Agenda and minutes

In accordance with the Council's Code of Conduct, Councillors of the Council are reminded that it is a requirement to declare interests where appropriate.

The disclosures of interests made by Councillors were set out in Appendix A to the minutes.

All officers present, with exception of the Chief Executive, declared a personal interest in respect of Recommendation 2 – 2017/2018 Budget Monitoring – Quarter 2 as the item includes a proposal of a one off payment to staff. The Chief Executive confirmed that she had chosen not to receive the proposed payment.

To receive and consider any announcementsor communications.

The Mayor invited representatives from each party to pay tribute to the sad passing of Honourable Alderman and Freeman Alan Quine. Councillors Burrett, B. Smith,

R. Burgess, Mullins, McCarthy and the Mayor himself, paid their heartfelt and touching tributes.

The Mayor provided the Full Council with a brief update of the Mayoral events, commenting that since the start of his mayoral year, there had been over 141 events attended. He already either visited or had hosted in the Council Chamber many of the schools in the Borough.

To answer public questions under Council Procedure Rule10.

·         The Mayor will invite questions in turn, via the raising of hands. Prior notice of the questions is not required.

·         Each questioner may ask one question and a supplementary question (on the same subject)

·         Each questioner is asked to direct their question to the Mayor and provide their name and the ward they live in.

·         The questions must not be a statement, but must relate to the functions of the Full Council. The questions cannot be about an individual’s personal circumstance or substantially be the same as a question raised in the past

6 months.

·         The Mayor may invite any Councillor to respond.  No Councillor will speak more than once on a question and will confine their comments to responding to the question

·         Up to 30 minutes is allocated to Public Question Time.

Questions asked in accordance with Council Procedure Rule 9 were as follows:

To approve as a correct recordthe minutesofthe meetingof the Full Council held on 18 October 2017.

The minutes of the meeting of the Full Council held on 18 October 2017 were approved as a correct record and signed by the Mayor.

Prior to the introduction ofthe Minutesofthe Cabinet, Overviewand Scrutiny CommissionandCommittees (ascontained in the BookofMinutes), Memberswill be given the opportunity to indicate on which items they wish tospeak.

TheseReservedItemswill then bethe onlymattersto bethe subject ofa debate.

Councillors indicated that they wished to speak on a number of items as set out in the following table:

(1)          Toreceive theminutes ofthe meetings ofthe Cabinet,Overviewand Scrutiny Commission and Committees, as listed on page 23, and set out in the Appendices to this item

(2)          Toadopt any of therecommendationsto Full Council,which have notbeenreservedfor debate and as listed on page 23, and set out in the Appendices to this item

1)      Moved by Councillor Portal Castro (as the Deputy Mayor):-

RESOLVED

That the following reports be received:

·           Planning Committee – 9 October 2017

·           Cabinet – 25 October 2017

·           Licensing Committee – 30 October 2017

·           Overview and Scrutiny Commission – 6 November 2017

·           Planning Committee – 7 November 2017

·           Overview and Scrutiny Commission – 27 November 2017

·           Audit Committee – 28 November 2017

·           Governance Committee – 28 November 2017

·           Cabinet – 29 November 2017

2)      That the recommendations contained in the reports on the following matters, which had not been reserved for debate, be adopted:-

Brownfield Land Register – Cabinet – 29 November 2017 (Recommendation 2)

The Full Council considered report SHAP/65 of the Head of Strategic Housing and Planning

RESOLVED

That the Constitution be amended so that the following functions are the remit of the Planning Committee:

(i).     Power to approve sites for entry into Part 2 of the Brownfield Land Register;

(ii).     Power to decline to approve sites for entry into Part 2 of the Brownfield Land Register;

(iii).    Power to determine applications for Permission in Principle;

(iv).   Power to determine applications for Technical Details Consent;

And that those functions (i)–(iv) be delegated to the Head of Economic and Environmental Services.

Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) – Delegation of Enforcement Powers – Cabinet – 29 November 2017 (Recommendation 4)

The Full Council considered joint report PES/262 of the Head of Economic and Environmental Services and the Head of Legal and Democratic Services.

RESOLVED

That Full Council approves the following Constitution changes in relation to Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) - Delegation of Enforcement Powers:

Delegation of Functions

1.         Exercise the Council’s duties and powers in relation to the enforcement of the Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) as set out in the Planning Act 2008 and Community Infrastructure Levy Regulations 2010 as amended or any Regulations amending or replacing the same.

Delegated to the Head of Economic Development and Environmental Services and/or the Head of Legal and Democratic Services.

2.         Exercise the Council’s duties and powers in relation to the calculation of the chargeable amount and the determination of liability, in respect of the Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) as set out in the Planning Act 2008 and Community Infrastructure Levy Regulations 2010 as amended or any Regulations amending or replacing the same.

