Meeting Details

The Chair

The Chair attended the following civic events:

 26 July – Black Shuck Shop Opening in the Three Tuns Building in Bungay

 2 – 4 August – Bungay’s Black Shuck Festival 2024

 8 September – Got to start the race with the flag drop at Lloyds Bank Tour of Britain at Royal Plain, Lowestoft 

The Chair updated on the East Suffolk Youth Council planning. Invitations have been sent to schools. There had been a lot of positive interest. Councillor Dr Speca had offered to visit schools regarding the plans for the Youth Council and a number of meetings had already taken place, including: Alde Valley Academy, Thomas Mills High School, St Felix School, Ormiston Denes Academy and Warren School. Further visits were planned at the Ashley School, Farlingaye High School and Castle EAST School.

 The Chair thanked Democratic Services and the Communities Team for their ongoing work. 

 The Vice-Chair

The Vice Chair had attended the following events: 

 14 August – Grand opening of McCarthy Stone’s Squadron House Development in Martlesham Heath

 1 September – 1 Big Multicultural Festival at Alexander Park in Ipswich

 5 September – Mayor of Felixstowe’s Cheese and Wine Evening at Landguard Fort

 13 September – Mayor of Ipswich’s charity evening on the Sail Barge Victor 

 18 September – Mayor of Sudbury’s Charity Fundraising Dinner at Melford Valley Tandoori

 The Leader

The Leader welcomed Councillor Tim Wilson as the Cabinet Member with responsibility for Economic Development and Transport, who took the role with effect from 21 August 2024.  The Leader thanked Councillor Toby Hammond for his hard work as the previous Cabinet Member.

 With effect from 21 August 2024, Councillor Toby Hammond took the GLI Vacancy on the Overview and Scrutiny Committee.

 On 27 August 2024 Councillor Lee Reeves became Chair of the Licensing Committee, replacing Councillor Wilson.

The Cabinet 

Councillor Whitelock congratulated the team on the recent Tour of Britain event which was another great success. 

Councillor Whitelock paid tribute to Phil Aves, Change Manager for Lowestoft Rising who recently retired. Mr Aves had worked tirelessly over the previous decade for the local community in Lowestoft, developing a mental health manifesto, working as a mental health champion, working on a school ambassador programme and supporting the multi-agency partnership amongst many other achievements.

Councillor Whitelock referenced the First Light Festival and thanked the team for another successful year with over 40,000 attendees showcasing over 580 artists and providing 273 freelance opportunities and over 490 volunteering hours. The Festival brought in £43,000 of commercial sponsorship. 

Councillor Ashton added that the Customer Services team had temporarily relocated to Riverside. The provision of service would continue, and team members would be present in Libraries to continue to offer face to face appointments.   

Councillor Ashdown added his thanks to Mr Aves as Chair of the Lowestoft and Northern Parishes Community Partnership for all of his work and support in the community.

The Chief Executive

The Chief Executive welcomed the two new Strategic Directors, Kerry Blair and Michelle Burdett who recently commenced their new roles at East Suffolk Council.

Councillor Hedgley raised an amendment to the minutes under item 14 page 23 which should have referred to the previous Chair of the Neighbourhood Planning Committee.

On the proposition of Councillor Hedgley seconded by Councillor Robinson it was unanimously 

RESOLVED 

 
That the amended minutes of the meeting held on 24 July 2024 be agreed as a correct record and signed by the Chair.

Question from Mr Warren to Councillor Dr Anthony Speca, Chair of the Council

The Council decides upon the rules of engagement with members of the public at Full Council meetings (Constitution Part A, Section 29.2). Is there not a danger of a conflict of interest (Part A, section 25.1) within the council such that they may wish to restrict statements at odds with council policy, and probing questions from members of the public? Would it be possible in principle, for example, to amend the constitution such that the public were not able to ask a question or speak at all? Given these risks, would it not be better to put these kinds of rules and formats into the hands of an independent outside body?

Response from Councillor Dr Anthony Speca, Chair of the Council 

 The Chair thanked Mr Warren for his question.

 Councillor Dr Speca stated it was an open council that was open to residents to engage with through their ward members. Councillors have telephone numbers; email addresses and they can be contacted to answer questions and help support residents with issues or problems they may have. In addition, some Councillors hold surgeries and hold public meetings, there are also Parish Council meetings.

 Members of the public can and do ask questions in meetings, with some parameters to guide the process. There is no statutory duty for public questions; parliament gives local authorities the power to host questions if they wish and provide the power to write the rules around how the process is managed. There is provision established for public questions at the start of Full Council meetings.

