been called and therefore we are required to comply with the associated Purdah requirements. As such members are asked to note that the Council meeting scheduled for 13 December 2019 will be postponed until Thursday 9 January 2020.

Councillor Mrs Mayor stated that no questions had been received submitted under Procedure Rule 8.6 and asked if there were any questions under Procedure Rule. 8.4 from Councillor Tanfield as Leader of the Opposition.

Councillor Tanfield asked the Leader if he has had any discussions with other council leaders in the area regarding a unitary authority and if so had there been any progress. Councillor Boden thanked Councillor Tanfield for the question and stated his disappointment at the current position. Responsibility for looking at local government reorganisation in the Combined Authority (CA) area has been given to the CA and a report is still under production. Having seen an interim version, Councillor Boden expressed his disappointment at the first stage of the report, feeling it to be inadequate in scope; he has made his feelings clear and hopes that the areas we are talking about will be more appropriately discussed and examined in the second stage report. Councillor Boden confirmed that he has had conversations with other district council leaders and the county council although not everyone agrees about local government reorganisation. However, he had not appreciated the terms of reference which had been given to the commission which is currently working on this matter by the CA. These conversations have been complicated in that they are not just talking about potential changes to local government, but also how parts of the NHS also fall within the remit of any future arrangement which takes place. He is confident that further information will be produced by the Commission that will form the debate and conversation will develop once the second part of the report is produced. Councillor Tanfield thanked Councillor Boden for the update, stating she appreciates the complexity of the issue. 

Councillor Tanfield said that before the election in May there was a conversation about the incinerator in Wisbech and members were told they would be kept informed. There have been discussions and items on social media over the weekend, so she wondered if the planning application would come to Fenland District Council, Cambridgeshire County Council or central government. Also if members should have received this information, why have they not? Councillor Boden stated that the reason why members had not been informed is because no application has been made. A developer has issued a press release which has caused the flurry of social media activity; however a planning application such as this would not be brought to Fenland District Council as it relates to waste. The waste authority for the area is the County Council. However, Councillor Boden understands from the press release that because the incinerator is of a sufficiently large size, it is a matter that falls within the remit of the Planning Inspectorate of National Infrastructure and will be determined by them. Councillor Tanfield thanked Councillor Boden. 

Members asked questions of Portfolio Holders in accordance with Procedure Rules 8.1 and 8.2 as follows: 

·         Councillor Wicks said we have seen the very good works that Street Pride groups have done and evidence of their efforts is visible throughout the area. He asked Councillor Murphy what is the level of recycling of the materials collected by Street Pride and what is the level of recycling undertaken by Street Scene officers as part of their collection of waste around the area? Councillor Murphy thanked Councillor Wicks for the question, stating he would get back to him with the answer.

·         Councillor Connor said that he is keen that members receive planning training and asked Councillor Mrs Laws if she could confirm that extra planning training will be taking place. Councillor Mrs Laws advised that an email has been sent to members regarding two sessions of planning training arranged for Thursday 21^st November. This is also open to town and parish councillors. Many members have lobbied for this training, which is at a cost to the Council, but she is disappointed that the uptake has been low. Unless more members commit to this training it will have to be cancelled. Councillor Connor asked members to take the opportunity of the extra training being offered.

·         Councillor Yeulett addressed Councillor Benney, stating that he noted a number of red RAG ratings under his portfolio. He asked if the targets are high or achievable. Councillor Benney said that a lot of this is statistical data reported back to the Council and these are yearly targets; however work is currently being undertaken on projects that will bring investment to the area which should improve these figures. Councillor Yeulett thanked Councillor Benney.

