The Council is asked to note any apologies for absence received from Members.

Apologies for absence were submitted on behalf of Councillors Alexander, Barry, Kotz, McWilliams and Turner.

The Council is asked to approve, as a correct record, the minutes of the meeting of the Council held on Tuesday 17 September 2024.

It was moved by Councillor M E Stephenson, seconded by Councillor I J Henderson and:-

RESOLVED that the minutes of the meeting of the Council held on 17 September 2024 be approved as a correct record and be signed by the Chairman.

Councillors are invited to declare any Disclosable Pecuniary Interests, Other Registerable Interests or Non-Registerable Interests, and the nature of it, in relation to any item on the agenda.

Councillor Scott declared a Disclosable Pecuniary Interest in relation to Agenda Item 15 (Reference from the Cabinet – A.3 – Adoption of a Revised Gambling Licensing Policy Statement (insofar as he held a Gaming Licence for North Essex Liberal Democrats within the District).

Councillor P B Honeywood declared a Disclosable Pecuniary Interest in relation to Agenda Item 15 (Reference from the Cabinet – A.3 – Adoption of a Revised Gambling Licensing Policy Statement insofar as he held a Gaming Licence for Clacton Constituency Conservative Association.

Councillor Fairley made the following declaration of interest in relation to Agenda Item 12 (Motion to Council pursuant to Council Procedure Rule 12 – Changes to Agricultural Property Relief and Business Property Relief):-

“I wish to declare a Disclosable Pecuniary Interest and a Non-Registerable Interest on ITEM 12 Motion to Council pursuant to Council Procedure Rule 12 submitted by Councillor Peter Harris in relation to changes to Agricultural Property Relief and Business Property Relief as follows:-

My spouse and wider family, own and rent agricultural land in Tendring for the purpose of commercial food production.

I have been granted a dispensation under Section 33(2)(c) of the Localism Act 2011, by the Council’s Monitoring Officer allowing me to participate and to vote.  The reason for the decision is on the grounds that it is in the interests of persons living and working in the authority’s area for this dispensation to be granted.  I am the sole Ward Councillor for Ardleigh and Little Bromley and have an opportunity to voice its residents and businesses concerns and act in the best interests and possible outcomes for the whole of the District.  The Council will not be the ultimate decision maker regarding these proposals, which will go off to Cabinet for determination.  The Ward, I represent is a very rural Tendring ward where farming contributes significantly to employment and the local economy both for my ward and the wider district, and I want to be able to act in the best interests for my residents and for the district as a whole and the Monitoring Officer has agreed that a dispensation is necessary for me to be able to fulfil this role.” 

Councillor Bush then made a personal statement as follows:-

“I’d like to make a declaration that with immediate effect I am leaving the Tendring Independents Group, and the administration, to go and sit with the opposition as an unaligned independent councillor to represent the interests of the community that elected me.”

Councillor Bush thereupon ‘crossed the floor’.

The Council is asked to note any announcements made by the Chairman of the Council.

The Chairman informed Members that, since the last meeting of Full Council on 17 September 2024, he had attended the following civic events:-

The Council is asked to note any announcements made by the Chief Executive.

There were no announcements made by the Chief Executive on this occasion.

The Council is asked to note any statements made by the Leader of the Council. 

Councillors may then ask questions of the Leader on his statements.

There were no statements made by the Leader of the Council on this occasion.

The Council is asked to note any statements made by Members of the Cabinet (Portfolio Holders).

Councillors may then ask questions of the Portfolio Holders on their statements.

The Portfolio Holder for Housing and Planning (Councillor Baker) made a statement in respect of the opening of the new Honeycroft Sheltered Housing Scheme at Lawford as follows:-

“Chairman, I am delighted to inform Council that the Honeycroft Project, the demolition of the sheltered scheme and its replacement with 13 bungalows for the elderly, and a community centre, in Lawford has recently been completed, and its achievement is a testament to the dedication, hard work, and collaboration of everyone involved, from our own staff and contractors alike.

I know that much of what I am about to say was probably said by our Chief Executive and the Leader of the Council at the event on Wednesday 13^th November, to which many people were invited, including the Ward Councillors, and the previous Portfolio Holder for Housing.

As most of this Council know, residents of the Honeycroft Sheltered Housing scheme were moved out in 2017, it was closed in 2018, and finally demolished in 2021 with Rose Builders of Lawford, being subsequently appointed as the Council’s contractor.

Having visited the site during construction on more than one occasion, I have seen the project continue at pace, and I will be visiting the site this coming Friday, as I was unfortunately unable to do so on the 13^th, to see the result.

As Mark and Ian said, this project is not just about putting something up to replace what was previously there, or putting a roof over people’s head. It is about enhancing the quality of life for our residents, and the environmental sustainability of this scheme is a vital aspect of its success. Innovative solutions have been implemented that will benefit the environment, the tenants who will live here, and sets a standard for any future projects. Energy efficient designs, the use of sustainable materials, all carefully designed to minimise environmental impact. This includes efficient heating, well-insulated, solar panels, keeping running costs low, combat fuel poverty and reducing the environmental impacts.