 The questions submitted are vetted by the Monitoring Officer and Chair of the Council without fear or favour. As long as a question conforms with the rules set out in the constitution it will be heard in Full Council. The rules supporting questions have been recently reviewed as part of the ongoing cross party Constitution Review Working Group.

 The Chair stated that the meeting was open to the public and it takes place in public, however it is not a public meeting. The main purpose of Full Council is to conduct council business.

 Councillor Dr Speca concluded that the main way members of the public can engage with the council is through their elected ward member, by telephone, email or surgeries.

Debate Not Hate

Proposer: Cllr Caroline Topping
Seconders: Cllr Peter Byatt, Cllr Mark Jepson

This Council notes that:

 In a nationwide 2022 survey three quarters of local councillors reported having experienced intimidation and/or abuse in the previous 12 months, with 1 in 10 saying this had occurred frequently. Meanwhile, the BBC reports that over two thirds (68%) of councillors may be reconsidering whether to stand again due to intimidation and/or abuse from members of the public.

Therefore it is clear, and this Council believes, that intimidation and abuse of councillors undermines democracy. It hinders elected members from representing their communities, deters people from standing for election, and undermines public confidence in the democratic process. Like all such behaviour, it is also fundamentally wrong on a human level.

This Council notes that increasing levels of toxicity in public and political discourse is having a detrimental impact on local democracy and requires a robust response to ensure councillors feel supported, safe and able to continue representing their communities with confidence.

This Council therefore commits to challenge any abuse or intimidation of its members or officers and to uphold exemplary standards of public and political debate in all it does. Furthermore, this Council pledges to sign up to the Local Government Association’s (LGA) Debate Not Hate campaign. The campaign aims to raise public awareness of the role of councillors in local communities, encourage respectful debate and improve support for anyone in public life experiencing abuse or intimidation. 

In addition, this Council resolves to:

Write to our local MPs to ask them to support the LGA campaign.

Write to the Government to ask it to work with the LGA to develop and implement a plan to combat the abuse and intimidation of elected representatives at all levels.

Ensure the Council has a clear reporting mechanism for councillors and officers to record and report any incidents of harassment and abuse they experience.

Regularly review the support and training available to members and officers in relation to threats, abuse or intimidation.

Work with local police to ensure there is a simple reporting mechanism for councillors, officers and their families to report safety concerns; encourage the police to take a preventative approach, recognizing the particular risks that councillors face, as they do with other prominent individuals, like MPs.

Take a zero-tolerance approach to the abuse of its councillors and officers.

Councillor Topping introduced the motion.

 Councillor Green supported the motion and described a recent incident where he had experienced abuse over social media from an anonymous poster. The Councillor reflected that it could be a difficult and isolating experience. 

 Councillor Ashton supported the motion and highlighted that members do their roles to help their local communities, and it was disappointing that a small minority of people choose to be abusive towards members. 

 Councillor Hedgley supported the motion and a Suffolk County Council version was supported in May 2024.

 Councillor Bennett was involved in drafting the motion which was an adaptation of the LGA’s equivalent. The Councillor added that it was important to hold the values of respect in the council when discussing and debating business matters and leading by example was a good place to start. The motion was about both the way members of the public interact with members and how members also interact with each other. 

Councillor King briefly worked with ‘debate not hate’ and highlighted the issue of abuse being a wider problem in society which was likely to grow with the continued expansion of social media. The Councillor enquired if there was therapy available for councillors who might wish to have some additional support. 

Councillor Ceresa was pleased to support the motion along with the Conservative group. The Councillor added that it was sad to be in the position of receiving abuse and that Councillors could be in potentially dangerous situations. Councillor Ceresa referenced access to counselling which was available for Suffolk County Council members and had been an option when East Suffolk operated as the two districts.

Councillor Byatt agreed with comments made and thanked the Leader for bringing the motion to Full Council. The Councillor highlighted the importance of including officers too and referenced the Officer, Member protocol which was currently being worked on. Councillor Byatt added that having an environment for robust debate was important and reiterated the unpleasantness of online abuse. The Councillor posed whether social media administrators could be contacted to stop anonymous users posting on websites.  Member addresses and contact information was also available should anyone wish to find it out. Councillor Byatt concluded that the Police should be contacted if anyone was under threat and the Monitoring Officer should be made aware. 

The Leader thanked Councillor Ceresa and Councillor Byatt for their support on the motion. The Leader added that there would be a difference of opinion at times and supported the desire to have a positive respectful debate during council business matters. 

Councillor Topping added that social media users could also use fictitious names as well as anonymously post which was challenging to manage as well.

On being put to a vote the motion was passed.

