Councillor Gledhill introduced the report that confirmed the calculations relating to the allocation of seats on committees following a change to political balance in November 2018 with the Administration gaining seats in Corporate Overview and Scrutiny Committee, Planning Transport and Regeneration Overview and Scrutiny Committee and Licensing Committee.

 

Councillor Gledhill moved the report to the vote.

 

RESOLVED:

 

That the allocation of seats including manual adjustment, as set out in Appendix 1, be approved.

Councillor Collins, Portfolio Holder for Central Services, presented the report which sought the approval of the Council’s Annual Pay Policy Statement. That Thurrock’s statement included a pay policy for all categories of employees which reflected the existing employment terms and conditions.

 

Councillor J Kent stated the Labour Group support to the recommendation.

 

Councillor Spillman stated he had concerns on how changes to bandings could affect staff’s pay and questioned how many staff would be affected, how many staff would benefit and how many staff’s salaries would stay the same following the band changes.

 

Councillor Collins stated that the Pay Policy had the agreement of all interested parties who all stated the policy to be agreeable and acceptable and that further information would be sent to Councillor Spillman.

 

Councillor Collin’s summed up by stating that nobody would lose with many members of staff and apprentices gaining from the change. Councillor Collins stated it was a good policy that had the support of all trade unions and urged members to vote in favour.

 

The Mayor called a vote on this item to which Members voted unanimously in favour.

 

RESOLVED:

 

That the Annual Pay Policy Statement 2019/20 is agreed in line with the Council’s obligations under the Localism Act 2011, the Single Status Agreement , the recommendations by the independent market assessment and the output of the pay review project (as agreed by General Services Committee on the 8 October 2018).

Councillor Hebb, Portfolio Holder for Finance, presented the report and stated that the current Local Council Tax Reduction Scheme had been implemented on the 1 April 2017 and agreed for the 2018/19 financial year with no changes. Councillor Hebb stated the proposal for 2019/20 would be to continue with the current scheme in light of no planned changes to the Housing Benefit legislation for the coming year.

 

Councillor Gerrish stated the Local Council Tax Reduction Scheme should be scrutinised by the Corporate Overview and Scrutiny Committee who would be able to review the elements of the scheme for the future. Councillor Hebb agreed with Councillor Gerrish’s suggestion and requested the report went to the vote.

 

Members voted unanimously in favour of the recommendation.

 

RESOLVED

 

That the Council agreed to maintain the existing scheme for 2019/20.

Councillor Halden, Portfolio Holder for Education and Health, presented the Annual Public Health Report that considered the current and future needs of older people with respect to housing. The report reviewed the evidence that worked for older people’s housing to describe the vision for Thurrock and that local and national data would be analysed to form a set of specific recommendations.

 

Councillor Halden stated that there was evidence that showed the links between good housing and health and that it was Thurrock’s ambition to provide attractive housing and communities that would meet the needs of the borough’s population as they age and to keep them healthy and independent as long as possible.

 

Councillor Halden thanked the Public Health team for the work undertaken in preparing the report.

 

Councillor Holloway as Chair of the Health and Wellbeing Overview and Scrutiny Committee thanked Ian Wake and his team for the fantastic evidence based report and stated that although the report showed joint working with Housing there should also be reference to joint working with the Planning teams. Councillor Halden thanked Councillor Holloway for her comment.

 

Councillor J Kent stated the report contained some good detail and evidence and that the following recommendations could have been in more depth. Recommendation 1(a). A need to be more aware that not all elderly residents had access to on-line facilities and information should be available in all formats. Recommendation 3(b). That a specific exercise should be tailored as part of a local resident engagement. Recommendation 3(d). That advice should be as independent as possible and there was a lack of housing advisors who were able to advice on housing options available to residents. Councillor Halden agreed with Councillor Kent’s comments.

 

Councillor Spillman stated the report had been presented at Housing Overview and Scrutiny Committee and had no negative comments. Councillor Spillman stated that until the Administration told the Government that there was a housing crisis and until the Government provided further monies the aspirations in the report would not be achievable. Councillor Halden stated that the Council supported private sectors to target and build the houses that Thurrock needed and the homes needed for elderly would be incorporated into the Local Plan.

 

Councillor Pothecary welcomed the report that contained some levelled evidence base but had concerns that the number of proposals in the report rested on new properties being built and questioned whether the Council’s proposal was a reality. Councillor Halden stated that in March 2018 monies were directly put into building new homes and not through the HRA which enabled more opportunities for the 1000 new homes to be built.

 

Councillor Jefferies asked Councillor Halden what provisions were being made for the provision of healthy housing for the elderly residents in Ockendon.

 

Councillor Rigby questioned whether the levels of bedding at the Community Hospital on the Long Lane site would be sustained or moved elsewhere once the Integrated Medical Centre had been built.

 

Councillor Allen stated that Tilbury was short of eight general practitioners and requested an update. Councillor Halden agreed to write to Councillor Allen.

 

RESOLVED

 

That Council noted the contents of the report and approved the recommendations within it.

The Mayor invited the Leader of the Council, Councillor Gledhill, to introduce the budget and advised that he had 20 minutes to do so.

 

Councillor Gledhill

 

Stated that 33 months ago the Conservatives took control of the Council after 6 years of a Labour administration, as I have outlined before we were told there was not enough taxpayers money coming in to supply basic services like street cleaning, grass cutting and pothole filling. A budget where the reserves had not been reviewed for six years despite rhetoric to the contrary. A budget where the graph of doom reigned supreme leaving a Council that was frankly dying of death of a thousand cuts to meet a political message rather than getting on with job of supplying public services.

 

In those 33 months we have seen external pressures put strain on the ever decreasing taxpayers funded income from Government which we have faced head on and tabled within budget. Indeed as a Council we receive £3.3m less in direct support than in 2016 yet despite this the only service cuts have been those agreed in those years’ budgets.

 

The highest number of unaccompanied asylum seekers reduced to near maximum assumed level but now on the way up.

 

Vital equipment and staff replaced at a cost of £13.5m over both the capital and revenue budgets to replace that was either sold, unserviceable or released from service to ensure our streets are cleaner, our bins collected weekly and our parks and green spaces cut and cleared to be useable by all.

 

I remember at my first budget speech after only 9 months being elected leader I brought you the outcome of the same cash envelope that Labour and the then UKIP Councillors had agreed. Had we stuck to that budget we would have seen no street cleaners, no grass cutting ability, massive over spends in children’s and adult social care, other non-statutory services costing the taxpayer money month in month out and so on. But instead, I brought you all the good news. Nearly £1/2 million extra in reserves, kept weekly bin collections, street cleaners removing tonnes of rubbish and a small surplus of £44 thousand, Oh boy how much has that changed.

 

We also promised in that budget: £1m increase in the environment department to continue clean it cut it fill it, £420 thousand in reserves, £1.3m investment in play equipment for our parks, £8.75m extra for new refuse and environmental support vehicles ensuring weekly bin collections, up to £2.6m redeveloping the civic amenity site.

 

Leap towards a year and not only did we deliver that but we exceeded it.

 

£3m into reserves, a one off budget surplus of £2.3m and a promise of the same year on year for the term of the MTFS, assigned £250k to tackle ABS which as I outlined in my portfolio holders report last month has delivered results, replaced the bin lorries and plant fleet, assigned more money to challenge the Lower Thames Crossing Proposals and to help with the local plan consultation.