I also want to acknowledge the cross-party political support that has been crucial in bringing this project to life. It was started by the previous administration, and it is important to give credit where it is due. The vision and groundwork laid the foundation of what we have achieved, it is an example of what can be accomplished when we all work together, regardless of political differences, and shows our shared commitment to serving our community and making it a better place for all.

I would also like to publically put on the record, Mr Chairman, this Council’s thanks, firstly to our officers, from the initial planning stages to the final touches, and our contractors, Rose Builders, for their expertise, commitment and professionalism in delivering this project, on time and within budget.

Finally Mr Chairman, Residents will be moving in during the next few weeks, and I should also mention, that some of those residents have re-sized, and due to this, one fully adapted four bedroomed house,  ...  view the full minutes text for item 63.

The Council will consider any petition(s) received in accordance with the Scheme approved by the Council.

The Council was to consider any petition(s) received in accordance with the Scheme approved by the Council.

On this occasion no such petition(s) had been submitted.

Subject to the required notice being given, members of the public can ask questions of the Leader of the Council, Portfolio Holders or Chairmen of Committees.

The Chairman shall determine the number of questions to be tabled at a particular meeting in order to limit the time for questions and answers to 21 minutes.

Subject to the required notice being given, members of the public could ask questions of the Leader of the Council, Portfolio Holders or Chairmen of Committees.

On this occasion no such Questions on Notice had been submitted by members of the public.

To notify Members of recent Executive Decision(s) taken in the circumstances set out in the Council’s Constitution in:-

(a)   Rule 15 of the Access to Information Procedure Rules (Special Urgency); and/or

(b)   Rule 18(i) of the Overview and Scrutiny Procedure Rules (Call-in and Urgency); and/or

(c)    Rule 6(b) of the Budget and Policy Framework Procedure Rules.

Council considered a report of the Leader of the Council which notified it of recent Executive Decision(s) taken in the circumstances set out in the Council’s Constitution in:-

(a)   Rule 15 of the Access to Information Procedure Rules (Special Urgency); and/or

(b)   Rule 18(i) of the Overview and Scrutiny Procedure Rules (Call-in and Urgency); and/or

(c)   Rule 6(b) of the Budget and Policy Framework Procedure Rules.

(1)    Approval of Tendring District Council’s formal response to the Government’s proposed reforms to the National Planning Policy Framework and other changes to the planning system

It was duly reported that, on 20 September 2024, the Portfolio Holder for Housing and Planning, in view of the urgency of the issue concerned, and in accordance with Rule 18(i) of the Overview & Scrutiny Procedure Rules, and through the offices of the Director (Planning and Communities), had sought and subsequently obtained the Chairman of the Community Leadership Overview and Scrutiny Committee’s consent, that his decision relating to the approval of Tendring District Council’s formal response to the Government’s proposed reforms to the National Planning Policy Framework and other changes to the planning system, be exempted from the call-in procedure.

The Portfolio Holder for Housing and Planning’s decision had been as follows:-

“To approve Tendring District Council’s formal response to the Government’s proposed reforms to the National Planning Policy Framework and other changes to the planning system.”

It had been felt by the Portfolio Holder for Housing and Planning that any delay likely to be caused by the call-in process would have seriously prejudiced the Council’s and the public’s interest for the following reason:-

“The deadline for the submission of consultation responses is Tuesday 24^th September 2024. Failure to meet that deadline could lead to this Council’s concerns about the Government’s proposals not being properly taken into account.

The Planning Policy and Local Plan Committee debated and agreed the proposed response at its meeting held on 16^th September 2024 and so this matter has therefore been considered by Members from all political groups represented on the Council. That discussion followed on from the all-Member briefing held on 4^th September 2024.”

(1)    Termination of the ‘YourStride’ Careline Contract

It was also reported that, on 24 October 2024, the Leader of the Council, acting on behalf of the Cabinet under his delegated powers, in view of the urgency of the issue concerned, and in accordance with Rule 15 of the Access to Information Procedure Rules and Rule 18(i) of the Overview & Scrutiny Procedure Rules, and through the offices of the Director (Governance), had sought and subsequently obtained the Chairman of the Resources and Services Overview and Scrutiny Committee’s consent, that his urgent decision taken on behalf of the Cabinet relating to the termination of the ‘YourStride’ Careline Contract, be both taken under the ‘Special Urgency’ provisions of the Council’s Constitution and also that it be exempted from the call-in procedure.

The Leader of the Council’s urgent decision taken on behalf of the Cabinet  ...  view the full minutes text for item 66.

The Council will receive the minutes of the following Committees:

(a)    Tendring / Colchester Borders Garden Community Joint of Thursday 5 September 2024;

(b)    Planning Policy & Local Plan of Monday 16 September 2024;

(c)    Resources and Services Overview & Scrutiny of Monday 23 September 2024;

(d)    Audit of Thursday 26 September 2024;

(e)    Community Leadership Overview & Scrutiny of Tuesday 15 October 2024; and

(f)     Standards Committee of Thursday 24 October 2024.