Local Listed Building Consent Order

Proposer: Cllr Rosie Smithson
Seconder: Cllr Peter Byatt

This Council notes that:

It is responding to climate change by declaring a Climate Emergency in July 2019 and committing to reach net zero CO2e emissions by 2030. Its Environmental Impact Strategy includes mention of: 

a) cross-county collaboration work to decarbonise private houses;

b) a recognition of the role of Planning to achieve its ambitions and

c) a desire to maintain the district’s beauty and heritage.

Historic England has stated that retrofitting historic buildings will be fundamental to achieving net zero. It lists over 2000 Grade II listed houses in East Suffolk. These are likely to have a poor energy performance resulting in increased energy use and carbon emissions, and the potential for fuel poverty.

To make energy efficient upgrades owners must currently apply to the Council for Listed Building Consent. This can be expensive and time consuming - deterrents that conflict with the notion of a climate emergency.

 Babergh and Mid Suffolk District Councils have approved the process for the adoption of a Local Listed Building Consent Order (LLBCO) for replacement and upgrade works to windows and a Local Development Order (LDO) for solar PV on outbuildings within the curtilage of listed buildings. The Councils state this action aims to streamline the consenting process for energy efficient improvements and reflects the urgency of their net zero carbon commitments. 

 
This Council resolves to:

Follow the example of our neighbours in Babergh and Mid-Suffolk and investigate quicker and easier ways that sensitive, energy efficient improvements can be made to listed buildings, giving a clear signal to residents that we take the need to reduce carbon use seriously, and we are prepared to be proactive and pragmatic in achieving this. 

Councillor Smithson introduced the motion in which climate change needed to be addressed as individuals and communities. As a Council there was a role to play, not only to achieve net zero aims by 2030 but to contribute to the nation’s legally binding 2050 target. The Council needed to take their own mitigation measures and implement a bold ‘Environmental Impact Strategy’.

 The Councillor added that the motion was a step forward to removing a barrier that may prevent private homeowners from making their houses more energy efficient. Currently,  make listed houses more efficient owners must apply for Listed Building Consent which can be expensive and time consuming. Babergh and Mid Suffolk have already started the process to adopt a Local Listed Building Consent Order that would grant in principle consent works to windows in Grade II listed buildings and a separate Local Development Order in relation to the installation of solar panels in the curtilage of listed buildings.

 This process followed a consultation at the end of last year involving homeowners and conservation groups that found 88% of the 242 respondents in favour of the proposal. One of the key bodies consulted was Historic England. Which stated, “Historic England supports the use of Local Listed Building Consent Orders and recognises their potential applicability for climate change mitigation measures. They can help speed up the process for applicants and reduce the burden of repetitive applications for Local Planning Authorities. If done thoughtfully and carefully, such Consent Orders in the District could facilitate appropriate works to adapt historic buildings to conserve energy and reduce carbon emissions.”

 Councillor Smith-Lyte thanked Councillor Smithson for bringing the motion forward and it was something she had raised the importance of a number of times.

 Councillor Ewart added there were approximately 4120 listed buildings in East Suffolk in which 59 were grade 1 listed. There were no statutory times on a listed building consent order and that Historic England has advised that it would be good practice to set a time limit and requested if the proposers of the motion could work with the Senior Planning Team to look at holding it for a 25-year period.  The Councillor also requested if it would be possible to use the Grant Officer to promote having good insulation and good restorative development. 

 Councillor Smithson was happy to look at advice from Historic England and highlighted the importance of getting the balance with the environment consideration.

 Councillor Topping advised that she had emailed the leader of Babergh and Mid Suffolk to enquire how the process was going.

 Councillor Ashton was happy to support the motion and stated it would be good to look at what other areas were doing. There was a larger problem of properties in conservation areas, in particular those where permitted development rights had been withdrawn. There was a significant process regarding retrofitting, auditing and assessment along with planning consents, where necessary for many other homes.

 Councillor Ashton highlighted that in 2012 more than a million homes a year were being insulated and had the pace of that work continued there would not be the current issue to resolve. The Councillor concluded that there was an enormous problem of which the element being discussed, was a small part.

 Councillor Yule thanked members for bringing the motion and had asked for the Local Plan Working Group take to on board and explore how the implementation would work for East Suffolk.

 Councillor Byatt thanked members for their support. The Councillor highlighted the issue for community members in East Suffolk who want to make their properties more efficient and the challenges of having to address the grade 1 listed buildings and properties with article four directions. Councillor Byatt discussed the issue of graded properties having rotting windows and the exploration of possible substitutes which were more cost effective than the current options available. Councillor Byatt stated he would ensure that local Labour MPs were aware of the issue.