 

This December with the one off surplus of 2018/19 we have set aside nearly a £1m for extra police over 3 years, £1/2m for mental health summit and support, £1/2m to help the Dedicated Schools grant for the higher needs unit, £1m for our kerb it campaign to protect and improve the public green spaces across Thurrock.

 

Again I have to make clear these one off surpluses are not something we can use for day to day running of the Council. So I could not for instance say I am putting an extra £250,000 into adult social care packages, supplying more staff for schools or three extra bin rounds. All this would do is put a pressure on the Council tax payer when these surpluses dwindle out in future years.

 

Equally making sweeping announcements and making massive spending commitments on surpluses that are not in the bank is dangerous. Yes we can outline what we would like to do but Conservative prudence would say that the approach of waiting for the money to be in the bank is better. Equally we do not know what pressure in year may need support to deliver the long term investment strategy. Just imagine if Thurrock Regeneration Limited hits similar problems to the St Chads scheme and needs extra support. Having committed the one off surplus money to other projects would in this example put at risk this long term income stream having a massive impact on the MTFS.

 

Finally we must remember it is in the gift of Cabinet, not full Council to allocate these surpluses so whilst I would be easy for me to mention possible projects like improving our CCTV capability tonight it will not be until Cabinet next December can any certainty to those plans be finalised. Equally we could decide that instead of lots of small one off spends we undertake one big project over a few years that would have a massive impact on the borough.

 

Now to the bit that annoys me the most, envelope setting. I have said it before and will say it again; I do not believe setting budget envelopes is setting a budget. A budget is not just an amount on a vague heading it should be outlining what you will be delivering for that amount.

 

However legislation is very clear only the Cabinet have the power to decide exactly where the money is spent so I will only refer to the envelope at page 98 paragraph 5.5.

 

However you will see in Appendix 3 an outline of the indicative budget for all areas. So where are the cuts I hear you ask? Well there are no cuts in this budget again only efficiency savings.

 

Let me take some time to make the clear distinction between cuts and the efficiency savings we have implemented. A cut is where you take service and reduce the spend in that area and remove part or all of the service as a good example the street cleaning service being slashed to next to nothing in 2015/16. An efficiency saving is where you remodel a service, make improvements to the efficiency or model of supply and the resulting savings are taken from that budget as example Councillor Halden remodelling of the children centres, moving some of them away from fixed buildings and supplying those service direct has saved £400,000 an seen a 25% increase in residents receiving the service.

 

It would be wrong for any public body not to look to being more efficient, to look at different models or models of delivering services, to supply the statutory requirements not just carry on doing what we have done in the past because that is what we have always done. As example by transforming the way we deal with adoptions and bringing them in house gives us better outcomes and a saving despite increasing the overall staff budget. Doing this across children’s service as you will see on page 97 at 5.3 there are identified savings of nearly £3m but we have only allocated £800,000 reduction with the remaining £2m gives the budget more resilience and an increase of available funding in that department.

 

So yet again despite the amount of tax payers money allocated to us by central Government being reduced by 7.3% and no cuts, we are proposing a below the maximum Council tax increase as we did last year, not just below, WAY below.

 

So as I am sure you have all read we are proposing a zero % increase in the Council’s portion of Council Tax this year. Why is that, well I think that is clear.

 

A balanced budget for not only this year but for the four future years. Not only a balanced budget but as mentioned a budget with one off surpluses year on year. Asking Thurrock residents for more money this year from their pockets when we have achieved this would be wrong, very wrong. We could have asked for a further 2.99% which is about £38 per year on a band D property but when we demonstrate that we do not need this increase why should we.

 

So that means this year nearly every copper coin our residents will see in Council tax increase will go towards coppers on the beat. Something no other Council in Essex can boast.

 

So yet again I have demonstrated that instead of spending time bemoaning that the Government is not giving Councils the money they want to spend, that we got on making efficiencies and raising the money ourselves through an investment and commerciality strategy that is delivered.

 

That we are determined to review every service to drive out every efficiency and commercial possibility to protect services to residents,

 

This shows that this administration is committed to supplying the services residents want like street cleaning, pothole filling, weekly bin collections, protecting verges, tackling anti-social behaviour, support those with mental health issues.

 

Not only supporting our residents but supporting the NHS by already investing £31m into designing and initial stages of delivering new integrated medical centre in Tilbury as a start on the four across the borough.

 

Putting in high quality bids to Government and SELEP and working closely with our MPs whilst applying for grants from growth and regeneration brings in vast amounts of capital to help improve infrastructure long overdue in Thurrock. You will see from appendix 7 page 129 £46.5m from Government for the long overdue East Facing Slips from Lakeside for an investment of 1/10th of that from Thurrock Council for example.

 

You will also note a significant difference in the potential capital spend for the Thameside. These upper and lower estimates are based on the two possibilities of just a refurbishment of the current provision all the way up to having to build a whole new theatre provision. We will of course await the long overdue options for this in the coming financial year.

 

So in conclusion, I am seeking approval from Council to set a zero % increase in Council Tax, an overall spending envelope of £111.69m from the Council Tax General Fund.

 

And £10.3m of additional capital for Major Schemes, £22.5m operational capital requirements with a further £5-30m over three years from improvement to the Thameside dependent on the finally agreed model of improvement or replacement.

The Mayor then invited the Leader of the Opposition, Councillor J Kent, to respond and advised that he had 15 minutes to do so.

 

Councillor J Kent

 

Thank you Madam Mayor and I can promise that I won’t take anything like 15 minutes.

 

Can I start by welcoming, genuinely, much of the budget we have before us this evening. The idea of using borrowing and some of the money we have put away to make sensible investments with one of the previous Labour administration. In fact, if we look at investments that we made such as investing money with CTLA that has now reached £10 million since we started. Other investments have raised roughly £3 million since we started. If we look at Labour’s policy of debt restructuring, that has now amounted to £30 million worth of savings, but if I had gone into reserves or helped to prop up services, so I am not going to be in any way churlish at saying that I am glad that the current administration has continued with that policy.

 

I am also glad to see that Council Tax here is recommended to be frozen having battered people with a 10% increase in Council Tax over 2 years. People deserve a break. Now, I would just remind everybody that during the last Labour administration, we froze Council Tax three times and actually managed to reduce it once. There is a caveat – Councillor Gledhill finds that amusing, you’ll remember it Rob –

 

Mayor

 

Councillors, can you please give Councillor John Kent the opportunity to present his report as we have done the same for Councillor Gledhill. Thank you.

 

Councillor J Kent

 

Madam Mayor, you’re too protective, I took that as being supportive, not anything else. I promise you. There is a caveat with the Council Tax freeze and the same as any sensible Member of this Chamber this evening, I read the section 151 of the Officer’s report very closely before I decided whether or not I could support the Council Tax freeze and he is very, very clear that this is pretty near the boat. That this is a kind of fine judgement call that it does rely on those savings – sorry, those efficiencies being delivered, as yet, unidentified but they have to be delivered. And Members and Officers have to be on their mettle to make sure that it happens. So I think we all need to be quite clear on that.

 

Councillor Gledhill was quite right, of course, when he said one of the things we would all like to discuss and would all like to make decisions on tonight is what we do with a surplus. That won’t happen until December but what I would like to do is just to say, what a Labour’s administration priority would be with that surplus and the first would be around homelessness.

