Meeting Details

There were no announcements from the Chair or Cabinet Members.

On the proposition of Councillor Langdon-Morris seconded by Councillor Candy it was unanimously

RESOLVED

 
That the minutes of the meeting held on 4 November 2025, be agreed as a correct record and signed by the Chair.

Councillor Paul Ashton, Deputy Leader and Cabinet Member with responsibility for Corporate Services - Digital, Customer Services, HR and Assets, introduced the report which related to the recent Call-In of the Cabinet report (ES-2535) pertaining to the authorisation to procure brown bin lids.

Councillor Ashton thanked the Overview and Scrutiny Committee (O&S) and stated it was positive experience. The Councillor handed over to the Vice Chair of Overview and Scrutiny who detailed the outcome of the Call-In. The Committee considered the call-in on 27 November 2025. The Call-In was made by two Members of the Committee whose main point of concern was the cost to replace the bin lids in comparison to purchasing stickers.

In response, during the O&S meeting Councillor Ashton explained the current bin system and what was being introduced as part of Better Recycling.  The Councillor clarified Cabinet’s main concerns about using stickers was that they:

• Might be more costly in the longer term.

• Might lead to increased contamination rates which would have a negative impact on the Council’s overall finances.

• Would mean East Suffolk would be out of step with the rest of Suffolk as the entire comms strategy for Better Recycling across Suffolk was based on the different coloured bin lids.

Having heard the views expressed and debating the matter for quite some time, several Committee Members remained concerned at the proposal and preferred stickers as they felt this would reduce the risk of contamination.

Other Members were relieved at the clarification that funding for the bin lids would come from central Government instead of East Suffolk Council, although they acknowledged it was still public money.

Opinion remained divided but the majority of the Committee voted in favour of supporting Cabinet’s decision to procure brown bin lids.

Following the vote, the Committee was pleased to hear Councillor Ashton state that, whilst he made no promises, he would reflect on the suggestion to also have information stickers so members of the public could see at a glance what should go inside each bin.

Councillor Clery thanked Councillor Ashton and Officers for the positive manner in which they approached the Call-In and end by reminding Cabinet that the Overview and Scrutiny Committee acts as a check and balance on their powers through the Call-In process and we hope you feel that the Committee acted as a “critical friend” and was able to add value through this review.

Councillor Ashton concluded that he had welcomed the view of the Overview and Scrutiny Committee, which the Chair echoed.

It was noted that Cabinet be advised that the Overview and Scrutiny Committee support the decision to procure brown bin lids in accordance with Cabinet Report ES/2535.

Councillor Langdon-Morris, Cabinet Member with responsibility for Resources and Value for Money introduced report ES-2604 which related to East Suffolk Local Council Tax Reduction Scheme (LCTRS) 2026/27.

Each year the Council is required to annually review its Local Council Tax Reduction Scheme (LCTRS) and decide whether to amend or retain the existing scheme.  LCTRS was a locally set scheme and aims to achieve a balance between charging an amount of Council Tax to encourage customers back into work, whilst setting the amount charged at an affordable and recoverable level during the year. 

The current East Suffolk Working Age LCTRS scheme provided a maximum benefit of 91.5% for working age claimants and the scheme also fully protects War Pensioners.  A statutory scheme also applies to pensioners who can receive up to a maximum 100% reduction of their Council Tax bill.

The recommendation for 2026/27 was not to change the maximum benefit for working age claimants and to retain the scheme at an 8.5% contribution rate. The recommendation ensured that the principle of everyone making at least a small contribution towards their council tax was continued, whilst providing support to vulnerable and low-income households. It also maintained a level of council tax income to provide funding for services at district and county level.

 There were no questions from Cabinet or other members present.

 On the proposition of Councillor Langdon-Morris seconded by Councillor Noble it was unanimously

RESOLVED

That Cabinet approved:

1. No change to the minimum 8.5% contribution level in the East Suffolk Local Council Tax Reduction Scheme (LCTRS) for 2026/27.

Councillor Langdon-Morris, Cabinet Member with responsibility for Resources and Value for Money introduced report ES-2603 which related to Council Tax 2026/27.

East Suffolk Council was required to approve its council tax base before 31 January each year in order for the information to be provided to Suffolk County Council and Suffolk Police Crime Commissioner for their budget processes. It also enabled each Town and Parish Council to set their respective precepts.

The tax base was the estimated number of chargeable dwellings expressed as a number of band D equivalents, adjusted for an estimated number of reliefs, discounts, exemptions and appeals plus an allowance for non-collection.

 Overall, the tax base for the district showed a decrease 208.30, or around 0.22%, on the tax base for the current year of 96,367.99 Band D equivalents, primarily due to the introduction of the second home premium.

