Agenda and minutes

Councillors E Aston, M Boylan, E Davies, S Davies, N Dugmore, A McClements, H Morgan, T Nelson, S J Reynolds, S Syrda, J Thompson, S Burrell, K Tonks, J Urey and P Watling declared an interest in the motion at 13a on the Agenda and indicated that they would take no part in the discussion. 

Sukhwinder Singh and Gurpyar Singh of the Guru Nanak Darbar Gurdwara, Oakengatessaid prayers.

To confirm the minutes of the last meeting of the Council.

RESOLVED – that the minutes of the meeting held on 25 January 2024 be confirmed and signed by the Mayor.

The Leader of the Council may give an oral report on matters of significance to the Borough, comment upon the Cabinet decisions or make any announcements.

The Leader announced that the budget would be brought before Members for final approval.  A lot of time had been spent looking at not just pounds and pence but getting the numbers right in order to protect, care and invest in the borough.   Some of the work taking place included protecting and improving air quality in the borough, the installation of 150 electric car charging points, investment into the Silkin Way improving sustainable travel, reducing carbon emissions and connecting communities.  Volunteers, together with the Council’s Environmental Team, had planted 2,500 bulbs in local green spaces.  There were currently 14 active friends’ groups involved in activities within local parks and green spaces. The Council now had 1,441 street champions and 501 snow wardens who played their part in improving the local community.

The Leader reported that Trading Standards had recently secured a custodial sentence for a rogue trader. He expressed his delight with regard to the Station Quarter and the new opportunities for students each year.  Nuplace had released a further 36 homes for rent bringing the total to 485 across the borough and the Council continued to maintain roads and empty wheelie bins. 

The Leader commented that there were 429 children in care and that there were one million hours of home care in place for older friends and neighbours with additional needs.

The Leader expressed that it was an honour to serve local residents and asked that all 54 Members make a difference to the community and that they should be proud of the borough where they live, work, enjoy and call home.

To note the Mayoral Engagements undertaken since the previous Council meeting.

The Mayor noted engagements he had undertaken since the last Council meeting.  In particular, he highlighted his attendance at the Youth Parliament election and congratulated the newly elected Members of Youth Parliament Austin Jijo and Esther Essel who will now stand in position for two years. He wished them his very best on their new role.

The Mayor expressed his delight in hosting his Mayor’s Black Tie Charity Ball on 8 March at The Valley Hotel in Ironbridge, as this was a highlight of a Mayor’s year in office and helped to raise much needed funds for the Telford & Wrekin CVS. 

The Mayor thanked fellow Members and our local community who had given their support during his term in office and he looked forward to attending his remaining engagements.

To receive any questions from the public which have been submitted under Council Procedure Rules 7.11 and 7.12. The session will last no more than 15 minutes with a maximum of 2 minutes allowed for each question and answer. Questions can be asked of the Leader and Cabinet Members.

No questions were received.

To answer questions received under Council Procedure Rule 6.2.

NB      In accordance with the provisions of Council Procedure Rule 6.2.9 there will be a maximum of 30 minutes allowed for questions and answers.  Any question not answered within the 30 minute time limit will receive a written reply within 5 working days.

The following questions were asked under Council Procedure Rule 6.2.2:-

(a)  Councillor Peter Scott asked the following question of Councillor Lee Carter, Cabinet Member: Place (The Economy & Neighbourhood Services)

"In Newport and other areas within the borough we are seeing more cars needing to find spaces in our car parks particularly shoppers and those who work in our towns.  We are not getting any extra car parks or spaces to cope with them so is it not now time for Telford and Wrekin Council to seriously consider parking charges on all council car parks? If not, what are your proposed solutions going forward?"