 

We know that in this financial year so far, there are now in excess of 800 families that have come to this Council in fear of losing their homes. We know, because we get it in our casework, we get it in our surgeries; we are housing Thurrock residents in caravans on Canvey Island; as far as Maidstone, Kettering. We are sending dozens of families down to Southend. Madam Mayor, I think that is a scandal that has to stop. And I think that the bulk of the surplus that we have, some within the region of £2.5 to £3 million should be used in buying properties in Borough for Thurrock’s homeless.

 

I then come to fuel poverty. Madam Mayor, we have seen in the last couple of weeks EDF Energy, EON, Npower, British Gas; all announced that they’re putting the gas and electricity tariffs up by 10%. Fuel poverty in Thurrock is a real issue. I believe we should be putting forward a pot of money in the region of £750,000 as a one-off pot to help deal with the effects of fuel poverty here in Thurrock.

 

And thirdly Madam Mayor, we also see in surgeries, we all get the same issues coming to us time and time again. One of the issues that we get more than any is on the cleanliness of the Borough on those bits of unregistered land. It’s back alleyways where the Council says we will not clear them, it’s not our land. We have a surplus that will allow us to put some money to one side to do what residents want us to do and to clear that rubbish for them so I would suggest we put somewhere in the region of £250,000 to one side for that purpose.

 

Finally, I come back to the police. I cannot be hypocritical; I’ve stood here and bemoaned the lack of police. The administration has taken some action, has taken some money out of that surplus as a one-off to fund extra police. I support that; I’ll support it being taken out of next year’s surplus as well and the next year after. The difficulty though is that, you carry on funding it as a one-off, it becomes, to all intents and purposes, part of a mainstream service. I think the challenge is, for this Council to decide whether it actually wants to permanently find mainstream funding for an element of policing or whether it wants to continue to do it as a one-off. I don’t think it’s a debate for this evening but I’ll put it out there. We need some clarity; we need to make a decision on it.

 

So, in closing, Madam Mayor, this is a budget but I hope the debate will be brief, I hope the debate will be collegiate in supporting the Council Tax freeze and therefore, supporting everything that follows from it.

 

The Mayor invited Councillor Gledhill to respond to Councillor J Kent and advised that he had 10 minutes to do so.

 

Councillor Gledhill

 

Thank you Madam Mayor and I will not be taking the full 10 minutes. I will, as Councillor Kent suggested, be keeping this brief as I hope everyone else does too.

 

I welcome your welcoming Councillor Kent. It is always good to see we do get it right and hopefully, this whole budget will be passed this evening and I welcome your support on that. Not so much correct, but bring attention to everyone that the full story about the 10% increase, cannot forget that 6% of that was for adult social care. 6% of that is going to our most vulnerable in our society that we need to support. And we’re going to hear a bit later on from Councillor Duffin in relation to his motion – which I will be supporting – about how Government changes its mind. So where we’ve always said oh Government this, paper this, Government this, paper this; this come out of central, ordinary taxation, that’s really great but let’s face it, Government will change its mind when it feels like it. And other mandarin will come up with a better idea and it will be put forward, it will be floated, it will go through consultation and end up with winners and losers. Sometimes Thurrock wins, sometimes they lose.

 

Now I’ll move to the increase of 0% that under your previous administration, again, you forget to mention, they were propped up by extra support from central Government so the taxpayer paid it through the backdoor. And I think the one reduction we were talking about, was actually forced by one of your Members and it was a pittance of pennies. Oh yes, sorry, two reductions. I forgot the reduction that we forced upon you after you wanting to cut the bin collections to fortnightly. Councillor Hague, who was Leader at the time, quite rightly led for a quarter of a percent reduction. How could we ever forget that.

 

But moving onto the one you said on funding’s. I’m sure it won’t come across as a surprise that actually; a lot of the things you’ve mentioned are things we all agree across the Chamber. The homelessness support, shipping people out the Borough, I’ve had, not only residents been a victim of this, had no alternative to house them within the Borough. It isn’t right, it isn’t fair on them and it does cause problems. But equally, those people that have come from other Boroughs when their homelessness period support is up, that Borough needs to have them taken back to wherever they may have come from, invariably in London.

 

But I do support what you’re saying, it wouldn’t be right to buy properties that already exist. Should we build new properties specifically for homelessness support? My personal view is the second rather than the former. But ultimately, the outcome will probably be the same.

 

Yet fuel poverty. We also, as you can fully appreciate, have these enquiries from our residents. There is something that we are doing about it. I cannot actually tell you tonight because it’s in the final stages of hopefully, agreement. But it is a different way so whilst I understand where your sentiments are coming from. Councillor Kent, it’s not something specifically that we could probably accommodate but I’m not saying that we wouldn’t do so if necessary.

 

Now we move onto this issue of back alleyways. Now you say this is unregistered land invariably and I know what this is like being a former property owner myself, and the alleyway at the back is part of your deed and it says that you’re responsible for x proportion of this with exception of x, y and z and various other little caveats. So invariably, these, and I say invariably, not all the time, are part of residents’ properties. They just don’t form part of the boundary access, the fences to the rear. If we clean it once, we’re going to end up cleaning it every time which is not what we should be doing because this gets on to your last point. Should we put this into regular income and regular expenditure? I think not, far from it. I think what we should be doing is making very clear to all residents that they have a responsibility to look after their own back alleyways and it’s their responsibilities to get it cleared up. However, where it is unregistered and we’re not sure, then we do need to take action so again, there may well be some scope to accommodate some of the idea as we go through in December.

 

Also, agree in principle what you say about the policing, should we be having a discussion about having this continual support for part of the Council Tax that we ask residents for. We already do that through the Police, Fire and Crime Commissioners pre-set and I think that’s the way we should continue to do it. This is a 3 year project and the point of having a 3 year project is to see will it make a difference. But should it continue? If not, then we can disband that group. The police have a full understanding that it’s only a 3 year contract. But if we feel that at the end of that, we are getting much, much more benefit than just the cash that we are paying for it, then that’s the time we should be having that discussion. I don’t mean 5 minutes to a 3 year end period, I mean, having a meaningful discussion and a meaningful vote long before.

 

So with that Madam Mayor, I do hope that the rest of the Chamber agree with the budget and agree with it accordingly.

 

The Mayor asked Members for any questions.

 

Councillor Duffin welcomed the zero % Council tax but stated his disappointed on how this had got there and needed to go further. Councillor Duffin suggested an amendment to Recommendation 1.2 “Agree to a 0% general fund Council tax increase”. Members agreed to this amendment.

 

Councillor Cherry question how the surplus was spent and that further funding was required for the Neighbourhood Watch Scheme and mentioned that the scheme had been relaunched in Tilbury and Chadwell St Mary. That the scheme was to build up community spirit and to help prevent crime. Councillor Cherry stated that the Neighbourhood Watch Chair, Roger Passfield, had received additional funding of £1000 which was not sufficient to enable road signs and window stickers to be purchased.

 

Councillor Collins congratulated Councillor Hebb on the budget.

 

Councillor Gerrish stated he was pleased with the Council tax freeze but the budget was all “smoke and mirrors” where residents may be tricked into forgetting all previous budget increases. Councillor Gerrish agreed on the Council tax freeze but stated the Council could not go on borrowing money tomorrow to pay for today with no plans to meet the gap in the deficit. The Administration and the Council needed to tackle the approaches currently being undertaken.