 Councillor Smithson concluded that she was grateful for the positive support.

On being put to the vote the motion was passed. 

Councillor Noble the Cabinet Member with responsibility for the Environment introduced the report ES/2093 which related to simpler recycling on a collection model for East Suffolk and joint procurement of food caddies and containers for Suffolk.

The Councillor outlined that it was a historic and hugely important decision with an opportunity to improve environmental outcomes for residents. The twin stream option was the preferred option for consideration. The current status was a co-mingled one, with a lot of paper and card being contaminated and not accepted by paper mills.

There was debate across members with concerns raised regarding the provision of additional bins for terraced housing, apartments and flats. Another concern was raised regarding areas where there would not be enough space on the pavements to have an additional bin, along with areas where there were ongoing problems of bins being left out in the streets. 

There was a discussion regarding the colour of the bins and keeping consistency to make things as easy as possible for community members. It was raised that more research and information was needed in order to make a fully informed decision. A number of members raised concerns with the proposed three weekly collection. 

Councillor Byatt added that sorting out waste at the source was an important component of addressing waste reduction. Councillor Ashdown stated that the Conservative group supported recycling however would not be able to support the item as presented and would need see more detail. Councillor Lynch echoed concerns regarding additional bins on the streets and the three weekly general waste collection. Councillor Patience referenced some of the problems faced in his ward with bins being left on the streets. 

Councillor Noble added that there would need to be a communications plan and that there were known issues in some areas which would be reviewed.

Councillor Hedgley added his support for recycling and if there would be consideration for a designated phone number to provide support for the community. 

Councillor Grey supported the proposal which encouraged community members to recycle, and a lot of education was done through example. The Councillor added that it was a well-intentioned and well thought through item. 

Councillor Topping added that the work would be done in the next 18 months and a procurement process would be required. The Leader highlighted that other authorities would be in the same position and that could lead to increases in cost of goods required. 

Councillor Ceresa was not able to support the item, taking on board feedback from residents regarding concerns over three weekly collections. There could be confusion for older or vulnerable residents with the proposed changes. The Councillor highlighted that additional education was needed and it should be kept simple.

Councillor Noble concluded that there had been lots of questions, comments and the changes proposed were appreciated. The Councillor highlighted that other areas are also moving forward with changes to refuse collection and it would be good to learn from others. There were more issues to resolve and investigate which included clinical waste and nappies. 

Councillor Noble highlighted that the heart of the proposal was a change of behaviour and working to cut down on waste production. The communications team would be working on a campaign in support of the changes and waste reduction in the community. 

On the proposition of Councillor Noble, seconded by Councillor Thompson it was by a majority vote in favour

RESOLVED

That Full Council: 

1. Approved Cabinet’s recommended option set out in section 3 of this report; the introduction of twin stream recycling along with 3 weekly refuse collections in conjunction with weekly food waste collections. 

2. Approved Food Caddy and Container Option B; that East Suffolk Council acts as the lead authority for the Suffolk Waste Partnership for the procurement of food waste caddies to gain  efficiencies in the procurement process as well as best value for money. 

3. That delegated authority be given to the Strategic Director, in consultation with the Cabinet Member for The Environment, to agree and undertake the appropriate procurement exercise, individually and/or collectively as required with partner Suffolk Councils, to vary the contract(s) to deliver the required service change. 

The Leader, Councillor Topping introduced report ES/2095 which related to the Independent Remuneration Panel (IRP) appointment process.

The report was to notify Full Council of the forthcoming review of the Members Allowances Scheme (MAS) and to agree the process for appointing a new Independent Remuneration Panel (IRP). 

The MAS was reviewed in full in 2018, as part of the preparations for the creation of East Suffolk Council, and it was reviewed again in September 2019 to see how it met the needs of Councillors. 

A MAS must be produced in accordance with the requirements of the Local Authorities (Members Allowances) (England) Regulations 2003, and was required to be adopted by Full Council.

The IRP would be responsible for reviewing the MAS and they will make recommendations to Full Council as to the level of remuneration, allowances and expenses to be paid to Councillors.

 A new scheme needed to be adopted by December 2024/January 2025 in order that it can feed into the budget, which would be approved by Full Council in February 2025.

Councillor Bennett queried the remit of the IRP and requested that the Panel’s remit include consideration of allowances for Town and Parish Councils; if an allowance was to be paid what percentage it should be of a district councillor’s basic allowance.

Through the Chair, the Monitoring Officer advised that the remit of the IRP was primarily to look at District Council allowances but that he could ask that the IRP to consider Town and Parish Council allowances as part of their work programme.

