Venue: Council Chamber, Civic Offices, New Road, Grays, Essex RM17 6SL
Contact: Jenny Shade, Principal Democratic Services Officer Email: Direct.Democracy@thurrock.gov.uk
No. | Item | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
To approve as a correct record the Minutes of the meeting of the Council, held on 27 November 2024.
To approve as a correct record the Minutes of the meeting of the Extraordinary Council, held on 28 November 2024.
Additional documents: Minutes: The minutes of Council held on the 27 November 2024 and the minutes of the Extraordinary Council held on the 28 November 2024 were approved as a correct record. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Declaration of Interests To receive any declaration of interests from Members. Additional documents: Minutes: There were no declarations of interest. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Announcements on behalf of the Mayor or the Leader of the Council Additional documents: Minutes: The Leader provided an update following the growth statement made by the Chancellor of the Exchequer with regard to the proposed Lower Thames Crossing. The Leader provided a timeline of events with a decision expected to be received by the 23 May this year. The Leader stated Thurrock Council remained opposed to the crossing as this would not resolve the real problems caused by congestion at the Dartford crossings. This would be a huge damage to the environment, ecology, as well as doing little to add to the resilience of the local road network. Therefore the council would be writing to the Chancellor to reiterate the council’s views and the views of Thurrock’s residents. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Questions from Members of the Public In accordance with Chapter 2, Part 2 (Rule 14) of the Council’s Constitution. Additional documents: Minutes: The Mayor informed the chamber of the question received:
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Petitions from Members of the Public and Councillors In accordance with Chapter 2, Part 2(Rule 14) of the Council’s Constitution. Additional documents: Minutes: A petition was presented by Councillor B Maney that noted the current consultation being carried out by Thurrock Council under its Area Intervention Programme, regarding potential road safety measure in Little Thurrock Blackshots. Residents were concerned that the section of Blackshots Lane north of Long Lane was excluded from the proposals and would not be included in any speed reduction or traffic calming scheme. The Portfolio Holder for Place, Councillor V Holloway, acknowledged the petition. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Petitions Update Report Additional documents: Minutes: Members received a report on the status of those petitions handed in at Council meetings and Council office.
Under Council Procedure Rule 3.7, the Mayor agreed to vary the order of business by taking item 14 next. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Revised Political Balance Additional documents:
Minutes: The report presented to Council confirmed the revised political balance calculations relating to the allocation of seats on committees following the resignation of Councillor Ryan Polston as an elected Member on 6 January 2025.
RESOLVED 1. The political balance and allocation of seats, as set out in Appendix 1, was noted.
2. Members agreed any changes to appointments to committees in response to the revised political balance. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Appointments to Committees and Outside Bodies, Statutory and Other Panels The Council are asked to agree any changes to the appointments made to committees and outside bodies, statutory and other panels, as requested by Group Leaders. Additional documents: Minutes: The following changes to appointments were agreed:
· Add Councillor Green to the Planning Committee. · Add Councillor Cecil to the Corporate Scrutiny Committee. · Add Councillor C Holloway to the Licensing Committee. · Add Councillor Muldowney to the vacancy on the Thurrock Play network outside body.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Additional documents: Minutes: The report summarised that at Full Council on 30 October 2024 a petition had been submitted relating to residents against the use of green belt being used for housing on part of Blackshots playing fields. The petition exceeded the threshold of 1500 verified signatures and in accordance with Chapter 1, Part 2, Article 3 of the Constitution qualified to be debated by Full Council this evening.
Mr Bilton, the lead petitioner, presented his petition and made the following comments:
· On behalf of the group thanked members for the opportunity to present the case. · As a group applaud the council’s decision to replace the current sub standing housing in the Blackshots estate. · Petition of 2,000 signature to register a protest of building houses on Blackshots playing field. · Loss of this public space would inevitably have a detrimental effect to the public, especially the young. · Questioned whether the plans would meet the government’s criteria. · Adjacent sites were originally designated for housing were available. · Concerns on access routes. · Concerns on potential loss of trees and wildlife habitat. · Concerns on the history of subsidence in Blackshots Lane. · A need to strike a balance between the use of land currently designated as green belt and the impact on adjacent properties. · In conclusion, there was significant public resistance to the use of land on Blackshots field for some housing, as demonstrated by the petition and the presence in the public gallery this evening. · This public opinion indicated that part of the development was not perceived as desirable or wanted by residents. · Hoped the Council would recognise and accept residents' opinions.