 

Councillor Huelin stated the Administration had balanced the books and had allowed spending on vital services such as the development fund for Tilbury, libraries, bus routes, new schools and Clean It Cut It Fill It. Councillor Huelin continued to thank all Officers that had helped to achieve this.

 

Councillor Spillman stated that the cost of living was increasing and that those costs were being piled onto residents. Councillor Spillman had concerns on retail outlets outside of the Lakeside Retail Park, on the efficiency savings for Children’s Services and Looked After Children, the reduction to agency staff in the Council, temporary accommodation issues need to be addressed and to stop moving homeless Thurrock residents out of the borough as this could be seen as social cleansing.

 

Councillor Allen questioned why the Council had not invested in purchasing Grays Town Centre when it had been up for sale and stated the Council should be looking at investments to earn the Council more money.

 

Councillor C Kent commented on street services and how residents would like to see more action taken on fly-tipping in alley-ways and was disappointed with the proposed plan and asked the Leader to reconsider and to look at each case individually.

 

Councillor Pothecary stated that the priorities should be want residents wont and that the Council had been failing expectations. That tackling of fly-tipping in alley-ways and in communal areas had to be addressed. The Council should be spending more on homes to house homeless residents. Councillor Pothecary stated that there was no reference to how congestion and air pollution would be tackled and that Thurrock residents deserved better.

 

Councillor Redsell applauded the Neighbourhood Watch work that Councillor Cherry was undertaking but Councillors should not come to the Council for everything and it was about Councillors raising money similar to the work being undertaken by the Friends of Blackshots.

 

Councillor G Rice stated his support for the budget but stated action had to be taken on homelessness and welcomed the money spent on police following the reduction of 22,000 police in 2010 and understood that residents were turning to the Neighbourhood Watch schemes as police were no longer walking the streets.

 

Councillor Halden stated Members should be proud of the balanced budget which had changed the culture of the Council. Councillor Halden referred to the regeneration and investment into the borough, the Clean It Cut It Fill It initiative, mental health, extra police, and injunctions against gangs, improvements to the community hospital, the integrated medical centre programme and the next generation Council housing initiative.

 

Councillor Watkins stated this was his third budget Council and it was vital for all Members to have their individual views. The Council had continued to see investments such as fly-tipping, roads, potholes, enforcement officers, weekly bin collections, bus services and investments into new schemes such as mental health and police officers.

 

Councillor Hebb stated the Thurrock Council economy was strong with the Administration committed to doing things differently by embarking on a long term self-sufficiency objective. The success of which ensured that services used by residents would be protected for 4 years. The Budget Review Panel had been replaced with the Council Spending Review, initiated more savings for the rainy day fund, moved to top down cuts and bottom up service review. Councillor Hebb made references to other Authorities that were not in the same position as Thurrock with them looking to see what Thurrock had been doing differently.

 

Councillor Coxshall stated that the homelessness issue would be addressed in the next stage of the Local Plan where conversations would take place on where new homes should be built. Councillor Coxshall encouraged all Members to work together on this and have honest conversations so this could be delivered as one voice.

 

Councillor Worrall reiterated that no libraries had been closed under the Labour Administration. Councillor Worrall commented on Baptist Church on Orsett Road in Grays and Friends of Essex and London Homeless providing clothes and feeding the homeless, the increase number of MHO for younger people and the conditions that young mothers had to live in was shameful. The Council needed to go further and tackle the waiting list of 800 homeless families. A change of plan was required as it was not sustainable to send Thurrock residents out of the borough. The Council were not taking full advantage of the Thurrock Regeneration Limited which appeared to be doing nothing. The Council should be building Council homes, buying homes and questioned what was stopping the Council from doing this. Councillor Worrall also welcomed the increase of funds to tackle Anti-Social Behaviour but this was not sufficient.

 

Councillor Akinbohun questioned whether the cause of anti-social behaviour and crime in Chafford Hundred could be down to the number of refugees and to the lack of benefits that they received.

 

Councillor Fish agreed that more had to be done on homelessness and quickly so that those residents could be better housed.

 

Councillor Gledhill briefing provided updates to Member questions.

 

Councillor Cherry – A payment of £1000 had been given to the Neighbourhood Watch scheme this was compared to the £800 provided by the Police Fire and Crime Commissioner.

 

Councillor Gerrish – No smoke and mirror just clear on what is being delivered and the improvements being made.

 

Councillor Spillman - Children’s Services only a third of the allocated budget had been applied with an agreement on temporary housing being looked at on how this would be delivered.

 

Councillor Allen – Return of investments – the Council had decided not to invest in Grays Town Centre and had decided to invest elsewhere.

 

Councillor C Kent – This was taxpayers money and should not be wished away.

 

Councillor Rice – The number of Police was 3000 in November and would increase to 3200 in the next financial year.

 

A non-recorded vote took place on recommendation 1.1. Whereupon the Mayor declared recommendation 1.1 to be carried.

 

A recorded vote took place on the amended recommendation 1.2 the result of which was:

 

For : Councillors Abbas, Akinbohun, Allen, Anderson, Cherry, Churchman, Collins, Coxshall, Duffin, Fish, Fletcher, Gamester, Gerrish, Gledhill, Hague, Halden, Hamilton, Hebb, Holloway, Huelin, Jefferies, Johnson, Kelly, C Kent, J Kent, Kerin, Lawrence, Liddiard, Little, MacPherson, Maney, Okunade, Piccolo, Pothecary, Potter, Redsell, B Rice, G Rice, Rigby, Sammons, Shinnick, Smith, Spillman, Tolson, Watkins, Worrall (46)

 

Against : (0)

 

Abstain : (0)

 

Whereupon the Mayor declared recommendation 1.2 to be carried.

 

A non-recorded vote took place on recommendations 1.3 and 1.4. Whereupon the Mayor declared recommendations 1.3 and 1.4 to be carried.

 

Finally, a recorded en-bloc vote would take place on recommendations 1.5 to 1.10 the result of which was:

 

For : Councillors Abbas, Akinbohun, Allen, Anderson, Cherry, Churchman, Collins, Coxshall, Duffin, Fish, Fletcher, Gamester, Gerrish, Gledhill, Hague, Halden, Hamilton, Hebb, Holloway, Huelin, Jefferies, Johnson, Kelly, C Kent, J Kent, Kerin, Lawrence, Liddiard, Little, MacPherson, Maney, Okunade, Piccolo, Pothecary, Potter, Redsell, B Rice, G Rice, Rigby, Sammons, Shinnick, Smith, Spillman, Tolson, Watkins, Worrall (46)

 

Against : (0)

 

Abstain : (0)

 

Whereupon the Mayor declared recommendations 1.5 to 1.10 to be carried.

 

RESOLVED:

 

That the Council:

 

1.         Considered and acknowledged the Section 151 Officer’s (Director of Finance and IT’s) S25 report on the robustness of the proposed budget, the adequacy of the Council’s reserves and the Reserves Strategy as set out in Appendix 1, including the conditions upon which the following recommendations are made;

 

2.         Agreed to a 0% general fund council tax increase;

3.         Approved the new General Fund capital proposals, including the allocation for feasibility work on future and aspirational proposals, as set out in section 10 and Appendix 7;

4.         Delegated to Cabinet the ability to agree schemes (a) where it can be evidenced that there is a spend to save opportunity or (b) that use any unbudgeted contributions from third parties, including those by way of grants or developers’ contributions, and these be deemed as part of the capital programme.