Councillor Ashton suggested seeking advice from the Suffolk Association of Local Councils.

 On the proposition of Councillor Topping, seconded by Councillor Byatt it was unanimously

 RESOLVED

 That Full Council:

 1. Approved the process for appointing a new Independent Remuneration Panel for East Suffolk Council, including delegating authority to the Selection Panel to make the appointments to the IRP, as detailed in this report. 

 2. Approved the Terms of Reference for the Independent Remuneration Panel at Appendix A.

 3. Agreed the Person Specification for the Independent Remuneration Panel Members at Appendix B.

Councillor Yule, Cabinet Member with responsibility for Planning and Coastal Management introduced report ES/2094 which related to the 2023-24 Infrastructure Funding Statement (IFS) and CIL Spending Report.

Councillors should be aware of the developer contributions received and spent in the East Suffolk Area and should understand the projects that have been provided and supported through CIL Funding, together with proposed projects listed in the Infrastructure List of the Infrastructure Funding Statement (IFS) 2023-24. (Appendix A – a 3-part document: CIL Report, s106 Report, Infrastructure List). The Infrastructure Funding Statement is a statutory document which must be produced and published annually by 31 December. This was agreed by Cabinet every autumn before being finalised for publication. The papers presented with the report included Appendix B: District CIL Funding 2024-25.

Councillor Yule offered thanks to the officers for their continued work on the CIL working group.

Councillor Smithson referenced the report on payments owed and if there had been issues with timely payments or an issue with any particular developers.

 The Head of Planning, Building Control and Coastal Management advised that it was part distributing and part collection from developers. There was a lot of work that went into securing and recovering money.

 Councillor Ashdown fully supported the work being carried out and thanked the officers for their ongoing work.

 Councillor Topping highlighted the photograph on p78 of the document pack which showed signage for a CIL funded project and stated that more promotion was needed to showcase CIL funded work in the district.

 Councillor Deacon echoed thanks to the officers supporting the CIL working group and showcasing funded projects and initiatives more widely. 

 Councillor Yule highlighted a visit to a CIL funded skatepark project. The Councillor said it was a joy to see and was one of the highlights of being on the committee.

 On the proposition of Councillor Yule, Seconded by Councillor Smith-Lyte it was unanimously 

 RESOLVED

 That Full Council noted the contents of the developer contributions papers and the updated CIL Spending Strategy approved by Cabinet, to further aid councillors’ understanding and knowledge of Developer Contributions.

Full Council received report ES/2096, which was presented by Councillor Topping, Leader of the Council, and provided individual Cabinet Members' reports on their areas of responsibility, as well as reports from those Members appointed to represent East Suffolk Council on Outside Bodies. The Leader stated that the written reports could be taken as read and she invited relevant questions on the contents.

Councillor Deacon queried the North Felixstowe Garden Neighbourhood and the upcoming event in October which was promoted as a questions and answer session. The Councillor asked what sort of security arrangements would be in place and if local Councillors could attend.

The Chief Executive was working with Felixstowe School for a date in late October or early November. There would be consideration for security provision if required. The Chief Executive confirmed that local Councillors and Cabinet Members were invited to attend.

Councillor Pitchers queried if the demolition at St Peter’s Court had begun and if the materials taken out were being recycled for the benefit of the community.

Councillor Beavan responded that he would find out the position on recycling of materials.

Councillor Green queried the recent move of the Customer Services team and if there were any digital champions in place. The Councillor also asked how many people they were supporting, and were they subject to any funding constraints.

Councillor Ashton responded that he would like to explore utilising digital champions further. There was some concern whether encouraging some people to become more computer literate could make people more vulnerable to digital scamming schemes in the context of the older population. Councillor Ashton was keen to explore how other Councils used digital champions so East Suffolk can make the best use of them.

Councillor Smithson stated that Freeport East was not mentioned in the Suffolk Business Strategy and wished to know how the Suffolk Business Board would work with Freeport East. They seem to be trying to attract businesses and staff in the same industry sectors, however freeport had the tax breaks. Would Felixstowe therefore loose out to Gateway 14 and Harwich.

Councillor Beavan responded he would come back with an answer. 

Councillor Patience requested information on the security measures in place to protect the remaining tenants of St Peter’s Court.

Councillor Beavan advised he would get back to the councillor with an answer.

Councillor Byatt queried the ‘East Suffolk is Amazing group’ which was working on many strands and with many volunteer groups. Councillor Byatt wondered when the volunteer handbook would be available.

Councillor Ashton advised that he would have to take the query away. He was aware there were lots of groups and ensuring safety was important.