Delegated to the Head of Economic Development and Environmental Services

3.         Exercise the Council’s duties and powers in respect of appeals relating to the Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) as set out in the Planning Act 2008 and Community Infrastructure Levy Regulations 2010 as amended or any Regulations amending or replacing the same.

Delegated to the Head of Economic Development and Environmental Services

4.         Exercise the Council’s duties in relation to the assessment of claims for exemption and/or relief from the Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL), in accordance with any relevant policies adopted by the Council as set out in the Planning Act 2008 and Community Infrastructure Levy Regulations 2010 as amended or any Regulations  ...  view the full minutes text for item 6.

Councillor Eade, on behalf of the Conservative Group, explained the rationale for bringing forward this item for debate. She commented that there were concerns over the staff levels in the Town Hall, after office hours, especially when evening meetings were taking place. Areas raised included the seeming lack of an obvious security presence, no obvious reception to direct visitors, IT support in the evenings and the question as to whether a risk assessment had taken place on the Town Hall in the evenings.

Councillors Vitler, B. Smith, Sudan, Burrett, and Lamb also spoke on this matter.

Councillor Crow, on behalf of the Conservative Group, explained the rationale for bringing forward this item for debate, he commented that he wasn’t on the Audit Committee or attended the said meeting, however when reading the minutes from this meeting and then speaking to his colleagues on the issues discussed at the meeting, there appeared to be a clear difference. The minutes states that ‘the Committee sought and received clarification on several points, including the delivery of the affordable housing programme.’ However what was actually discussed was how the Council was having to pay back £1.4mil of 1-4-1 capital receipts to the Government as it had not been spent. Councillor Crow questioned why such an important finance issue had not be included with the Audit Committee minutes. He intimated those types of key details should be included within minute, so that it more appropriately reflects the debate.

Councillors Belben, Lamb, Irvine, Lanzer, B Burgess and Sudan also spoke on the subject.

It was noted during the discussion that Democratic Service did have a guide as to what should be included within its minutes (and which was based on national guidance), and was available to Councillors on request.

The Full Council considered report LDS/132 of the Head of Legal and Democratic Service, which had been previously considered at the meeting of the Governance Committee on 28 November 2017.

Councillor Lunnon presented the report, with Councillors Crow, Irvine, Burrett, Lamb, Jones also spoke on the recommendation and associated report.

During the debate strong opinions were expressed on two differing views, one being in support of expanding the Council size to 39 Councillors and the other argument to reduce the Council size to 36 Councillors. It was noted that the council size must be a devisable by 3 as the Council was to remain election by thirds.

A recorded vote was requested and the Mayor then called for the vote.

Voting in Favour: Councillors: Ayling, Cheshire, Irvine, Jones, Joyce, Lamb, Lunnon, Mullins, Pickett, Portal Castro, Quinn, Rana, Sharma, Skudder, B A Smith,

P C Smith, Sudan, and Thomas. (18)

Voting Against: Councillors: Belben, Boxall, B J Burgess, R G Burgess, Burrett, Crow, Eade, Guidera, Jaggard, Lanzer, McCarthy, Peck, Pendlington, Stone, Tarrant, and Vitler. (16)

Abstentions: Councillors: None (0)

The Mayor declared the proposed recommendation as approved – votes in favour 18, and votes against 16 with 0 abstention.

RESOLVED

That the Full Council approvesthe document at Appendix A of report LDS/132 (subject to minor clerical corrections and the removal of Sections 8.6 and 8.7) for final submission to the Local Government Boundary Commission for England, and in doing so agree that the Council size be proposed at 39 Councillors from May 2019.

Councillor Guidera, on behalf of the Conservative Group, explained the rationale for bringing forward this item for debate, he queried whether the costing of the signage and wayfinding exercise was good value for money for our residents with signs costing £9k. Councillor P. Smith replied that a procurement exercise had been adhered to and the quotation that had been accepted was the best in terms of high quality signage for the best value for money.

The Full Council considered report FIN/427 of the Head of Finance, Revenue and Benefits, which had been previously considered at the meeting of the Cabinet on 29 November 2017.

Councillor Lamb presented the report, with Councillors Lanzer, Crow and Joyce also spoke on the recommendation and associated report.

RESOLVED

That the Full Council approvesthe allocationof £8.0mof 1-4-1receipts andapproximately £7.5mof GeneralFund receipts for affordable housing on the Town Hall site development as outlined in paragraph 9.24 of report FIN/427.

The Full Council considered report CH/178 of the Head of Crawley Homes which had been previously considered at the meeting of the Cabinet on 29 November 2017.

Councillor Joyce presented the report, which Councillors Jaggard, and Lamb also spoke on the recommendations and associated report.

RESOLVED

1)      that the allocation of funds from the Housing Revenue Account and Right to Buy 1-4-1 Reserves as detailed in Section 7of the report CH/178 for the acquisition of the residential scheme on the College Car Park site, be approved for the main purpose of Council-owned affordable housing, but with the flexibility to explore other tenure options as detailed in section 5.1 of the report CH/178.