·         Councillor Cornwell addressed Councillor Mrs French, stating that in July he had raised the issue of civil parking enforcement. He said Councillor Mrs French had announced then that she had commenced discussions with officers the previous month but to date members have not received a progress report and residents are still complaining about “wild-west parking”. Councillor Mrs French replied that she was also frustrated.  Unfortunately the shortage of a senior officer meant progress had not been as quick as expected. A draft confidential report has been produced which she was hoping to bring to Cabinet and Council in December, but these meetings have been rearranged for January. She stated that she has been pushing as hard as she can but it is a long, ongoing process. Councillor Cornwell did not accept that the absence of an officer of the authority should delay the process and expressed his disappointment at the current situation. Councillor Mrs French stated that she would be able to provide an update in three weeks’ time.

·         Councillor Hay addressed Councillor Murphy, saying that she understood there is a waste duty of care for waste disposal but asked why the fixed penalty notice is £400 for householders but only £300 for a business trade waste offence. Councillor Murphy responded that he would  ...  view the full minutes text for item C44/19

Councillor Sam Hoy presented her motion regarding discrimination including racism and antisemitism, advising that the Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government has asked all councils to adopt the international definition of antisemitism.  

“Fenland District Council is proud of its efforts to tackle discrimination in all its forms, we celebrate our diverse community and we condemn racism and antisemitism wherever it is found. As part of the Council’s ongoing equalities work we resolve to join with the UK Government and the major political parties in the UK in signing up to the internationally recognised International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) guidelines on antisemitism which defines antisemitism as:-

‘Antisemitism is a certain perception of Jews, which may be expressed as hatred towards Jews. Rhetorical and physical manifestations of antisemitism are directed towards Jewish or non-Jewish individuals and/or their property, towards Jewish Community institutions and religious facilities.’

The guidelines highlight various manifestations and are accessible at:-

https://www.holocaustremembrance.com/working-definition-antisemitism

This Council underlines its condemnation of all forms of racism and religious discrimination in all its manifestations and adopts the IHRA definition of antisemitism as the working model for challenging and confronting incidents of this form of discrimination”.

Councillor Booth seconded the motion and Councillor Mrs Mayor asked for a vote to be taken on the motion.

The motion was passed unanimously. 

To provide Council with an update on the progress of the Commercial & Investment Strategy including formal approval of the Strategy, and to agree next steps in formulating a plan for implementation to include: governance, funding, investment criteria and prospective projects.

Members considered the Commercial and Investment Strategy report presented by Councillor Boden.

Members asked questions, made comments and received responses as follows:

·         Councillor Sutton felt this policy to be the reincarnation of a policy from a previous administration in 2016/17 and not a new one as suggested. Councillor Boden agreed it is not the first time we have talked about having a commercial and investment strategy but the difference is that this time we are trying to create one.

·         Councillor Yeulett asked for confirmation that that there will be further opportunity to challenge and discuss this strategy. He added that mention is made within the report of housing provision and as affordable housing is a national and local problem, will the strategy be proactive in helping and encouraging home ownership for the less well-off and younger people. Councillor Boden agreed these were valid points and it is correct that we look at how hard working families can get on the housing ladder; however the reasons for housing shortages are different across the country. The Mayor of the Combined Authority has plans for homes up to £100k which should play a significant part in helping people get on the housing ladder but in this policy we need to bear in mind that we have wider objectives. Councillor Boden confirmed this policy is subject to change and amendment.

·         Councillor Hay said she felt the policy to be long overdue but better late than never. The policy is about creating a return to this Council so that we can keep council tax down and deliver the services we need; this is the way forward. 

·         Councillor Tanfield said that she is pleased this is now coming to fruition but her concern is that we have the skill required to run this commercial side. The process of raising investment is very complex and it is important to get the governance arrangements and structure right, however it is very positive. Councillor Boden responded that Councillor Tanfield’s comments were correct; given the spirit of the ambition, the officers themselves recognise they do not possess the entire skill set required and a level of buy-in will be required on special areas of investment.