 Appendix A showed the estimated 2026/27 council tax base for the district by parish along with the increase or decrease compared with 2025/26. Where the tax base of a parish has decreased, this was primarily due to factors in the calculation such as the value of discounts and reliefs and not a reduction in the physical number of properties.

 Councillor Beavan queried the reduction of second home premium in Aldeburgh versus the increase in Southwold. The Chief Finance Officer responded that the reduction could be attributed to several factors. ARP had been tasked to review where there had been changes. The Chief Finance Officer advised they would look into Aldeburgh and Southwold in more detail.

 Councillor Jepson queried why Felixstowe had increased so much. The Chief Finance Officer advised that changes were due to various factors which could include, additional properties, more properties coming into reduction scheme, or the debt provision. The Chief Finance Officer stated there was a breakdown and specific details for Felixstowe could be provided.

 Councillor Byatt queried how the Council was doing in recovering outstanding council debt. The Chief Finance Officer responded that in terms of collection it had been that rates had dropped below target, however were still within the range of tolerance. In terms of rate of collection there had been a reduction against the target. 

 The Chair advised that for those who are struggling to pay their council tax there were resources available to support people.

 On the proposition of Councillor Langdon-Morris seconded by Councillor Candy it was unanimously

RESOLVED

That Cabinet:

1. Approved the council tax base for 2026/27 for the East Suffolk district is 96,576.29 Band D equivalent properties.

2. Confirmed the council tax bases for 2026/27 for individual town and parish areas are as shown in Appendix A.

Councillor Jan Candy, Cabinet Member with responsibility for Community Health introduced report ES/2607 which related to the Anti-Social Behaviour Policy 2025.

The revised policy set out how the Council tackled ASB in partnership, providing clearer definitions of ASB enhancing understanding of ASB and its impact. The policy included information about East Suffolk Council (ESC) responsibilities, and provided a description of the tools and powers that were available to ESC and partners. Councillor Candy outlined how ASB cases had become more complex and the updated policy should ensure a consistent, joined-up approach which encouraged early intervention.

Key changes included:

Clearer guidance on what constitutes ASB – and what doesn’t.

Ensures that residents understand their responsibilities and encourages them to try to resolve issues as soon as possible.

More information about legal tools such as Injunctions, Closure Orders, and Possession Proceedings

Clarity about council commitment to meeting the Regulator of Social Housing (RSH) Neighbourhood and Community Standards.

The policy also addressed safeguarding, making it clear that the Council will refer into the Multi-Agency Safeguarding Hub where needed. The Council undertakes Equality Impact Assessments for individuals as relevant.

ASB remained a key priority in the East Suffolk Community Safety Partnership Action Plan and Cabinet was therefore asked to approve the updated ASB Policy 2025 for implementation across all relevant service areas. 

Councillor Whitelock was interested if there was an age profile concerning those involved in reported incidents. The Senior Anti-Social Behaviour Officer responded that the main areas of concern were neighbourhood despites and therefore adults were the most involved. 

Councillor Jepson added that the policy had been reviewed by Overview and Scrutiny and the Councillor sought reassurance that ASB was being addressed consistently internally across departments in the Council. Councillor Jepson also queried if there were the resources in place to support communities under the ‘build’ element of ‘Clear-hold-build’ initiatives. 

Councillor Candy responded that there was closer partnership working taking place. The Senior Anti-Social Behaviour Officer added that different departments were working in a more structured way. The Officer added that quite rightly the policy supports that victims need to report incidents at the appropriate time and not leave things too late.

Councillor Jepson followed up to query how committed the police were to the policy. The of Head of Communities and Leisure responded that the policy had been developed in partnership with other agencies and relevant agencies departments. Regarding the ‘Clear-hold-build’ initiative, the Head of Communities and Leisure added that it was a national driven area of work which did not come with additional funding. Therefore, delivery was expected within existing resources, which did present challenges. 

Councillor Reeves thanked the team for producing the policy which was clear to read.

Councillor Bennett added that there was growing concerns regarding vehicle related ASB in the Felixstowe area. The Senior Anti-Social Behaviour Officer responded that it was embedded in the 2014 legislation and it would not be able to outline all elements of each law in a document. The Public Space Protection Order (PSPO) was different.

Councillor Byatt echoed previous comments that the policy was an excellent document, which could also support councillors who are dealing with issues in their communities.

Councillor Candy thanked Councillor Reeves for his work chairing the Community Safety Parnership.

On the proposition of Councillor Candy seconded by Councillor Whitelock it was unanimously

RESOLVED

That Cabinet:

1. Approved the updated ESC Anti Social Behaviour Policy 2025.

2. Endorsed the Policy being embedded in the work of all relevant teams.

 3. Agreed to delegate head of service to approve any minor amendments to the policy where such changes do not materially alter the intent or scope of the policy. 