The full speech can be viewed from Item 9 on the following link:
Thurrock Council - Full Council, 29/01/25
Councillors L Watson, Speight, Fletcher, B Maney, Jefferies, Johnson, Allen and Rigby spoke on this item with the following comments made:
· The portfolio holder thanked the lead petitioner and the residents committee for organising and presenting the petition. · Good working relationship had been established with residents and members. · Portfolio holder had committed to being open and honest on what was possible and to work with them until the delivery of the development. · New chief of housing had been willing to listen to residents and had given a commitment to review all options. · A solution needed to be found that provided a space whilst minimising the inconvenience for both local residents and those using the park. · Plan should still be to provide decent and safe homes for Thurrock residents who need and deserved them but also retaining local facilities and open spaces. · Encouraged the portfolio holder to make a formal approach with Fields in Trust, a charity in place to protect open spaces. · King George V Park had been gifted to the people of Thurrock with the intention of being used as a green space, not for development. · The petition had demonstrated the depth of feelings of local residents. · There was a need to increase social housing stock, and this should be possible without sacrificing Blackshots Field. · There ... view the full minutes text for item 90. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Local Council Tax Support Scheme Additional documents:
Minutes: The report presented detailed the Local Council Tax Support Scheme that supported Council taxpayers who had a low income by providing a reduction to the actual amount of Council Tax payable after other discounts had been applied. The report outlined a summary and findings of the review, the alternative options considered and reasoning for the recommendation that the current scheme continued unchanged for 2025/26.
Councillors Jefferies and Speight spoke on this item with the following comments made:
· Welcomed the help for those most vulnerable. · Questioned whether the help would be for those pensioners who had lost their winter fuel allowance. · Referred to paragraph 4.8 of the report that stated the current latest best estimate for the cost of providing the scheme in 2024/25 was £9.5m and raised concern on any potential increase in 2025/26 of potential claimants. · Questioned the portfolio holder on what basis the estimate figure had been based on. · Questioned the portfolio holder whether she was confident the number of claimants would go down and not up in the coming year.
Councillor Muldowney summed up by stating comments had been noted and a written response would be provided following the meeting.
RESOLVED
1. Noted the analysis and review of the current Local Council Tax Support (LCTS) Scheme for Working age people.
2. Approved that the current Local Council Tax support scheme for working age people which had been in place since 2017/18 continued for 2025/26 with no changes:
• to ensure work pays, the first £25 per week of earned income is disregarded when calculating levels of council tax support; • the maximum capital limit is to be set at £6,000. This means anyone who has savings over £6,000 may not receive support with their council tax; • for working age claimants, the maximum support allowed is set at 75% of their full council tax bill; • to assist those with families, the Child Benefit and Child Maintenance received is not included as income in the calculation of council tax support; • the maximum period a claim can be backdated under the scheme is one calendar month. To qualify for this, the claimant will need to provide good reason for not claiming earlier; • there is a full disregard of military compensation payments, including War Disablement Pensions, War Widow’s Pension and Armed Forces Compensation Scheme payments; • Disability Living Allowance and Personal Independence Payments are fully disregarded; • the number of dependants assessed in the calculation of claimants’ needs is a maximum of two; • the maximum period of an award when temporarily absent outside the United Kingdom was four weeks. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Local Tax Discounts and Premiums Additional documents: Minutes: The report presented summarised under Sections 11B and 11C of the Local Government Finance Act 1992 amended by the Levelling up and Regeneration Act 2023 allow billing authorities to charge a premium up to a maximum defined level on properties that had been empty and unfurnished for over 12 months and were classed as second homes from 1 April 2025 (a second home being defined as “being substantially furnished but have no permanent resident”).