NOTES:         

(1)   The above minutes are presented to Council for information only.  Members can ask questions on their contents to the relevant Chairman but questions as to the accuracy of the minutes must be asked at the meeting of the Committee when the relevant minutes are approved as a correct record; and

(2)   If any recommendations to Council have been made by those Committees, these are included within separate reports for Council to decide upon (i.e. by noting the minutes those recommendations are not approved at this stage of the proceedings).

It was moved by Councillor M E Stephenson and:-

RESOLVED that the minutes of the following Committee, as circulated, be received and noted:-

(a) Tendring / Colchester Borders Garden Community Joint of Thursday 5 September 2024;

(b) Planning Policy & Local Plan of Monday 16 September 2024;

(c) Resources and Services Overview & Scrutiny of Monday 23 September 2024;

(d) Audit of Thursday 26 September 2024;

(e) Community Leadership Overview & Scrutiny of Tuesday 15 October 2024; and

(f) Standards Committee of Thursday 24 October 2024.

Pursuant to the provisions of Council Procedure Rule 12, Council will consider a motion, notice of which has been given by Councillor Harris.

The provisions of Council Procedure Rule 12.5, (Professional Advice of the Council’s Statutory Officers on the Motion) require the Council’s three statutory officers (i.e. Monitoring Officer, Section 151 Officer and Head of Paid Service), once the Motion has been accepted as being valid, to produce a formal Advisory Note detailing any necessary initial professional advice in relation to the implications for the Council of that Motion. That Advisory Note will focus on implications for the Council relating to budgetary, constitutional or legislative requirements or staffing matters.

In this instance, the Council’s Statutory Officers have not yet indicated whether they need to provide any such professional advice and whether therefore an Advisory Note(s) does need to be produced on this occasion.

Council had before it the following motion, notice of which had been given by Councillor Harris pursuant to Council Procedure Rule 12:-

“(A)      This Council notes that:-

(i)         the Chancellor of the Exchequer, Rachel Reeves MP, announced in the Budget on 30^th October 2024, changes to Agricultural Property Relief (APR) and Business Property Relief (BPR); and

(ii)        this will potentially seriously affect the District of Tendring as a significant percentage of our District is of a rural nature with farming significantly contributing to our local economy.

 (B)      Therefore this Council, in accordance with the Corporate Plan themes of “Pride in our area and services to residents” and “Championing our local environment”requests that –

(1)       the Leader of Tendring District Council, Councillor Mark Stephenson, through a resolution from Cabinet instructs Officers:-

(a)    to establish the total number of commercial farms and smallholdings operating and based in the Tendring District; and

(b)    via consultation with local farmers and investigation, to determine a realistic assessment of the potential impact on these businesses and the subsequent impact on the District of Tendring and the local economy.

(2)       the findings of the above be reported back to Cabinet and thenceonto the relevant Overview and Scrutiny Committee at the earliest opportunity given the potential serious implications.

(3)       the findings together with the Cabinet’s final decision on this matter be reported to Full Council for its information.”

Prior to the commencement of the meeting the Council’s Monitoring Officer (Lisa Hastings), pursuant to Council Procedure Rule 12.5 had produced and circulated to Members an Advisory Note that set out the statutory officers’ professional advice in relation to this motion as follows:-

“SECTION 151 OFFICER:

There is likely to be a relatively significant cost involved and an appropriate budgetary amount would need to be set aside as part of considering this motion, or referred to Cabinet for consideration as part of developing the forecast before any associated activities got underway.

HEAD OF PAID SERVICE:

The resources required to undertake detailed research on the impact of a government policy would put significant drain on the capacity of the organisation who are working to deliver Cabinet’s existing priorities, the Committees’ work programmes, as well as business as usual of services across the Council.  The type of data being sought should be in the public domain and the impacted parts of the community will have access to their own bodies and representatives.  

MONITORING OFFICER:

Article 13.02 of the Council’s Constitution sets out the Principles of Decision Making, in that all decisions of the Council must be made in accordance with the following principles:

(a)     Proportionality (i.e. the action must be proportionate to the desired outcome);

(b)     Due consideration of all the relevant factors and options, taking into account the results of any consultation undertaken and the professional advice of Officers;

(c)     Respect for human rights, and equality and diversity;

(d)     A presumption in favour of openness;

(e)     Clarity of aims and desired outcomes; and

(f)      Transparency (i.e. explaining what  ...  view the full minutes text for item 68.

Pursuant to the provisions of Council Procedure Rule 12, Council will consider a motion, notice of which has been given by Councillor Bray.

The provisions of Council Procedure Rule 12.5, (Professional Advice of the Council’s Statutory Officers on the Motion) require the Council’s three statutory officers (i.e. Monitoring Officer, Section 151 Officer and Head of Paid Service), once the Motion has been accepted as being valid, to produce a formal Advisory Note detailing any necessary initial professional advice in relation to the implications for the Council of that Motion. That Advisory Note will focus on implications for the Council relating to budgetary, constitutional or legislative requirements or staffing matters.