Councillor Lee Carter responded that work was currently being undertaken with Newport Town Council to manage plans for long and short stay parking within the thriving centres across the borough.  He gave a cast iron pledge that free parking would remain and that sustainable options to visit town centres were being explored.  The Council had invested in new bus routes for residents to travel to employment, leisure facilities and high streets and cycling and walking routes were available.  A parking plan containing potential improvements to stay restrictions and real time information on spaces was being investigated but this did require funding.  Once funding had been identified, local stakeholders would be consulted.

Councillor Peter Scott asked a supplementary question:

“Would the Council consider using parking permits for residents in areas ie around schools?”

Councillor Lee Carter responded that he was willing to consider any proposals put forward and would continue to engage with all stakeholders.

(b)  Councillor Peter Scott asked the following question of Councillor Richard Overton, Cabinet Member: Homes & Enforcement

"In Newport and across the borough there is an increase in irresponsible dog owners who let their dogs defecate on public roads and parks and do not pick it up.  I appreciate that there is an Enforcement Team that can deal with reported cases and that free dog poo bags are available but what else can the council do to crack down on this increase in this anti-social behaviour?"

Councillor Richard Overton responded that the Council were on the side of residents that that there was a Public Spaces Protection Order (PSPO) in place across the borough and penalties were imposed on dog fouling or dogs allowed to enter gated children’s play areas with offenders being held to account.  Community Action Teams (CATs) operated in partnership across the borough and would be delivering targeted campaigns with a data and intelligence led approach.  Dog fouling would not be tolerated.

Councillor Peter Scott asked a supplementary question:

“In relation to the Public Spaces Protection Order could missing signage be installed as residents may not be aware of the order being in place.

Councillor Richard Overton responded that Councillors could use their Pride Fund as a partnership approach for additional signage and asked Councillor Scott to provide details of locations where he felt signage was required.

(c)   Councillor Andrew Eade asked the following question of Councillor Nathan England, Cabinet Member:  ...  view the full minutes text for item 62.

To receive the report on the Cabinet decisions made since publication of the last Council meeting agenda. Cabinet Members may speak on these decisions and Members may ask questions about key decisions of the relevant Cabinet Member for the purposes of clarification only.  Members are asked to note the additional delegations to officers granted at those meetings.

Members received the report on the Cabinet decisions made since the last meeting of the Council.

Building Safer, Stronger & Healthier Communities through better Air Quality

Councillor T Nelson asked Councillor R Overton, Cabinet Member: Homes & Enforcement

“In relation to the Action Plan for managing air quality could you clarify whether the management action includes the contract with Idverde where key parts of the cycle network are rendered impassible by unswept leaves?”

Councillor R Overton responded that it was in line with Idverde contract and that additional works would be undertaken where necessary in line with the Air Quality Strategy.

Councillor N England, Cabinet Member: Finance, Customer Services & Governance presented the report of the Interim Director Finance & Human Resources which set out how the Council would deliver the Strategy and its five key priorities. It sought approval of the Council’s Medium Term Financial Strategy together with the budget framework for 2024/25.

It was noted that there had been a significant increase in demand for services, together with higher costs in relation to the provision of Adult Social Care and energy costs. There were high levels of financial pressure and complexity of need in relation to both Adult Social Care and Children’s Servies which had led to a Council Tax increase of 4.99% all of which would go to vulnerable children and adults.

In accordance with the Local Authorities (Standing Orders) (England) (Amendment) Regulations 2014, a recorded vote was taken on the recommendations as follows: -

For (33)

Councillors E Aston, M Boylan, A J Burford, E Callear, L D Cater, G H Cook, E Davies, S Davies, P Davis, F Doran, A England, N England, S Handley,

Z Hannington, C Healy, L Lewis, G Luter, A D McClements, R Mehta,

K Middleton, H Morgan, R A Overton, I Preece,  S J Reynolds, H Rhodes,

R Sahota, P J Scott, B J Thompson, C R Turley, J Urey, O Vickers,

P R Watling and D R W White.