 

Statutory Council Tax Resolution

(Members should note that these recommendations are a result of the previous recommendations above and can be agreed as written or as amended by any changes agreed to those above).

5.         Calculated that the council tax requirement for the Council’s own purposes for 2019/20 is £66,062,077 as set out in the table at paragraph 5.8 of this report.

 

6.         That the following amounts be calculated for the year 2019/20 in accordance with Sections 31 to 36 of the Act:

 

(a)          £428,070,964 being the aggregate of the amounts which the Council estimates for the items set out in Section 31A (2) of the Act.

(b)          £362,008,887 being the aggregate of the amounts which the Council estimates for the items set out in Section 31A (3) of the Act.

(c)          £66,062,077 being the amount by which the aggregate at 1.8(a) above exceeds the aggregate at 1.8(b) above, calculated by the Council in accordance with Section 31A(4) of the Act as its council tax requirement for the year. (Item R in the formula in Section 31B of the Act).

(d)          £1,287.81 being the amount at 1.8(c) above (Item R), all divided by Item T (Council Tax Base of 51,298), calculated by the Council, in accordance with Section 31B of the Act, as the basic amount of its council tax for the year (including Parish precepts).

(e)          £0 being the aggregate amount of all special items (Parish precepts) referred to in Section 34(1) of the Act.

(f)           £1,287.81 being the amount at (d) above less the result given by dividing the amount at (e) above by Item T, calculated by the Council, in accordance with Section 34(2) of the Act, as the basic amount of its council tax for the year for dwellings in those parts of its area to which no Parish precept relates.

7.         Noted that the Police Authority and the Fire Authority have issued precepts to the Council in accordance with Section 40 of the Local Government Finance Act 1992 for each category of dwellings in the Council’s area as indicated in the tables below.

 

8.         That the Council, in accordance with Sections 30 and 36 of the Local Government Finance Act 1992, hereby sets the aggregate amounts shown in the tables below as the amounts of council tax for 2019/20 for each part of its area and for each of the categories of dwellings.

 

2019/20 COUNCIL TAX FOR THURROCK PURPOSES EXCLUDING ESSEX FIRE AUTHORITY AND ESSEX POLICE AUTHORITY

 

9.         That it be noted that for the year 2019/20 Essex Police Authority has stated the following amounts in precept issued to the Council for each of the categories of dwellings as follows:

10.       That it be noted that for the year 2019/20 Essex Fire Authority has stated the following amounts in precept issued to the Council for each of the categories of dwellings as follows (waiting on formal confirmation):

2019/20 COUNCIL TAX (INCLUDING FIRE AND POLICE AUTHORITY PRECEPTS)

 

Councillor Hebb, Portfolio Holder for Finance, presented the report that set out the strategic framework underpinning capital expenditure and the associated financing at the Council. The report also included the Treasury Management Strategy which had been previously considered in isolation up to 2018/19 which was also linked to the Council’s ambitions of becoming a more commercially focused borough; one where sensible transactions were completed which created revenue returns that could then be allocated to spending on the services for Thurrock residents.

 

A sheet had been tabled for this item which reflected changes to Pages 65 and 66 of the agenda. This sheet can be found as a supplementary item on-line.

 

Councillor J Kent stated the Labour Group support to the recommendations.

 

Councillor Spillman stated the Thurrock Independent Group support to the recommendations.

 

The Mayor called a vote on this item to which Members voted unanimously in favour.

 

RESOLVED:

 

That the Council:

 

1.         Approved the Capital Strategy for 2019/20 including approval of the Annual Minimum Revenue Provision (MRP) statement for 2019/20; and

 

2.         Approved the adoption of the Prudential Indicators as set out in Appendix 1; and

 

3.         Noted the revised 2018/19 and 2019/20 Treasury Management projections as set out in Annex 1 paragraph 2.32.

 

The Leader of the Council introduced the report and noted paragraph 3.1 with the number of complaints against Members was relatively low when compared favourably with other Councils and then recommended that the engagement of the Independent Persons should continue until the Annual Meeting of the Council in 2022.

 

RESOLVED

 

For the purposes of section 28 of the Localism Act 2011, the Council agreed to continue the appointment of Sarah Cooper-James and Fiona Fairweather as its Independent Persons until the Annual Meeting of the Council in 2022.

The Mayor informed Members that the nominations of Group Leaders to the places allocated on committees, and the nominations for Chairs and Vice Chairs of committees had been received.

 

The nominations made to Committees for the municipal year 2019/20, together with the nominations for the positions of Chair and Vice Chair, were set out in a booklet tabled for Members.

 

The Leader of the Council briefly introduced the report, which requested the Council to confirm the calculations relating to the allocation of seats on committees and also to appoint the nominations made by political groups to committees.

 

In addition, the report also requested the Council to appoint the Chairs and Vice-Chairs. Councillor Gledhill stated that the Conservative Party would not be nominating Chair or Vice Chairs on overview and scrutiny committees therefore these positions were open for the opposition parties to fill and would be abstaining from the voting on those contested appointments.

 

Councillor Pothecary made the following change to the nominations:

 

To replace Councillor Abbas with Councillor Akinbohun on the Corporate Parenting Committee.

 

The Mayor then called for a separate vote to be undertaken in respect of each of the contested nominations for Chairs and Vice Chairs of Committees.

 

The results of each vote are set out below:

 

Cleaner Greener and Safer Overview and Scrutiny Committee

 

The majority of the chamber voted in favour of Councillor J Kent over Councillor Mayes to be Chair.

 

Therefore Councillor J Kent was appointed Chair and by default Councillor Mayes was appointed Vice Chair of the Cleaner Greener and Safer Overview and Scrutiny Committee.

 

Corporate Overview and Scrutiny Committee

 

The majority of the chamber voted in favour of Councillor Gerrish over Councillor Duffin to be Chair.

 

Therefore Councillor Gerrish was appointed Chair and by default Councillor Duffin was appointed Vice Chair of the Corporate Overview and Scrutiny Committee.

 

Health and Wellbeing Overview and Scrutiny Committee

 

The majority of the chamber voted in favour of Councillor Holloway over Councillor Ralph to be Chair.

 

Therefore Councillor Holloway was appointed Chair and by default Councillor Ralph was appointed Vice Chair of the Health and Wellbeing Overview and Scrutiny Committee.

 

Planning Transport and Regeneration Overview and Scrutiny Committee

 

The majority of the chamber voted in favour of Councillor Kerin over Councillor Allen to be Chair.

 

Therefore Councillor Kerin was appointed Chair and by default Councillor Allen was appointed Vice Chair of the Planning Transport and Regeneration Overview and Scrutiny Committee.

 

Corporate Parenting Committee

 

Councillor Pothecary nominated Councillor Akinbohun as Vice Chair of the Corporate Parenting Committee.

 

Licensing Committee

 

The majority of the chamber voted in favour of Councillor Collins over Councillor Potter to be Chair.

 

Therefore Councillor Collins was appointed Chair of the Licensing Committee.

 

The majority of the chamber voted in favour of Councillor Abbas over Councillor Potter to be Vice Chair.