In this instance, the Council’s Statutory Officers have not yet indicated whether they need to provide any such professional advice and whether therefore an Advisory Note(s) does need to be produced on this occasion.

Council had before it the following motion, notice of which had been given by Councillor Bray pursuant to Council Procedure Rule 12:-

“This Council notes and believes that:-

(i)         the Government is currently undertaking a rewrite of the National Planning Policy Framework;

(ii)        clear indications are that Tendring will be burdened with a new housing supply target of 1043 houses per year, a massive increase from our current requirement of 550 per year. We will be expected to build at the new rate for the full term of the local plan some 15 years. Given that, in the entire history of Tendring District Council, we have never achieved a figure this high in any single year, it is beyond reasonable thinking to believe that we could do so for 15 consecutive years. The target set is quite simply unachievable;

(iii)      in addition, under the new proposed rules, we will be required to maintain a five year housing supply throughout. This will again be almost double our current proved and agreed need.  The Government haschosen to take no account whatever of our local need or requirement when calculating the numbers etc. Many councils will like us not be able to reach their respective targets, meaning that a presumption in favour of development will be forced upon us, rendering our local plan all but useless. In turn this will likely lead to unwanted and unsuitable development across our District, as developers seek to gain planning permission in places we would not normally consider to be in the interests of our current and future residents of our District, whilst we will have no effective means of defence against such applications.

Therefore this Council resolves:-

1.    That the Leader of the Council, Councillor Mark Stephenson, in consultation with the Director (Planning and Communities) and on behalf of this Council and the residents it represents, writes to Angela Rayner M.P. asking that further consideration be given to the current review of the National Policy Planning Framework in light of this Council’s replies to the Government consultation on the same.

2.    That this Council offers its thanks and full support to our planning officers regarding the responses given by them to the recent Government consultation.

3.    That whilst we seek to gain a more favourable outcome for our District, our Officers will continue to do whatever they are able to in trying to reach the position currently expected, in anticipation that our request is ignored or unsuccessful.”

Prior to the commencement of the meeting the Council’s Monitoring Officer had confirmed to Members that the statutory officers did not need to provide any professional advice in relation to this motion and that therefore an Advisory Note pursuant to Council Procedure Rule 12.5 had not needed to be produced.

Councillor Bray formally moved the motion and Councillor Harris formally seconded the motion.

In accordance with the provisions of Council Procedure Rule 12.6 Councillor Bray then explained the purpose of the Motion and Council  ...  view the full minutes text for item 69.

The Council is asked to consider the recommendations submitted to it by the Cabinet in respect of the Local Council Tax Support Scheme 2025/2026, Discretionary Council Tax Exemptions, Discounts and Premiums for 2025/2026; and the Annual Minimum Revenue Provision Policy Statement 2025/2026.

Council was informed that, at its meeting held on 15 November 2024 (Minute 84 referred), the Cabinet had considered a joint report of the Housing & Planning Portfolio Holder and Corporate Finance & Governance Portfolio Holder (A.9) which had sought its agreement for recommending to Full Council the following:

•    Local Council Tax Support Scheme 2025/26 (LCTS);

•    Exceptional Hardship Policy;

•    Discretionary Council Tax Exemptions, Discounts and Premiums for 2025/26; and

•    Annual MRP Policy Statement for 2025/26.

Having conducted the annual review of the above matters, those Portfolio Holders had proposed to Cabinet:-

(i)      in terms of the LCTS, to continue with the principle of providing financial stability wherever possible to Tendring claimants;

(ii)      to keep the 2025/26 LCTS scheme the same as for 2024/25, which provided for a maximum discount of 80% for working age claimants;

(iii)     to not make any changes to the associated hardship policy apart from recognising that council tax payable on second homes / empty properties was not eligible for support;

(iv)    to not make any changes for 2025/26 in relation to existing discretionary council tax discounts, exemptions and premiums (including discounts for young people leaving care;

(v)     to not make any changes in respect of existing council tax premiums on long-term empty properties;

(vi)    to introduce from 1 April 2025 a 100% council tax premium on properties occupied periodically (‘second homes’);

(vii)    to note that central Government have introduced a number of exceptions where the council tax premium on long term empty properties and/or second homes is not chargeable; and

(viii)   to not make any changes to the Annual Minimum Revenue Provision Policy Statement for 2025/26 other than minor amendments to reflect revised Guidance.

Cabinet had been informed that, if it was agreed that no changes were necessary to the proposed LCTS scheme, there would be no need for public consultation. However, if any amendments were proposed and approved by Full Council at this meeting, then public consultation would be required before the final scheme could be agreed and adopted.  Consequently, if consultation was required, this Council would have to notify the precepting authorities that the final council tax base would be delayed and would not be available until late on in the budget cycle.

Given the recommendation to continue with the existing LCTS scheme, it had not been proposed to Cabinet to formally refer it for scrutiny to the Resources and Services Overview and Scrutiny Committee, on the grounds that it would be considered by Full Council at this meeting.