Councillor Jan Candy, Cabinet Member with responsibility for Community Health introduced report ES/2608 which related to the request for Implementation of a Public Spaces Protection Order (PSPO) – Felixstowe Viewpoint and Landguard Carparks.
 
It was proposed that the order would cover the seafront car parks from Viewpoint to Cliff Road, including all adjoining roads that lead to and connect these areas. The PSPO would also cover the Abbey Grove carpark separately under the same conditions.

Felixstowe residents have experienced persistent issues with anti-social and dangerous driving and excessive noise in several of the town’s car parks—particularly at Viewpoint and Landguard.

The proposed PSPO aimed to address these concerns by prohibiting:

Dangerous and antisocial driving

Excessive noise and emissions

Nuisance congregation

The consumption of alcohol and drugs

Environmental damage and misuse of public spaces (including littering, fly tipping)

The detail of the PSPO was included in Appendix B of the report.

The Chair queried how long the PSPO would be in place and raised concerns regarding the potential displacement of the targeted ASB to other areas. The Chair also asked how long it would take to implement any variations. The Communities Officer responded that a thorough consultation was conducted which did consider a majority of the sea front, part of that was to consider displacement as well as other reports of issues in the local areas.

If any variations were sought additional consultation would be required which could take approximately four weeks to complete before coming back to Cabinet. In total a variation could take up to eight weeks.

The Communities Officer described the consultation process further, which included a stakeholder event in which Felixstowe Town Councillors and Suffolk County Councillors were included. The event was well attended, with across-the-board representation and an overwhelming support to implement the PSPO.

The Chair queried if the police had capacity to enforce the PSPO. Inspector Clack responded that the PSPO provided another layer of enforcement for the police to use. Policing numbers would be increasing from sixteen to eighteen and there would be mixed ability within the team. Officers could also be deployed from other teams along with colleagues from Ipswich roads policing team if required.

Inspector Clack added that it was a good piece of legislation to enforce and as it came with fines it would impact on those participating in ASB financially. People were travelling from far afield to come to Felixstowe with their vehicles.

There was a discussion regarding consequential thinking and training around raising awareness to the dangers of the actions being carried out. The Police always look to educate first before going down the punitive routes. 

Councillor Packard queried how success would be measured. Councillor Candy commented on the success of impact days. Inspector Clack recognised impact days had a value and made a difference. The overarching proof of success would be in seeing a drop in calls from the public to the police and partner agencies. Statistics and data could be provided. 

Councillor Jepson referenced a tragic traffic incident which occurred in Felixstowe and commented on the potential for displacement. Councillor Reeves responded that the area did need to be extended and Golf Road had been raised by residents as an area of concern. 

Councillor Bennett congratulated the team on their work on the PSPO and commented that it was refreshing hearing the Inspector saying that was straightforward legalisation to use.

Councillor Candy concluded that the issues experiences at Landguard were very concerning and it would be good to do some consequential thinking around working with drivers as part of the work to tackle the ASB that was being targeted.

On the proposition of Councillor Candy seconded by Councillor Wilson it was 

RESOLVED

That Cabinet:

1. Considered the consultation responses at Appendix A, B and C and agrees the statutory conditions for a PSPO, as detailed in Section 8 legal implications of this report, are satisfied

2. Approved the introduction of the new Public Space Protection Order (PSPO) for ‘Felixstowe carparks leading from Viewpoint to Cliff Road, and surrounding area’, at Appendix D, to commence for 3 years from 13 December 2025

 3. Delegated authority to Police Constables, including PCSO’s, to issue Fixed Penalty Notices (FPN’s) on behalf of East Suffolk Council

4. Noted that enforcement of the PSPO will be a discretionary power exercised by Suffolk Police and authorised Council officers, applied proportionately and in accordance with existing enforcement protocols. Authorised Council officers include those with delegated authority.

Councillor Sally Noble Cabinet Member with responsibility for the Environment introduced report ES/2610 which related to East Suffolk Council Air Quality Strategy 2025-2030 for approval.

The updated Air Quality Strategy sets out East Suffolk Council’s vision for improving air quality within the district. The strategy would enable the Council to protect both the health of all who live, work in and visit the district, together with the environment. It aimed to seek continued improvements in air quality within the East Suffolk district for local communities, reflects the strategic framework for air quality set out by the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra)(2)(3) and encompassed the new goals for reduction in PM2.5 concentrations across the board(4).

In November 2023, East Suffolk Council’s new Strategic Plan ‘Our Direction 2028’(5) was approved. The plan set ‘Environmental Impact’ as one of four main priorities and reflected the commitment to working with residents, businesses and other stakeholders to achieve the Council’s goals. East Suffolk believed that clean air must be a basic right for all, and by threading air quality considerations into our work we believe we can maintain the quality of air within East Suffolk and make improvements where possible.