 

Therefore Councillor Abbas was appointed Vice Chair of the Licensing Committee.

 

Planning Committee

 

The majority of the chamber voted in favour of Councillor Kelly over Councillor Byrne to be Chair.

 

Therefore Councillor Kelly was appointed Chair of the Planning Committee.

 

The majority of the chamber voted in favour of Councillor Fletcher over Councillor Byrne to be Vice Chair.

 

Therefore Councillor Fletcher was appointed Vice Chair of the Planning Committee.

 

Standards and Audit Committee

 

The majority of the chamber voted in favour of Councillor Rice over Councillor Potter to be Chair.

 

Therefore Councillor Rice was appointed Chair and by default Councillor Potter was appointed Vice Chair of the Standards and Audit Committee.

 

RESOLVED

 

1.         That the allocation of seats, as set out in Appendix 1, be approved.

 

2.         That the nominations of the political groups to seats on committees be approved, as set out in Appendix 2.

 

3.         That the non-voting co-opted members of the Planning Committee, the Standards and Audit Committee, the Health and Wellbeing Overview and Scrutiny Committee, the Housing Overview and Scrutiny Committee, the Children’s Services Overview and Scrutiny Committee and the Corporate Parenting Committee be appointed, as set out in Appendix 2.

 

4.         That the Chairs and Vice-Chairs of committees be appointed, as set out below.

 

Committee	Chair	Vice-Chair
Children’s Services Overview and Scrutiny Committee	Cllr Okunade	Cllr Smith
Cleaner Greener and Safer Overview and Scrutiny Committee	Cllr J Kent	Cllr Mayes
Corporate Overview and Scrutiny Committee	Cllr Gerrish	Cllr Duffin
Health and Wellbeing Overview and Scrutiny Committee	Cllr Holloway	Cllr Ralph
Housing Overview and Scrutiny Committee	Cllr Worrall	Cllr Baker
Planning Transport and Regeneration Overview and Scrutiny Committee	Cllr Kerin	Cllr Allen
Corporate Parenting	Cllr Redsell	Cllr Akinbohun
General Services	Cllr Gledhill	Cllr Pothecary
Health and Wellbeing Board	Cllr Halden	-
Licensing Committee	Cllr Collins	Cllr Abbas
Planning Committee	Cllr Kelly	Cllr Fletcher
Standards and Audit Committee	Cllr Rice	Cllr Potter

 

The Leader of the Council proposed the recommendations as printed in the report.

 

Upon being put to the vote, Members voted unanimously in favour of the recommendations, whereupon the Mayor declared these to be carried.

 

RESOLVED

 

1.         That the Overview and Scrutiny Committees listed in paragraph 3.2 of the report be established for the 2019/20 municipal year, with their terms of reference being those set out in Chapter 4 of the Constitution.

 

2.         That the Committees listed in paragraph 3.4 of the report be established for the 2019/20 municipal year, with their terms of reference being those set out in Chapter 5 of the Constitution.

The nominations of the political groups to Outside Bodies, Statutory and Other Panels were detailed in the supplementary booklet tabled for Members.

 

The Leader presented the report in respect of the appointments required to be made to Outside Bodies, Statutory and Other Panels.

 

The Mayor called for a separate vote to be undertaken in respect of each of the contested nominations for appointments to Outside Bodies, Statutory and Other Panels.

 

The results of each vote are set out below:

 

Police Fire and Crime Panel

 

The majority of the chamber voted in favour of Councillor Redsell over Councillor Spillman.

 

Therefore Councillor Redsell was appointed the representative of the Council on the Police Fire and Crime Panel.

 

Local Government Association

 

Councillor Spillman removed Councillor Duffin therefore the appointment was no longer contested.

 

Councillor Gledhill offered Councillor Duffin one of the two Cabinet appointments to this outside body to which Councillor Duffin declined.

 

Therefore Councillor Pothecary was appointed the representative of the Council on the Local Government Association.

 

Local Government Association General Assembly

 

Councillor Rice nominated Councillor C Kent. Councillor C Kent thanked Councillor Rice for the nomination but declined. The vacant position on the Local Government Association General Assembly was still held.

 

Open Door (Thurrock)

 

The majority of the chamber voted in favour of Councillor Spillman over Councillor Liddiard.

 

Therefore Councillor Spillman was appointed the representative of the Council on Open Door (Thurrock).

 

Thurrock Play Network

 

The majority of the chamber voted in favour of Councillor Mayes over Councillor Akinbohun.

 

Therefore Councillor Mayes was appointed the representative of the Council on the Thurrock Play Network.

 

Standard Advisory Council on Religious Education

 

No nominations were received for the vacant position on the Standard Advisory Council on Religious Education.

 

Tilbury Community Local Development Action Group

 

The majority of the chamber voted in favour of Councillor Allen over Councillor Liddiard.

 

Therefore Councillor Allen was appointed the representative of the Council on the Tilbury Community Local Development Action Group.

 

Prevent Violent Extremism Members Working Group

 

Councillor Spillman nominated Councillor Mayes and Councillor Ralph for the two vacant appointments with the agreement from Members.

 

Orsett Hospital Task and Finish Group

 

Councillor Gledhill gifted the vacant appointment to Councillor Massey to which Councillor Massey accepted and agreed by Members.

 

The Mayor advised that following the changes detailed above there were no longer any contested appointments to the nominations to Outside Bodies, Statutory and Other Panels. Members voted unanimously in favour of the nominations made, thereupon the Mayor declared these to be carried.

 

RESOLVED

 

That the nominations to Outside Bodies, Statutory and Other Panels be approved.

The Leader of the Council briefly introduced the report. A copy of the schedule of meetings for 2019/20 was included in the Agenda at Appendix 1 to the report.

 

The Leader stated that a date should be scheduled outside the purdah period for Council in March 2020. It was agreed that Officers would identify any suitable dates with the Election Team and inform Members.

 

Councillor Redsell questioned why June 2019 Council was not being held, at normal, on the last Wednesday of the month. The Leader stated that Members and Senior Officers would be attending an award seminar as the Council had been nominated for the Council of the Year Award.

 

Members agreed to note the recommendation.

 

RESOLVED:

 

That the Schedule of Meetings for 2019/20 be approved.

The Leader of the Council briefly introduced the report which informed the Council of the schedule of elections to be held between 2020 and 2023.

 

Councillor Spillman thanked the Election Team for all their hard work.

 

Members agreed to note the recommendation.

 

RESOLVED

 

That the schedule of elections from 2020 to 2023 and order of retirement of Councillors be noted.

The Mayor informed Members that an update copy of the report had been emailed to Members and a copy had been tabled.

 

At 7.32pm, Councillor Pothecary called Point of Order, in relation to Chapter 2, Part 2, Paragraph 16(m) to request a short adjournment to seek further clarification of the updated report with the Chief Executive and Officers. The Mayor agreed to adjourn the meeting for 10 minutes. The meeting reconvened at 7.51pm.