Against (0)

Abstain (10 )

Councillors S Bentley, S P Burrell, N Dugmore, A J Eade, T J Nelson,

S Sydra, G Thomas, W L Tomlinson, K Tonks and R Tyrrell.

RESOLVED – that

a)     the Medium-Term Financial Strategy (MTFS) for 2024/25 – 2027/28 and the budget framework for 2024/25 be approved;

b)    a council tax increase of 4.99% for 2024/25 including the Government’s 2% Adult Social Care precept, which will be fully invested in the provision of social care services for the most vulnerable members of our community be approved;

c)     the net investment of £5.9m into Adult Social Care in 2024/25 be approved;

d)    the net investment of £7.6m into Children’s Safeguarding in 2024/25 be approved;

e)     the budget savings totalling £17.567m in 2024/25 be approved;

f)      the continuation of work with partner organisations, including Town & Parish Councils and Voluntary Sector and Community Groups to seek to identify ways to mitigate the impact of some of the cuts to services that could no longer be delivered be approved and the availability of the Invest to Save/Capacity Fund which is available to support partnership working be noted;

g)    the base budget, the policy framework for Reserves and Balances and their planned use be approved;

h)    the Risk Register be approved;

i)       the Council Tax Reduction Scheme for implementation on 1 April 2024 be endorsed;

j)       the continuation of the Council Tax Reduction Hardship Assistance Policy be approved;

k)     the revenue implications of the medium-term capital programme for the period 2023/24 – 2027/28 set out in the Capital Strategy and Programme reports be approved;

l)       delegated authority be granted to the Interim Director:  ...  view the full minutes text for item 64.

Councillor N England, Cabinet Member: Finance, Customer Services & Governance presented the report of the Interim Director: Finance & Human Resources, which sought to determine the levels of Council Tax for Telford & Wrekin in 2024-25 and took account of the requirements of Telford & Wrekin Council, the West Mercia Police and Crime Commissioner, Shropshire and Wrekin Fire Authority, together with the Town and Parish Councils.

In accordance with the Local Authorities (Standing Orders) (England) (Amendment) Regulations 2014, a recorded vote was taken on the recommendations as follows:-

For (33)

Councillors E Aston, M Boylan, A J Burford, E Callear, L D Cater, G H Cook, E Davies, S Davies, P Davis, F Doran, A England, N England, S Handley,

Z Hannington, C Healy, L Lewis, G Luter, A D McClements, R Mehta,

K Middleton, H Morgan, R A Overton, I Preece,  S J Reynolds, H Rhodes,

R Sahota, P J Scott, B J Thompson, C R Turley, J Urey, O Vickers,

P R Watling and D R W White.

Against (0)

Abstain (10 )

Councillors S Bentley, S P Burrell, N Dugmore, A J Eade, T J Nelson,

S Sydra, G Thomas, W L Tomlinson, K Tonks and R Tyrrell.

RESOLVED – that the levels of Council Tax for 2024/25 as set out in the report be approved.

To seek approval for Councillors who have requested a leave of absence from Council duties.

The Cabinet Member: Policy and Governance presented the report for a request for a Councillor Leave of Absence which sought approval for a period of absence for the purpose of undertaking caring responsibilities for Councillor L Powers and a period of absence for maternity leave for Councillor L Parker.

RESOLVED – that:

a)     a leave of absence for Councillor Leanne Powers from 13 June 2024 until 14 November 2024 be approved; and

b)    a leave of absence for Councillor Lyndsey Parker from 29 May 2024 until 24 January 2025 be approved.

“This Council believes that Telford and Wrekin children deserve the very best start in life, they deserve great education in great schools from great teachers. This council notes that 95% of primary schools are good or outstanding and that some of our secondary schools are amongst the best performing in the country, and reaffirms our thanks and praise to our school heads, teachers, school staff and governors. However, schools are being let down by this government.