In order to proceed towards the implementation of an LCTS Scheme in 2024/25 along with the required council tax discounts, exemptions and premiums and an MRP Policy Statement Cabinet had:-

“RESOLVED that Cabinet agrees that -

(a)   the LCTS scheme for 2025/26 remains the same as the current year (2024/25);

(b)   the Council Tax Exceptional Hardship Policy be as set out in Appendix B to the joint report; and

(c)   the discretionary Council Tax exemptions, discounts and premiums for 2025/26 be as set  ...  view the full minutes text for item 70.

The Council is asked to consider the recommendations submitted to it by the Cabinet, following Cabinet’s consideration of a reference from the Licensing and Registration Committee, in respect of the adoption of a revised Gambling Licensing Policy Statement.

Earlier on in the meeting, as reported under Minute 59 above:-

(i)     Councillor Scott had declared a Disclosable Pecuniary Interest in relation to this matter insofar as he held a Gaming Licence for North Essex Liberal Democrats within the District. Councillor Scott therefore withdrew from the meeting and left the room whilst Council deliberated on this matter and made its decision.

(ii)    Councillor P B Honeywood had likewise declared a Disclosable Pecuniary Interest in relation to this matter insofar as he held a Gaming Licence for the Clacton Constituency Conservative Association. Councillor Honeywood therefore also withdrew from the meeting and left the room whilst Council deliberated on this matter and made its decision.

Council was informed that, at its meeting held on 15 November 2024 (Minute 77 referred), the Cabinet had considered a reference report from the Licensing and Registration Committee that had set out that Committee’s recommendations in relation to the adoption of a revised Gambling Licensing Policy Statement.

Cabinet had been informed that a draft Policy Statement had been considered by the Licensing and Registration Committee at its meeting held on 24 July 2024.  The Committee at that time had authorised consultation on the draft for a period of five weeks from 30 July 2024 to 3 September 2024.

In response to that consultation Gosschalks LLP, acting on behalf of the Betting and Gaming Council, had submitted a consultation response. As part of that response, Gosschalks had put forward amendments to paragraphs 15.11 and 24.2 of the Policy Statement.

The draft Policy Statement had sought to set out how this Council (as the licensing authority) would regulate gambling activities within the District. Whilst for the majority of the general public, gambling was an enjoyable and often social experience, it was for some individuals a largely hidden addiction which taken to excess had an adverse impact on their finances, health, wellbeing and relationships. The wellbeing of its residents was a key priority for the Council and the Gambling Policy had a role to play in supporting this priority through its control of gambling premises. It was hoped that the new revised policy statement was clear and easily understood and would be of significant use to the Council, its partners and operators when considering gambling matters.

The Licensing and Registration Committee (“the Committee”), at its meeting held on 2 October 2024 (Minute 23 referred), had considered the matter again (including the response received during the consultation).  Through the report, the Committee had been invited to determine its recommendation to Cabinet.  The Committee’s decision had been as follows:-

“RESOLVED that the Committee recommends the revised Gambling Licensing Policy Statement 2025 - 2028, as attached as Appendix A to the report (A.3), to Cabinet and thence Full Council for its formal adoption.”

The Portfolio Holder for Housing and Planning, as the designated Executive Member for overseeing licensing policy matters, had submitted the following written statement to Cabinet at its meeting held on 15 November 2024:-

“I thank the Licensing and Registration Committee  ...  view the full minutes text for item 71.

The Council is asked to consider the recommendations submitted to it by the Cabinet in respect of an amendment to the Council’s Climate Change target date.

Council was informed that, at its meeting held on 15 November 2024 (Minute 85 referred), the Cabinet had considered a report of the Portfolio Holder for the Environment (A.10), which had sought to enable Cabinet to determine its recommendation to Full Council with a proposal of amending the Council’s current policy target to achieve net zero carbon in scope one and two emissions from 2030 to the Government’s target date, currently 2050, in order to allow for more financially sustainable investment to meet the target.

The Portfolio Holder’s report had also set out the proposed Climate Action Plan for 2024-27, subject to Cabinet’s endorsement, which would look to deliver against the new target, following Full Council’s approval.

Cabinet had further been requested to note that an action within the Action Plan was for further work to be undertaken to improve and streamline data collection on energy usage and emissions.

The Environment Portfolio Holder had proposed that the Council aligned its target date for scope one and two emissions to reach net zero to the Government’s national target date, currently set at 2050, because this Council could not financially sustainably become net zero by 2030. This change was a realistic, value for money approach to responding to climate change. Aligning with the national target meant that the Government policy, regulation and funding required to meet net zero would be brought forward to enable the country, and so this Council, to meet what remained a challenging ambition by 2050.

Cabinet had been made aware that the Government would need to regulate to meet the 2050 target, and as it did so new statutory responsibilities for the Council would come with new burdens funding to deliver them. Over time it was expected that innovations in technology would make improvements in carbon reductions better value for money, more locally available (in terms of supply and maintenance), and more realistic in terms of delivery. The national target date of 2050 had therefore been recommended by the Environment Portfolio Holder.