 

Councillor Hebb introduced the report to seek the agreement of Council to approve the Appointment of the interim Director of Children's Services and stated that Roger Harris had demonstrated absolute capability and care and spoke on behalf of all 49 Members that they held Roger Harris with the highest regard and with the highest esteem. Councillor Hebb stated that the Council found themselves in a unique situation where 49 Members had been given less than a 48 hours deadline to appoint a Director of Children’s Services which the Council knew would be vacated some three months ago. The recommendation would see a significant remodelling of services. Councillor Hebb stated the democratic oversight had been nil but in reality there was a need to have a Director of Children’s Services in place by midnight on Sunday. Councillor Hebb explained that elected members did not have the authority or control over appointments and general structures which would be in the remit of the Head of Pay Service in line with the constitution. Those 49 Members had been asked to approve this appointment but not had the time to challenge, provide opinion or examine the contents of the report. That it was the duty of all those 49 Members as Corporate Parents that they were satisfied that the place holder, structure underneath and around were in place to help to deliver what was required and have a duty of care for that person undertaking the role. Councillor Hebb was sure that the above had been considered. The updated report had come about following interactions between Councillor Hebb, the Leader of the Opposition, Councillor Pothecary, Councillor Spillman, Councillor Okunade and Councillor Little where concerns had been raised. Councillor Hebb stated that an interim Director of Children’s Service could be appointed by Head of Paid Service but more importantly the matter should be called into General Services Committee as soon as possible for a full examination of the structure. Councillor Hebb concluded that Members this evening had to look at the report where cross party comments had been made to ensure safeguard measures were in place and to examine the proposal so that it can go ahead.

 

Councillor Pothecary stated it was Member’s duty to ask difficult questions. Councillor Pothecary had reservations to have Children’s and Adult Services, Health and Housing under one director and questioned the protection, care and safeguarding of children and adults under this proposal. Councillor Pothecary urged Members to think long and hard to ensure that their decision was the best thing for vulnerable adults and children in care and for those Members that had any concerns on whether this was the right decision should vote against the recommendation.

 

Councillor Spillman stated he held Roger Harris with the highest regard but asked why the three groups had not had sufficient time to scrutinise the report. With the proposed combination of all the directorates scrutiny was vital to ensure that the layers underneath this major change were in place and to ensure the safeguards were there. Councillor Spillman stated his concern there was no democratic accountability and going forward to ensure that this did not happen again on any upcoming appointments with better communication between groups.

 

Councillor Okunade wished Rory Patterson well in his retirement. Councillor Okunade reluctantly agreed to support the recommendation as this was where the Council was at this time and that going forward better processes should be put in place. Councillor Okunade had confidence the interim director appointment would comply with the Children’s Act but would be overstretched as one directorate.

 

Councillor Halden stated that as Portfolio Holder for Education and Health he had not been consulted for his opinions on the report and had expected a General Services Committee to meet. Councillor Halden stated that decisions in the future need to be across party and to strike the right balance where conversations between Members and Officers had to be held to re-align the internal process so that this situation did not happen again.

 

Councillor Fletcher stated he had nothing against Roger Harris but it was essential the right support and structure were in place to do the job. Councillor Fletcher questioned the lack of consultation and what had been undertaken between the period of receiving Rory Patterson’s resignation to now. Members had a free vote for no right answer to which Councillor Fletcher concluded the decision had been taken out of Members hands.

 

Councillor Little stated her support to the recommendation as there was a legal obligation by the Council and all 49 Corporate Parents to have a Director of Children’s Services in place by Sunday and comments made would not reflect badly on Roger Harris. Councillor Little stated she had worked with Children in Care for a long time but agreed the process should be looked at differently and a report be presented to the General Services Committee as soon as possible.

 

Councillor J Kent stated he had known Roger Harris since 2008 and he had fantastic qualities and hoped the report would not damage his reputation. Councillor J Kent stated that lots of questions had arisen as to why Members and even Portfolio Holders were not consulted or asked on the processes of the report. Members were informed that Rory Patterson’s resignation was received in March 2019 and the consultation with key staff was undertaken in May 2019 with discussions taking place with Leaders only two days ago. Councillor J Kent stated this was not acceptable and it had treated Members with contempt. Councillor J Kent stated that the Head of Paid Staff should have been responsible for the appointment of officers and the interview process and stated he was disappointed that Members had been consulted earlier. Councillor J Kent agreed with Councillor Halden that a good authority ran when there was a good partnership between senior Members and senior Officers and stated this partnership was not working in Thurrock at this time and some hard work had to be undertaken to get this back on track. Councillor J Kent stated that he did not believe that appointing a person to the Director of Children’s Services role, even for only 6 months, was good enough for this authority or good enough for the children of Thurrock and would not be supporting the recommendation.

 

At 8.18pm, Councillor Halden called Point of Order, to confirm that he had known initially about the report but knew that Officer were capable to do their role and a report should have gone to the General Services Committee as reports had always done so in the past.

 

Councillor Gerrish stated he had struggled to come to any conclusion on the report and had no confidence, however talented that person may be, that there should be one single director of Children, Adults, Housing and Health even for a period of 6 months as it was too much for one person. Councillor Gerrish stated the updated report had the same outcome just a change to the job title. That the process had not given Members options or alternatives. Councillor Gerrish urged Members to think long and hard before making any conclusions.

 

Councillor Coxshall stated this was the first time in his third term as a Member that he was unsure which way to vote. Councillor Coxshall noted the good points made by Councillors Kent and Gerrish and stated that the process was in place to undertake interviews for internal roles.

 

Councillor Abbas opposed to the recommendation so that a clear message could be sent that Members would not be put on at the eleventh hour.

 

Councillor Hebb stated this was a low point for the Council. The points made by Councillors were clear and professional and called the report to the vote.

 

The Mayor called a vote on the recommendation to which Members voted:

 

For: 15, Against: 26, Abstained: 0

 

Whereupon the Mayor declared the Motion not carried.

 

RESOLVED:

 

Members did not approve in accordance with the Council’s Constitution the appointment of Roger Harris as interim Director of Children’s Services for six months pending the presentation of a report to General Services Committee to consider options for the future of this role.

 

Roger Harris entered the council chamber at 8.27pm.

The Motion, as printed in the Agenda was proposed by Councillor Holloway and seconded by Councillor Halden. The Motion read as follows:

 

That Council notes with extreme concern, the recent instruction from NHS England to NHS Thurrock Clinical Commissioning Group (CCG) to set out a clear and agreed timeline by the end of September 2019 for a CCG merger to create a single CCG covering Mid and South Essex.

 

Council finds the complete lack of consultation by NHS England with us as a key statutory partner and with local residents, prior to issuing an instruction of this magnitude, unacceptable and disrespectful. 

 

Council strongly opposes any move by NHS England to create a single CCG for Mid and South Essex which we believe will damage the strong partnership working and local relationships we have with our NHS partners, shift focus away from local health and care transformation at Thurrock level, and will make our local NHS less accountable to our residents.

 

Council calls on NHS England to retain a fully constituted CCG at Thurrock level with a Thurrock CCG Accountable Officer and Executive.

 

Council also resolves to write to our two local MPs to ask them to support our calls and work with us to intervene to prevent this merger.

 

Councillor Holloway introduced the Motion by stating that NHS England had shown complete disregard to Thurrock Council, the Cabinet, Members, Directors and herself as chair of the Health and Wellbeing Overview and Scrutiny Committee. The instruction would have enormous implications on how Thurrock delivered the vision of health care. Councillor Holloway stated the importance of Thurrock CCG would be to ensure that health services were clinically safe and effective, the quality of primary care improved, transform the quality of general practitioner surgeries and mayor decisions on health and care would be taken locally. Those decisions designed to meet the needs of Thurrock residents. Councillor Holloway informed Members that a strong partnership had been built up with local general practitioners and Thurrock CCG Chief Officers over many years and had been crucial to improving health and care for local residents.