Councillors Jefferies and Speight spoke on this item with the following comments made:
· Welcomed the introduction of the additional charge on empty homes as an incentive to have more properties back on market. · Requested information on the number of properties that had been brought back into use as a result of the additional charge that had been put in place. · Encouraged further ideas on how the number of properties brought back on the market could be increased. · No reference as to whether the policy had been successful. · Further details were required to ensure proper decisions could be made. · A more accurate prognosis was required.
Councillor Muldowney summed up by acknowledging the comments and suggestions made, would be happy for the policy to be reviewed but noted the government legislation had been in place since 1992, and the council had not charged before. Additional legislation had also been put in place to capture those trying to get around the law and not be charged for empty properties. Further data would be available once further charging started in April 2025.
RESOLVED
1. Noted the additional income generated from the ‘Long term Empty and Unfurnished’ premium year to date in 2024/2025 as detailed in 4.12.
2. Noted the statutory exceptions/exemptions that had now been finalised in regulations and would apply to both premiums from April 2025.
3. Noted the work that had been undertaken in 2024/25 to validate properties that would potentially be subject to the ‘Second Homes’ premium from 1st April 2025.
4. Approved that the council continued to charge the ‘Long term Empty’ council tax premium in line with the existing determination on:
• Properties empty after 12 Months and up to 5 years = 100% Premium • Properties empty between 5 and 10 years = 200% Premium • Properties empty over 10 years = 300% Premium
5. Approved that as per the existing determination, the Council proceeds to implement the ‘Second homes’ premium from 1st April 2025.
It was noted that Councillor Speight voted against 2.4 and 2.5. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Gambling Act 2005 Policy Statement Review Additional documents: Minutes: The report presented identified the Gambling Act 2005 that required local councils to review their Gambling Policy Statement every three years. A reviewed Gambling Policy Statement had been produced, consulted upon and considered by both the Licensing Committee and Cabinet and was ready for adoption by full Council.
Councillors Speight, Green, B Maney and Gledhill spoke on this item with the following comments made:
· Concerns raised on the validity of the report. · Concerns raised on the timing of the consultation alongside the meeting of cabinet before the consultation period had concluded. · Assumed no significant relevant responses had been received as no paperwork available to members to support this. · Members were being asked to vote on a policy without having received any verified information. · Concern raised if policy did not get approved the council would be unable to operate this statutory function. · Concern that the report was late which gave members insufficient time to properly digest the information. · Noted the date in paragraph on page 71 was incorrect.
Councillor Holloway summed up by noting members concerns on the timing of the report and the crossover of the consultation date. Stated that were there any significant comments or objections received this report this would have gone back to cabinet for further discussion.
RESOLVED |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Progress on Thurrock Council’s Improvement and Recovery Additional documents:
Minutes: The report provided Members with a progress update on the work to date to deliver the council’s Improvement and Recovery Plan.
Gavin Jones, Lead Commissioner, provided a brief summary of the report written to the Minister in November 2024, once a response had been received this would then be published. The key messages from the report were:
· There had been significant progress across the council. · An increase in improvement and the pace of improvement over the past year. · Highlighted the importance of the corporate plan. · Improvements made around risk management. · Thurrock council should be proud of the journey so far to date but accept there was still a lot to be done. · Important that Thurrock could demonstrate that improvements were sustainable improvements. · Over the next few months commissioners to look at how well embedded those changes had been done. · Real improvements noted in member/officer relationship. · Leadership of the council, managerially and politically, working well together and with the engagement with officers. · All 49 members still had a role to play. · Encouraged all members to engage with the council’s training and development offer. · On finances, latest report highlighted huge progress. · Concern about capacity and would need to continue to focus on transformation. · Improved engagement with the local community had been noted. · Council's leadership continued to emphasise the work that was being undertaken to meet best value duty and this must remain a priority. · Devolution and Local Government reorganisation – the council would still have a duty to focus on recovery and as commissioners, would continue to hold the council to account for that improvement. · Noted that Gavin Jones would be standing down as Chief Executive of Essex County Council next month.