The Chair discussed the installation of the cubes which had been installed around the district. Councillor Candy commented that it was evident that there was an increase in the volume of traffic along the A12 and there were increased numbers of monitoring stations. Councillor Noble added that fleets should be operating with lower emissions. The Environmental Protection Officer responded that there were 78 monitoring sites which were small in size and easy to locate. There were sites located across the district which were reporting a reduction, which was attributed to a lower emissions fleet and more electric vehicles on the roads. 

Councillor Langdon-Morris commented on working on four rivers project which was focussed on water quality. There was a discussion regarding the effects of water run off and drainage from roads. The project was in the information gather stage.

Councillor Ashton queried if there were any communication plans regarding bonfires and if there was a method to measure the impact on air quality. The Head of Environmental Services and Port Health responded that there were campaigns regarding however it was difficult to monitor the effectiveness of success. 

Councillor Reeves queried the measures that had been taken around the port. The Environmental Protection Officer responded that there was monitoring around the port and the surrounding A14. There had been lots of work to reduce emissions and the introduction of a vehicle booking system had a significant positive impact. Monitoring would continue, however recordings were in the low 20’s and were reducing year on year. 

Councillor Whitelock commented on the detrimental effect of poor air quality to community members who had respiratory conditions. The Councillor welcomed the strategy.

Councillor Noble concluded that it was important work and thanked the team for their continued work.

On the proposition of Councillor Noble, seconded by Councillor Whitelock it was unanimously

RESOLVED

That Cabinet:

1. Adopted the East Suffolk Council Air Quality Strategy 2025-2030 at Appendix A; and 

2. Approved the delivery of the Action Plan within Appendix A

Councillor Topping introduced report ES/2614 which related the Decision Wheel. The report reviewed the work undertaken following the Full Council motion to investigate implementation of an East Suffolk version of the Cornwall Decision Wheel used to assist and inform rounded decision making. The Policy, Performance and Risk team carried out research and investigation and as a result have developed a pilot version of an East Suffolk Decision Wheel. This would assess the impact against each of the strategic objectives - as an example of how it might be used by East Suffolk Council.

The pilot East Suffolk Decision Wheel was presented to Group Leaders in May 2025 and they requested that it was considered by Overview & Scrutiny Committee for comment. The report included feedback gained from consultation with Corporate Leadership Team (CLT) in August 2025 for consideration as part of the investigations.

The report also included feedback from Overview & Scrutiny Committee when they considered it at their meeting of 18 September 2025. It recommended options 1 and 2 as outlined below:

Limited adoption - Initially adding the Decision Wheel to the project management framework as an optional tool along with some clear guidance for its use.  In this way it would raise awareness of the strategic objectives and align with the existing framework - but not making it a mandatory process for Cabinet and Council reports.

Policy only – Use the decision wheel only when implementing or agreeing key Policy initiatives, rather than all projects or proposals requiring decision.

The Chair discussed the Cornwall experience and how it could be utilised in East Suffolk. The Deputy Leader attended the Overview and Scrutiny Committee and was happy with the concept. The Deputy Leader commented that it would take time to 'bed in' and due to LGR it was not recommended to be fully adopted. It would be a good tool for the Council to use.

Councillor Candy commented that it would be interesting to see how it would slot into Marmot Place decision making. The Head of Communities and Leisure added that Marmot work was ongoing to refine and look at what would be focused on, however it could be explored alongside the decision wheel.

Councillor Daly commented that it was good to have and an interesting way of actualising thinking.

Councillor Langdon-Morris queried if the process could be automated which could be something to consider for innovation and development.

Councillor Byatt welcomed the motion through Full Council and was interested to enquire if Cornwall had considered digitising their version of it.

The Chair concluded that she had tasked the Strategic Director team to run things through the decision wheel to try it and hoped the new unitary  authorities would put it to good use. 

On the proposition of Councillor Topping seconded by Councillor Ashton it was 

RESOLVED

That Cabinet:

1. Reviewed the investigations and proposals carried out on an East Suffolk version of the Cornwall Decision Wheel.

2. Did not fully adopt the East Suffolk Decision Wheel at this time, but adds it to the corporate Project Management Framework as a tool for officers to use, when managing projects or policy adoption.

3. Recommended that this approach to decision making is carried forward once the outcome of Local Government Reorganisation is known to feed into discussions for the unitary council creation.

On the proposition of Councillor Daly seconded by Councillor Whitelock it was unanimously

RESOLVED

That under Section 100A(4) of the Local Government Act 1972 (as amended) the public be excluded from the meeting for the following items of business on the grounds that they involve the likely disclosure of exempt information as defined in Paragraphs 2 and 3 of Part 1 of Schedule 12A of the Act