Cabinet had consequently:-

“RESOLVEDthat Cabinet - 

a)     notes the contents of the Environment Portfolio Holder’s report (A.10) and in particular the development of a draft Climate Change Action Plan, as set out in Appendix A for 2024-27 based upon a revised target of achieving Net Zero carbon emissions by 2050;

b)     recommends to Full Council that –

i)       the Council’s Policy Framework (within Article 4 of the Constitution)) be amended to “Approval of the Council’s target for achieving Net Zero carbon emissions with the relevant strategy and action plans being adopted and delivered by the Executive”;

ii)      in recognition that at a national level the UK Government has outlined comprehensive targets aimed at achieving Net Zero carbon emissions by 2050 and based on the Council’s resources, the Council’s new target for achieving Net Zero carbon emissions be aligned with the UK’s national objectives to achieve Net Zero, by 2050; and

iii)     Cabinet adopts and delivers against its strategy and action plans in accordance with the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 72.

The Council is asked to consider the recommendations submitted to it by the Cabinet in respect of the adoption of a Social Value Policy.

Council was informed that, at its meeting held on 15 November 2024 (Minute 82 referred), the Cabinet had considered a report of the Portfolio for Assets which had presented to Cabinet for its approval a Social Value Policy to demonstrate how the Council would deliver corporate priorities by achieving social value through procurement ensuring the additional benefit to the community which it could derive, over and above the direct purchasing of goods, services and outcomes, where those quality criteria were relevant and proportionate to the subject matter of the contract and non-discriminatory.

The Portfolio Holder had put forward that implementing a Social Value Policy could elevate social value from a procurement process to an organisation-wide policy.   Organisation-wide ownership of social value, would encourage each project owner across the Authority to consider how they could achieve priority objectives in the Corporate Plan, thereby ensuring they made a commercial contribution in line with the Local Government Act 1988.  For example, a project manager in Directorate A could enable local jobs and skills opportunities, thereby delivering on corporate objectives in Directorate B.

The Policy could also enable this Council to set out a framework for:

·      ensuring the social value measures we used aligned to the Corporate Planand how changes to Social Value Themes, Outcomes and Priorities were made; and

·      how changes to the specific measures listed in the TOMs Calculator were made where they delivered Outcomes agreed by the Cabinet.  Each Measure sat under one of the agreed Social Value Outcomes.

This option had been recommended because it met best practice principles of publishing an organisation-wide Social Value Policy and it would enable the Council to adopt the TOMs Calculator efficiently to harness specific opportunities to deliver on corporate objectives (but only where they delivered on the outcomes already agreed by the Cabinet).

Whilst Social Value could apply with any value of contract, there was an operational cost to preparing and scoring the evaluation model. Therefore, the Portfolio Holder had proposed that the Council would normally only require social value to be considered when it was procuring a contract with a value of over £100,000.

Cabinet had consequently:-

“RESOLVED that Cabinet -

(a)    approves the Social Value Policy, as set out in Appendix A, for recommendation onto Full Council for adoption;

(b)    authorises the Portfolio Holder for Assets (with responsibility for procurement) to approve changes to the list of Social Value Measures in the TOMs Calculator, where those measures deliver on the Outcomes agreed by Cabinet;

(c)    authorises the Director (Governance) (with responsibility for procurement) to approve the removal of TOMs measures for specific procurements, in order to meet the Public Contracts Regulations requirements for relevance, proportionality to the subject matter of the contract and non-discrimination; and

(d)    endorses an annual social value statement to reaffirm their goals to suppliers and measuring social value progress.”

A copy of the published reference report of the Assets Portfolio Holder (and its appendix) to the Cabinet meeting held on 15 November 2024 was before Council  ...  view the full minutes text for item 73.

The Council is asked to consider any reports submitted to it by an Overview and Scrutiny Committee.

Council would consider any reports submitted to it by an Overview and Scrutiny Committee.

No such reports had been submitted for consideration at this meeting.

Further to the decision taken at its meeting held on 17 September 2024 (Minute 50 refers), to enable Council to consider proposals for a community governance review of Clacton-on-Sea, Holland-on-Sea and Jaywick Sands and to enable Council to determine:-

(a)    whether to proceed with such a review; and

(b)    the timetable for a review and the resourcing of such a review.

Council considered a report of the Chief Executive (A.6) which sought to provide it with the information it had requested at the last meeting of the Council (Minute 50 of 17 September 2024 referred in respect of a possible community governance review of the unparished areas of the District.  Council had requested: “that proposals for a community governance review of Clacton-on-Sea, Holland-on-Sea and Jaywick be prepared and submitted to the next ordinary meeting of the Council to enable Council to determine whether to proceed with such a review, the timetable for a review and the resourcing of such a review.”

The Chief Executive’s report therefore set out proposals for Council to consider in respect of a possible community governance review of Clacton-on-Sea, Holland-on-Sea and Jaywick Sands. Those proposals were in the form of draft Terms of Reference for such a review (which themselves included a timetable for such a review) and possible costs to be incurred in undertaking such a review.  If Council was minded to proceed with a community governance review there would need to be a recommendation to Cabinet to authorise the necessary expenditure to facilitate that review.  This was set out as one of the recommendations in the Chief Executive’s report for Members’ consideration.