This Council notes with concern:

That this year, schools in Telford & Wrekin, and schools nationally, are facing real-terms cuts to their funding. With a national increase of 1.9% per pupil in the 2024/25 School Funding Formula allocations to Local Authorities, inflationary price increases in areas such as energy and pay awards – which are substantially higher than this, are placing significant pressure upon our schools, resulting in less resources in the classrooms of children across Telford and Wrekin.

This council believes that investment in education is investment in the future of our borough, and that it is essential to provide ALL young people in Telford & Wrekin with a chance to succeed. Furthermore, we believe that pupils of similar characteristics should attract similar levels of funding regardless of which area in the country they live in.

The Government should ensure that it makes the funds available for Government policy initiatives in our schools, so the basic level of funding allocated to all schools is adequate for the school to cover BOTH operational costs and the sufficient provision of staffing.

SEND provision is teetering on the brink of a national crisis. This council believes that High Needs Funding should be addressed urgently to meet the increasing needs of children with SEND, in Telford alone we have seen a 70% rise in EHC assessment requests over the last year and we know there is a similar pattern happening nationally. High Needs Funding has to be adequate to ensure that we can meet our statutory duties within the context of growing pressures in this area whilst delivering a balanced and equitable funding formula for pupils with SEN.

The council resolves to write to the Secretary of State for Education asking them to ensure that school funding is kept in line with real inflation, and to ensure that wage and pension increases are fully funded by national Government – basing the School Funding formula on the above and calculating school budgets on the costs of running a school.”

The Motion will be seconded by Councillor Paul Watling.

Councillor E Callear moved, in accordance with Council Procedure Rule 7, the following Motion:

“This Council believes that Telford and Wrekin children deserve the very best start in life, they deserve great education in great schools from great teachers. This Council notes that 95% of primary schools are good or outstanding and that some of our secondary schools are amongst the best performing in the country and reaffirms our thanks and praise to our school heads, teachers, school staff and governors. However, schools are being let down by this government.

This Council notes with concern:

That this year, schools in Telford & Wrekin, and schools nationally, are facing real-terms cuts to their funding. With a national increase of 1.9% per pupil in the 2024/25 School Funding Formula allocations to Local Authorities, inflationary price increases in areas such as energy and pay awards – which are substantially higher than this, are placing significant pressure upon our schools, resulting in less resources in the classrooms of children across Telford and Wrekin.

This Council believes that investment in education is investment in the future of our borough, and that it is essential to provide ALL young people in Telford & Wrekin with a chance to succeed. Furthermore, we believe that pupils of similar characteristics should attract similar levels of funding regardless of which area in the country they live in.

The Government should ensure that it makes the funds available for Government policy initiatives in our schools, so the basic level of funding allocated to all schools is adequate for the school to cover BOTH operational costs and the sufficient provision of staffing.

SEND provision is teetering on the brink of a national crisis. This Council believes that High Needs Funding should be addressed urgently to meet the increasing needs of children with SEND, in Telford alone we have seen a 70% rise in EHC assessment requests over the last year and we know there is a similar pattern happening nationally. High Needs Funding has to be adequate to ensure that we can meet our statutory duties within the context of growing pressures in this area whilst delivering a balanced and equitable funding formula for pupils with SEN.

The Council resolves to write to the Secretary of State for Education asking them to ensure that school funding is kept in line with real inflation, and to ensure that wage and pension increases are fully funded by national Government – basing the School Funding formula on the above and calculating school budgets on the costs of running a school.”

Following advice from the Deputy Monitoring Officer, the following Members declared an interest and left the room:

Councillors M Boylan, S Burrell, N Dugmore, T Nelson, J Urey and P Watling.

Councillor R Overton seconded the motion.

Following a robust debate on the Motion it was:.

RESOLVED – that the motion be approved.

“With increased frequency of flooding around the borough support for affected businesses and residents is needed now more than ever. Until recently, following widespread flooding incidents, government has provided flood recovery funding to help cover clean up costs and replace damaged items in recognition that insurance is either unaffordable or simply refused.