 

Councillor Halden stated he would vote in favour of the motion and had been against NHS England forcing the merger of CCG onto Thurrock. Councillor Halden stated that were the plans available for consultation they would be flawed and Officers should continue to consider the approach and legal challenge if necessary.

 

Councillor Spillman welcomed and supported the motion and stated CCG powers should be held at local level and for the needs of Thurrock residents.

 

Councillor Little thanked Councillor Holloway for raising the motion and stated her support. Councillor Little stated as Chair of the Health and Wellbeing Board she had attended meetings where discussions had taken place with the CCG and had been disappointed by the lack of consultation being undertaken by NHS England. Councillor Little informed Members that she had already written to Thurrock’s MPs with her concerns and had received a reply from Steven Metcalfe, Conservative MP. Councillor Little read out the reply to Members that displayed his full support and commitment to write to NHS England.

 

Councillor Coxshall stated his support for motion and the reorganisation of NHS at local level should be for the benefit of Thurrock residents.

 

Councillor Holloway stated that the focus of the NHS from Thurrock to a larger and remote geography of Mid and South Essex would make no sense to Thurrock residents and encouraged all Members to vote in support of the motion and send a strong message to NHS England. Councillor Holloway thanked Members for their comments and thanked Councillor Little for writing to the MPs and encouraged Members to write to the NHS and their MPs.

 

The Mayor called a vote on the Motion.

 

Members voted unanimously in favour of this Motion to which the Mayor announced the Motion carried.

The Motion, as printed in the Agenda was proposed by Councillor J Kent and seconded by Councillor Pothecary. The Motion read as follows:

 

Thurrock Council congratulates Grays Athletic Football Club on being named the Bostik League Football Club of the year for 2018/19.

 

Councillor J Kent stated the word “Community” had been missed from the Motion and should now read as follows:

 

Thurrock Council congratulates Grays Athletic Football Club on being named the Bostik League Community Football Club of the year for 2018/19.

 

Councillor J Kent introduced the Motion by stating that a similar motion had been raised by Councillor Duffin in June 2018 to support sport clubs in the borough where residents were involved in supporting and volunteering to give youngsters a positive attitude to sport. Councillor J Kent stated the remarkable work undertaken by Grays Athletic Football Club from being formed in 1990 to nearly going out of business to the club now being relaunched to a community football club that was owned by supporters, each member having one share and one vote. That a director and a chair had been elected and had over 30 sides playing and over 500 players registered.

 

That an appropriate measure should be undertaken to congratulate the team that would reflect this achievement of sport being undertaken in the borough by either a letter, presentation or for the Council to sponsor a home game as this would mean a lot to the players.

 

Councillor J Kent stated that the Council could help Grays Athletic Football Club to identify a plot of land for their new club. Councillor J Kent again stated the remarkable achievements made by the club and again congratulated the team.

 

Councillor Pothecary congratulated Grays Athletic Football Club that a real offer to find a new home ground would be a dedication to local people.

 

Councillor Rice stated his support to the motion and congratulated Grays Athletic Football Club on the wonderful work that they do to support youngsters in the community and they should be congratulated in some form.

 

Councillor Mayes left the Council Chamber at 8.26pm.

 

Councillor Gledhill thanked Councillor J Kent for the motion and stated his support and would be working with the portfolio holder and directors to look at potential locations.

 

Councillor Redsell stated that infrastructure should be taken into account when considering potential locations.

 

Councillor Spillman echoed Members comments and stated his support for the motion although Councillor Spillman felt the Council did not do enough to promote clubs, the leisure options and events in Thurrock.

 

Councillor C Kent stated her support for the motion and congratulated Grays Athletic Football Club for the work that it had undertaken. Councillor C Kent also congratulated all the other sport clubs in the borough to the amount of time and dedication undertaken by volunteers and stated that the Council should do more to encourage and support sporting activities in the borough.

 

Councillor Watkins congratulated Grays Athletic Football Club for their achievements and congratulated all other sport clubs, volunteers and those residents that went to these sport clubs. Councillor Watkins stated his continued support as work continued on the Sports Strategy that would include contributions from Members, residents and sport groups to support and promote sport clubs across Thurrock.

 

Councillor J Kent thanked Members for their support that agreeing to the motion this evening would show sport clubs in Thurrock that they had the Council’s support.

 

The Mayor offered to support local clubs as much as practicable and stated those clubs should contact the Mayor’s Office.

 

The Mayor called a vote on the Motion.

 

Members voted unanimously in favour of this Motion to which the Mayor announced the Motion carried.

Tim Hallam left the Council Chamber at 7.25pm.

 

Councillor Gledhill presented the report to seek the agreement of Council to appoint Tim Hallam as the Interim Monitoring Officer whilst an external recruitment process for a permanent Monitoring Officer was undertaken following the departure of David Lawson next Friday. Councillor Gledhill thanked David Lawson for all his hard work and stated all three group leaders had agreed to appoint the candidate following a Governance Group meeting.

 

Councillor Pothecary stated that the timings on the process to recruit senior officer process had again not been quite there but asked commitment from the Leader that further recruitment of senior officers would go through the General Services Committee process.

 

Councillor Spillman stated that it had been a pleasure to work with David Lawson who would be greatly missed and would support the recommendation.

 

Councillor Gerrish thanked David Lawson for his help and guidance over the years and wished him well but stated that it was important that the recruitment process be looked into to ensure that proper consultation was available to all Members.

 

Councillor Halden arrived into the Council Chamber at 7.29pm.

 

Councillor Gledhill stated that David Lawson would be solely missed but supported the recommendation that Tim Hallam be appointed the Interim Monitoring Officer and gave his commitment to both Councillor Pothecary and Councillor Gerrish that the recruitment of senior officers would go through the General Services Committee process.

 

Upon being put to the vote, Members voted unanimously in favour of the recommendation, whereupon the Mayor declared this to be carried.

 

RESOLVED

 

That Tim Hallam be appointed the Interim Monitoring Officer of Thurrock Council.

 

Tim Hallam returned to the Council Chamber at 7.31pm.

The Mayor referred Members to the Overview and Scrutiny Annual Report for 2018-19 as published in the Agenda.

 

Councillor Worrall welcomed the annual report but noted that the report appeared to be muddled and the content was repetitive. Councillor Worrall had been disappointed that no photo of the chair had been included.

 

Councillor Spillman stated the report appeared to be light with insufficient details of some of the major issues that had been discussed at overview and scrutiny committees this municipal year.

 

Councillor Okunade also made similar comments with the report being repetitive to what was in the report against what each chair had written.

 

Councillor Gledhill noted the comments made by Members and stated if Members were unhappy with the content of their report the recommendation could be changed to reflect this and suggested that the recommendation be changed to:

 

“That the Overview and Scrutiny Annual Report 2018/19 would be returned to Council at a later date”.

 

Upon being put to the vote, Members voted unanimously in favour of the amended recommendation, whereupon the Mayor declared this to be carried.

 

RESOLVED:

 

That the Overview and Scrutiny Annual Report 2018/19 would be returned to Council at a later date.