Appendix A to the Chief Executive’s report set out the draft Terms of Reference for the possible Community Governance Review of Clacton-on-Sea, Holland-on-Sea and Jaywick Sands and Appendix B thereto set out a proposed amendment to the Community Leadership Overview and Scrutiny Committee’s Terms of Reference which would, if approved, enable that Committee to undertake functions relating to the making of recommendations to Council on the review pursuant to Sections 87 to 92 of the Local Government and Public Involvement in Health Act 2007.

In addition to Councillor M E Stephenson, Councillors Griffiths, Scott, Thompson, P B Honeywood, Bray, Baker, Guglielmi, Amos, Land, Calver and Talbot spoke during the debate on this matter.

It was moved by Councillor M E Stephenson, seconded by Councillor Baker and:-

RESOLVED that Council -

(a)    being minded to see a community governance review of Clacton-on-Sea, Holland-on-Sea and Jaywick proceed;

(b)    hereby determines the following:-

(i)      that the draft Terms of Reference for the community governance review, as set out at Appendix A to report A.6, be approved as the basis for that review;

(ii)     that the Chief Executive be authorised to adjust the Terms of Reference approved in (b)(i) above to finally be published to reflect the current position as known on 1 July 2024 in relation to matters such as the 2025/26 Parish Precepts and consequential Band D Council Tax amount in each area of the District;

(iii)   that, subject to (iv) below, Cabinet be requested to include within the recommended budget for 2025/26 the minimum sum of £48.4K to fund consultation and other expenses in respect of the community governance review and thereby authorise Officers to incur expenditure to undertake the review following approval of the budget;

(iv)   that Officers be requested to monitor  ...  view the full minutes text for item 75.

To enable the Council to approve the appointment of the members of the Council’s Independent Remuneration Panel (IRP) following Council’s decision on 30 April 2024 and to ensure compliance with the Section 20 of The Local Authorities (Members’ Allowances) England Regulations 2003.

Council considered a report of the Chief Executive (A.7) which sought its approval for the appointment of the members of the Council’s Independent Remuneration Panel (IRP) following Council’s decision on 30 April 2024 and in order to ensure compliance with Section 20 of The Local Authorities (Members’ Allowances) England Regulations 2003.

Members were reminded that there was a requirement, following the decision taken at Full Council on 22nd November 2022 that alternative arrangements for the Council’s IRP be explored further in order to maximise options available with other Councils within Essex and to give consideration to the outcome prior to any future recruitment. 

It was reported that, during 2023, Braintree District Council (BDC) had expressed an interest in joint working on the IRP Members and had advertised to recruit to their IRP role and had included reference to working with other Essex Councils (although Tendring District Council (TDC) had not been specifically named). This Council’s Director (Governance) & Monitoring Officer had taken part in the BDC interview process in 2024 and each candidate had confirmed they would be interested in joint working with TDC, if this was approved locally as an approach going forward. 

Council recalled that the term of office for TDC’s Independent Remuneration Panel had expired in April 2024 and that, following a reference report from the Standards Committee, Council had approved on 30 April 2024 (minute no. 14 referred):–

“(b)   future arrangements continue to be explored for a joint Independent Remuneration Panel with other Councils, and the delegation for recruitment be extended to the Chief Executive and Monitoring Officer for recommendations to be made to a future meeting of Full Council; and

(c)  for the purposes of (b) above the term of office of future Independent Remuneration Panel members be for a period of up to 7 years, being staggered if appropriate, to cover the Review of the Members’ Allowances Scheme required for 2026/27 and into the next term of office for District Councillors.”

Following that decision of Full Council in April 2024, the Chief Executive reported that all IRP members appointed by BDC had expressed an interest in being involved with TDC’s IRP and that all six candidates had been individually interviewed by the Chief Executive, the Director (Governance) & Monitoring Officer and the Head of Democratic Services and Elections. 

Council was informed that the experience and/or interest in the role had been of a high standard with a range of backgrounds and that, consequently, the Council would benefit from appointing all six in order to form a pool of members for an IRP to undertake reviews of Members’ Allowance Schemes for the District Council and the District’s Town and Parish Councils. 

The Chief Executive and the Monitoring Officer had therefore recommended to Council that the following candidates be appointed by Tendring District Council for a term of up to seven years:

·      Andy Barton – Self-employed therapist providing services to leaning disabled and elderly clients with a care home setting, spanning 28 care homes across Essex, Suffolk and  ...  view the full minutes text for item 76.

To report the finding by the Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman on a complaint determined by them in respect of a non-executive matter.

Members were aware that the Constitution (Article 12.03(a)) required the Monitoring Officer to report to Council (or to Cabinet for executive functions) if any decision or omission had given rise to maladministration.  This Monitoring Officer report (A.8) concerned actions that the Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman had determined were maladministration/service failings.