·         Councillor Booth said that his concern is that there is a lot more that needs to be determined with this policy. He is not sure that the recommendation quite says what Councillor Boden says it does. It says we will approve the draft policy but then officers will formulate the proposals. Proposals can sit underneath a policy but is it therefore that this policy will come back after those proposals have been arranged? This needs to be clarified. Councillor Booth also pointed out areas within the report which he feels need updating, for example p.124, section 3.4 of the agenda pack incorrectly states that the Council’s housing stock was transferred in 2017. He would also ask that the board oversee the arrangements; currently under these proposals it says there will be a minimum of two  ...  view the full minutes text for item C46/19

For Members to consider and agree to adopt a Local Discretionary Business Rate Relief Policy (LDBRR).

Members considered the Discretionary Rate Relief Policy, presented by Councillor Boden.

Members asked questions, made comments and received responses as follows:

·         Councillor Tanfield asked how many businesses we would envisage attracting into Fenland over the next five years. She wondered how the criteria was arrived at because, as a business owner herself, it seems harsh to expect 50% of the staff to be apprentices. Who would teach them? We are trying to help businesses and get them into Fenland, but not by having a policy that no-one can fulfil.  Councillor Boden agreed we do not have unlimited funds available, but we do need to target, therefore what should that target be? We could subsidise more low paying jobs in the area, but that will perpetuate the current problem. We do not want a low-paid economy but we do want to attract higher paid, higher skilled jobs in more productive industries. That, he stated, is the rationale behind the policy. The objective is that any business would need to show that either half the workforce is apprenticed or that staff are receiving more than the average wage in Fenland, it is ambitious to try and attract larger, higher paying employers into the area. Councillor Boden also pointed out that no targets have been set for the number of businesses we would envisage attracting into Fenland.

·         Councillor Booth said the policy aims are good. However, he does have concerns about the eligibility criteria and the number of businesses it will attract. It also seems there has been no cost benefit analysis. He would ask that the criteria not be over complicated as it could put businesses off. He also stated that by requesting two years of audited accounts, we are potentially missing an opportunity in not attracting start-ups or new firms. Councillor Boden replied that a cost benefit analysis was examined at the start of this process. He also emphasised that this is a discretionary relief. However, he took on board the comments regarding not making the application process over complicated and every effort is being made to ensure that it will not be. The requirement for two years of audited accounts, whilst stated in the report, is not an absolute obligation and there is flexibility to allow that requirement not to be fulfilled.

·         Councillor Tierney stated that he runs a small industrial business in Hertfordshire and all his customers are medium to large sized. He works closely with those companies and is confident that they all meet the criteria described within this policy. This is a policy where we offer a discount on rates to attract those sorts of companies here, if only one comes then it is a benefit, therefore he fully supports this.

·         Councillor Booth said he was in no doubt this is a good policy but he just wants to make sure it is not too restrictive and puts people off.  He said that the wording seems quite rigid and does not offer the flexibility as suggested by  ...  view the full minutes text for item C47/19

To present to Council the conclusions and recommendations of the Independent Remuneration Panel (IRP) in respect of its review of the current Members' Allowances Scheme. 

Members considered the Review of Members’ Allowance Scheme report presented by Amanda Orchard, Chairman of the Independent Remuneration Panel.

Amanda Orchard thanked all councillors who provided their views as part of the review, whether by completing the questionnaires or attending the face-to-face interviews on members’ allowances. Their candid input had proven invaluable in formulating a comprehensive and robust set of recommendations as outlined in the resulting review report. She expressed her personal thanks to the Council officers who assisted the Panel and her fellow panel members, Gerard Dempsey and Carol Hart.

Councillor Mrs Mayor proposed to adopt the recommendations, seconded by Councillor Booth. Councillor Mrs Mayor opened the item for discussion.

·         Councillor Boden thanked the Independent Remuneration Panel for their work and the clarity of the report produced. He said that although members are required to give due consideration to the contents of the report they are not required to agree with it. It was his intention, and as a matter of principle, to agree to whatever was proposed in the report before it was produced. However, he feels there are a couple of errors within the report which need to be addressed and therefore has proposed two amendments to the report which has been tabled to members.