This council notes that the Government has, without warning, added a new requirement of written evidence of insurance being refused or unaffordable leaving those businesses who only sought verbal advice without access to recovery funding following internal flooding from Storm Babet, once again demonstrating that the Conservatives are no longer the party of business.

This council resolves to write to the Secretary of State for the Environment to express its concern and consternation that the Government has changed the criteria without due notice and requests that the refusal of grant support for Storm Babet be reconsidered.”

The Motion will be seconded by Councillor Lee Carter.

Councillor C Healy moved, in accordance with Council Procedure Rule 7, the following Motion:

“With increased frequency of flooding around the borough support for affected businesses and residents is needed now more than ever. Until recently, following widespread flooding incidents, government has provided flood recovery funding to help cover clean-up costs and replace damaged items in recognition that insurance is either unaffordable or simply refused.

This Council notes that the Government has, without warning, added a new requirement of written evidence of insurance being refused or unaffordable leaving those businesses who only sought verbal advice without access to recovery funding following internal flooding from Storm Babet, once again demonstrating that the Conservatives are no longer the party of business.

This Council resolves to write to the Secretary of State for the Environment to express its concern and consternation that the Government has changed the criteria without due notice and requests that the refusal of grant support for Storm Babet be reconsidered.”

Councillor S Bentley raised a point of order in respect of 9.10.2 of the Council’s constitution that the final paragraph was the motion and the vote be taken at the point on 9.15.2.

Following advice from the Deputy Monitoring Officer, the motion had not been proposed and seconded and the Speaker requested that debate on this motion was heard.

The Motion was seconded by Councillor Lee Carter.

Following a robust debate the Motion was unanimously approved.

Members requested a recorded vote be taken on the motion.

For (33)

Councillors E Aston, S Bentley, M Boylan, A J Burford, S P Burrell, E Callear, L D Cater, G H Cook, E Davies, S Davies, A J Eade, P Davis, F Doran, A England, N England, S Handley, Z Hannington, C Healy, L Lewis, G Luter, A D McClements, N Dugmore, R Mehta, K Middleton, H Morgan, T J Nelson, R A Overton, I Preece,  S J Reynolds, H Rhodes, R Sahota, P J Scott, S Sydra, G Thomas, B J Thompson, W L Tomlinson, K Tonks, R Tyrrell, C R Turley, J Urey, O Vickers, P R Watling and D R White.

Against (0)

Abstain (0)

RESOLVED – that the motion be approved.

“This council recognises the vital role that scrutiny plays within the ‘Strong Leader’ governance model adopted by this Council and agrees to undertake an independent review of current support and practices.”

The Motion will be seconded by Councillor Andrew Eade.

Councillor T Nelson moved, in accordance with Council Procedure Rule 7, the following Motion:

“This council recognises the vital role that scrutiny plays within the ‘Strong Leader’ governance model adopted by this Council and agrees to undertake an independent review of current support and practices.”

The Motion was seconded by Councillor Andrew Eade.

Following the motion being seconded, the speaker noted that this may fall under purview of Scrutiny Management Board and asked the Deputy Monitoring for advice.

The Deputy Monitoring Officer stated that in accordance with Rule 9.2 of the rules of debate which set out that a motion that related to the responsibility of the Leader/Cabinet Executive or any other Committee shall, upon being moved and seconded, stand referred without discussion to the leader/Cabinet Executive or any other Committee as may be determined for discussion or report.

The Speaker proposed that this matter fell within the remit of Scrutiny Management Board and in line with rule 9.2 it was referred for consideration without further discussion.  It was seconded by Councillor Richard Overton.

Upon being put to the vote it was, by a majority:

RESOLVED – that in relation to the following motion

“This Council recognises the vital role that scrutiny plays within the ‘Strong Leader’ governance model adopted by this Council and agrees to undertake an independent review of current support and practices.”

that this be referred for consideration to Scrutiny Management Board without further discussion.