This particular report was also required under section 5A of the Local Government and Housing Act 1989 in view of the aforementioned decision in this matter by the Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman.

Council was informed that the matter related to a claimed failure by the Council to investigate concerns about a development neighbouring the complainant’s home; a failure to correctly apply permitted development guidance and building regulations; and about the Council’s complaint handling. The Ombudsman had found that the Council was not at fault for how it had considered and applied the permitted development guidance.  It had not questioned the merits of the Council’s decision in this regard. The Ombudsman had found the Council at fault for not making a clear decision on whether building regulations applied to the development and for not addressing concerns raised by the complainant in a timely way. This had caused avoidable injustice for the complainant. The Ombudsman had also found the Council at fault for its complaint handling. Recommendations to remedy the injustice caused had been submitted to the Council and accepted by it.

The recommendations from the Ombudsman in the case were:

Within four weeks of the final decision being issued, to:

a)    Provide a written apology to the complainant for the faults and injustice identified.

b)    Pay the complainant £400 in recognition of the injustice experienced.

It was reported that the Council had provided the requested apology and had taken the necessary step to pay the sum identified to the complainant.  Those steps had included the publication of the decision of the Chief Executive to authorise the payment concerned.  This had been published on 12 November 2024.

Members were advised that, since the time of the complaint, the Council had implemented revised procedures around complaint handling with a view to improving the consistency of compliance with the Council’s existing complaints procedure.  In addition, that complaints procedure was itself being revised to align with the expectations of the two Ombudsman Services (separately for Local Government & Social Care and for Housing) as set out in their parallel codes.

The Director of Planning and Communities had met with both the Building Control & Planning Enforcement teams and had shared the Ombudsman’s final decision and findings with them at their team meetings. The Director of Planning and Communities had set down a clear expectation of the timelines required for responses to complaints and enquiries and had stressed that ongoing matters should be closed in a clear and precise manner which would include a full explanation to the customer / complainant. Further training had been arranged and would cover improvements to customer service.

It was moved by Councillor M E Stephenson, seconded by Councillor  ...  view the full minutes text for item 77.

Subject to the required notice being given, Members of the Council can ask questions of the Chairman of the Council, the Leader of the Council, Portfolio Holders or Chairmen of Committees.

The time allocated for receiving and disposing of questions shall be a maximum of 30 minutes. Any question not disposed of at the end of this time shall be the subject of a written response, copied to all Members the following working day unless withdrawn by the questioner.

On this occasion one question has been received, on notice, from a Member.

Subject to the required notice being given, Members of the Council could ask questions of the Chairman of the Council, the Leader of the Council, Portfolio Holders or Chairmen of Committees.

One question on notice had been submitted by a Member on this occasion as set out below:-

Question

Councillor P B Honeywood asked Councillor M E Stephenson, the Leader of the Council:- 

“At the Council meeting held on 17^th September 2024 this Council debated a motion in response to the Labour Government’s plans to cut winter fuel payments from all pensioners except those receiving pension credits (Minute 51).

That motion, as amended by Councillor M E Stephenson, and passed by this Council stated, inter alia, the following:-

3. Following the Government’s decision to remove the Winter Fuel Payment from pensioners not in receipt of pension credit, the Leader of the Council and his Cabinet urgently review how Tendring District Council with the inclusion of its partners and other local organisations, can offer support and advice to pensioners living in this District who may suffer or be in the position of fuel poverty or difficulty as a result of this Government decision.

4. The availability of Pension Credit be promoted by the Council and with partners to assist all those entitled.”

Can the Leader of the Council please update this Council on the action he and his Cabinet have taken following the urgent review as to how Tendring District Council, with the inclusion of its partners and other local organisations, has offered support and advice to pensioners living in this District who may suffer or be in the position of fuel poverty or difficulty as a result of this Government’s decision to cut winter fuel payments and how the availability of Pension Credit has been promoted by the Council and with partners to assist all those entitled?

Could the Leader of the Council also update this Council as to when these actions were taken and how successful they have been?”

The Leader of the Council replied as follows:-

“Thank you Councillor Honeywood for your question.

This Council is committed to providing support and advice to local pensioners to take up money that they are entitled to, in particular Pension Credit, and to work with partners to do so.

The Council has a Fuel Poverty Officer who developed and provided a leaflet that informs people how to access pension credit and wider support, which has been circulated, in particular at the energy hub in Jaywick.

I requested officers to contact the Department of Work and Pensions (DWP) to obtain posters and leaflets promoting the take up of Pension Credit. The request was made of DWP on September 24th.

The Council sent out social media posts to promote Pension Credit take up on 28 September. Facebook reached 1,700 people with 15 interactions.  We followed up on 13^th November with a further post on Facebook with a reach of 841 and Next Door received 634 impressions. We also posted on Instagram. 

I  ...  view the full minutes text for item 78.

The Council will consider any urgent matters submitted in accordance with Council Procedure Rules 3(xv), 11.3(b) and/or 13(p).

No urgent matters had been submitted in accordance with Council Procedure Rules 3(xv), 11.3(b) and/or 13(p) for this meeting.