Firstly in respect of the Special Responsibility Allowances, although the Chairman of Licensing Committee does an excellent job, a greater significant amount of work and responsibility is undertaken by both the Chairman of Planning and Chairman of Overview and Scrutiny. Therefore Councillor Boden would suggest the allowance be reduced from £8,000 to £7,000 and not £5,000 for the Chairman both these committees (item 4 of the Report Recommendations). 

The second change he would like to suggest refers to paragraph 5.9 of the Report. It was suggested that a letter be sent to the CPCA outlining the view that any payments to members representing constituent councils on the CPCA be payable by the CPCA. The problem with this recommendation is that by law the CPCA are not allowed to make any payment. Therefore this resolution is a pointless exercise and without changing any other part of the recommendation made, it seems appropriate not to send such a letter.

Councillor Boden proposed that these tabled amendments be taken as an amendment to the motion. Councillor Topgood seconded the proposal.

Councillor Mrs Mayor opened the amendment for debate.

·         Councillor Count thanked the Independent Review Panel for the work they had undertaken saying that it was not widely known that about 30% of councillors’ time was taken up on reaching these judgements. He agreed with Councillor Boden’s comment regarding the letter to the CPCA, this cannot be done as it was part of the order laid down with the original agreement. He pointed out that he chaired all the meetings up until getting the agreement, and what was envisaged at the start is not what we have now. He stepped back because there was so much work involved, he could not run a council or sit  ...  view the full minutes text for item C48/19

To adopt the proposed Gambling Statement of Principles Policy.

Members considered the Gambling Policy report by presented by Councillor Humphrey.

Proposed by Councillor Humphrey, seconded by Councillor Meekins, Council AGREED the recommendation from the Licensing Committee to adopt the Statement of Gambling Principles for the period of 2019-2022 as set out in Appendix A of the report. 

To adopt the proposed Cumulative Impact Assessment Policy.

Members considered the proposed Cumulative Impact Assessment Policy (CIA) report presented by Councillor Humphrey.

Proposed by Councillor Humphrey, seconded by Councillor Skoulding, Councillor Mrs Mayor opened the item for discussion.

Councillor Tierney proposed a motion amendment without notice for the item to go back to Licensing Committee for a rethink. He thanked the Committee for their efforts in helping tackle street drinking and alcohol issues, which residents are concerned about.  However a majority of Wisbech members in this instance do not feel the policy is right. When the issue came to Wisbech Town Council it was almost unanimously turned down; it has been in place for years now and has done little to address the issues it purports to resolve. Street drinking problems have not gone away and it unfairly targets several wards in Wisbech and is ineffective for what it is trying to achieve. It is also felt that there is a strong risk that it will make it difficult to improve the Wisbech night time economy and prevent good new businesses from opening, some of which may be part of the solution, while protecting older businesses, some of which may be part of the problem.  Many Wisbech members felt more consideration was needed as to the potential limits and consequences and would appreciate the Licensing Committee have a rethink with a view to the concerns raised by many Wisbech members.

Councillor Topgood seconded this proposed motion amendment and Councillor Mrs Mayor opened the deferral request for debate.   

·         Councillor Hoy agreed that Wisbech Town Council had objected but Councillor Tierney does not want the CIA at all.  However, she was of the view that this should affect off licences rather than on licences. The biggest problem is that Public Health objects to every application and do not use the CIA properly. She agreed that Licensing Committee should have a further look at this, even if they come back with the same answer.

·         Councillor Tierney added that he has no precept view on this. He was on Licensing Committee for a number of years and said each year that he does not think the policy works. He would hope that Licensing Committee has a rethink but if they come back with the same recommendations then that is fair enough.

Councillor Mrs Mayor asked for a vote for the amended motion to defer back to the Licensing Committee. 

Council AGREED that the CIA be referred back to the Licensing Committee.