Councillors Jefferies, Speight, J Kent, Muldowney, Halden and Coxshall spoke on this item with the following comments made:
· Acknowledged the progress been made within the council but noted there was still a long way to go. · Residents should be reassured that changes being made was to give residents of Thurrock a council fit for purpose. · Concern over the withdrawal of the local plan and urged the leader and his administration to publish the full reasons behind its withdrawal. · Referred to the RAG ratings within the report. · Noted this time next year some comparison between the two documents could take place. · Concern raised on red RAG rating for risk. · Thanks were given to Gavin Jones and commissioners for their help, support, advise and reassurance. · Recovery was still fragile and not to lose focus. · Take the past experience that we have had and to make sure that whatever came next was more sustainable, more responsive, that actually held people to account and linked that accountability to delivery from day one. · Praised the members risk training and encouraged all members to attend. · Thanks were also given to council officers who continued to do their job to improve services and delivery those for the people of Thurrock. To cabinet members and the senior leadership team for all the work undertaken. · Touched on capacity and ... view the full minutes text for item 94. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Questions from Members In accordance with Chapter 2, Part 2 (Rule 14) of the Council’s Constitution. Additional documents: Minutes: The Mayor informed the chamber of the questions received to the leader and cabinet members:
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Reports from Members representing the Council on Outside Bodies Additional documents: Minutes: No reports were presented. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Minutes of Committees
Additional documents: Minutes: The minutes of committees as set out in the agenda were received. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Update on motions resolved at Council during the previous year Additional documents: Minutes: Members received an update on outstanding motions.
Councillor Jones requested an update on the following two motions, the Leader agreed that a response would be provided and sent to members.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Motions Received for January Council Additional documents: Minutes: Motion 1, as printed in the agenda was proposed by Councillor Speight and seconded by Councillor B Maney. The Motion read as follows:
With the benefit of hindsight and experience and having reviewed the changes instigated to the council constitution O&S rules (Chapter 4), following the full council meeting on 30 October, this chamber seeks an immediate amendment to those changes. Namely that the right be restored to members of an O&S committee to extend the length of meetings if there is still important, appropriate and necessary business to be debated and decided. That decision would be made by a majority vote of eligible members present. It is my interpretation that this change can immediately be approved by the Monitoring officer who was delegated the authority to make agreed revisions that are clerical or minor changes into the Constitution, but that may be open to a different interpretation. I put it forward for speed of process. However, the matter can be referred to the executive (cabinet or GSC) for a final decision.
Councillor Speight stated that an error of judgement had been made when the report had been presented to members and this was now the opportunity to correct it. Concerns that the two and half hours was not always sufficient time for important scrutiny to take place and decisions in the past to extend standing orders had not been taken lightly. Only taken place when serious or appropriate matters needed to be dealt with. The change was required to allow scrutiny chairs with the majority vote of committee members to take extra time if required to undertake the role they were elected to do. Voting against this motion would prevent all three overview and scrutiny committees being able to scrutinise those important issues.
Councillors V Holloway, G Byrne, Jones, Worrall, Johnson, Fletcher, Muldowney, Kerin, L Watson, Halden and B Maney spoke on this item with the following comments made:
· All legislative bodies had time limits on debates. · Timings would be managed by a competent chair working with officers, democratic services and committee members. · Ensuring work programme items were suitable for the time allotted. · Chairs should be able to decide how long meetings should go on for. · If committee members not happy to go beyond the allocated time they say so. · Not an officer decision. · Concern on the item of urgent business being removed from the agenda. · Concern that members were being asked to attend daytime meetings and training sessions. · With the number of overview and scrutiny committees being reduced from six to three meant more reports being brought to committee. · Concern that not sufficient time was given to read reports. · Items being missed or not debated fully as not sufficient time was provided to discuss. · Of the 14 overview and scrutiny meetings held this year only two meetings had been affected by the guillotine and items having to be deferred. · Would be discussed as part of the already planned scrutiny review. · Rules set clear time limits on ... view the full minutes text for item 99. |