2)      the Delegated Authority be given to the Head of Crawley Homes, the Head of Finance, Revenues and Benefits and the Head of Legal and Democratic Services, in consultation with the Cabinet Member for Housing, to negotiate and agree the detailed terms of the Conditional Purchase Agreement and acquisition, and to consider the available tenure options as deemed necessary for financial or strategic reasons.

Toconsider,in accordance with Council Procedure Rule 13, the following NoticeofMotion tobemoved by Councillor Lamband seconded byCouncillor Joyce.

The Council considered the Notice of Motion 1 ‘Universal Credit’ as set out in the Full Council’s agenda. The Motion was moved by Councillor Lamb and seconded by Councillor Joyce.

During the debate on the proposed Notice of Motion, Councillors Crow, Sudan, Guidera, Thomas, Lanzer, Irvine, Jones and Lunnon all spoke on the subject.

The Mayor then called for a vote on the substantive motion, which was carried – votes in favour 18, and votes against 0 with 16 votes of abstentions.

RESOLVED

This Council notes that Universal Credit, the single monthly payment which replaces the six current working age benefits, is to be fully implemented in Crawley on 18 June 2018.

This Council also notes that, within our area, thousands of local people will be affected by these changes.

Crawley Borough Council notes with concern that the move to a Full Service Universal Credit in other parts of the country has caused considerable financial hardship for many of those people moving onto this new system of benefit payments. Before a full role out of Universal credit the following problems need to be addressed:

·         The six week wait for claimants to receive their benefits. The idea that all workers are in jobs where they are paid a month in arrears ignores the reality for the 1.5m workers who struggle on zero hours, insecure jobs or forced self-employment. Claimants need to be paid from day one.

·         Payments going to one named member of a household. Many claimants struggle to budget and payments should be paid to the separate claimants within a household and on a fortnightly rather than monthly basis. With the present policy there is a real danger that if the whole benefit goes to one named individual there is no guarantee that the money will be distributed fairly within the household

·         Claimants need to have their rent paid directly to landlords to avoid the unacceptably high levels of arrears and homelessness that have occurred in the areas where UC already exists. Pushing claimants into debt adds to the stress and insecurity for claimants.

·         An end to benefit sanctions as there is no evidence that sanctioning helps people into work. In fact taking away claimant’s ability to feed themselves and their families prevents them from focusing on finding employment as they are too busy trying to survive. The evidence of the harm that sanctions cause is growing – they are an unnecessary cruelty in our benefits system.

·         Allow all new claimants to apply for Universal credit in jobs centres with the support of trained job centre staff. Forcing new claimant to apply on-line causes real problems for many people who don’t have either access or the IT skills to cope with the complex online application. The use of a paid helpline also needs to be abandoned as claimants cannot afford the expensive rates charged. The planned job centre closures also needs to be reversed as claimants need face to face support to help them back into work and to deal  ...  view the full minutes text for item 13.

Toconsider,in accordance with Council Procedure Rule 13, the following NoticeofMotion tobemoved by Councillor Crowand seconded byCouncillor Boxall.

The Council considered the Notice of Motion 2 ‘Capital Receipts from Right to Buy’ as set out in the Full Council’s agenda. The Motion was moved by Councillor Crow and seconded by Councillor Boxall and in doing so both Councillors presented their reasons for bring forward the motion.

Following the moving to Notion of Motion 2, the Mayor stopped the debate on this item, due to the need for a vote to continue the meeting.

As the business had not been completed within the scheduled 2 hours 30 minutes a vote on continuation, and in line with Council Procedure Rule 2.2, was held. The Mayor required the Full Council to consider if it wished to continue with the meeting.

Having put it to the vote, the Council agreed that the meeting be continued for an additional period not exceeding 30 minutes.

Following the vote to continue the meeting the Mayor reopened the discussion on the

Notion of Motion 2 - ‘Capital Receipts From Right To Buy’.

During the debate on the proposed Notice of Motion, Councillors Lamb, Burrett, McCarthy, Irvine, Joyce, and Lanzer also spoke on the subject.

The Mayor then called for a vote on the substantive motion, which was carried – votes in favour 33, with no votes against or in abstentions.

RESOLVED

In 2012 the Government relaxed the rules on the use of capital receipts from Right To Buy housing sales by allowing local authorities to keep a greater share of those receipts on the condition that they would be used to fund the provision of new affordable housing on a 1 for 1 match-funding basis, but with the proviso that any such capital receipts which were not spent within five years of their receipt would have to be paid back to the Government with interest.

This Council is extremely concerned to learn that, for the first time since this policy was introduced, Crawley Borough Council has been required to pay over £1 million of such receipts back to the Government along with an appropriate interest payment due to those receipts not being spent within the time limit allowed.

Therefore the Council resolves to:

 (i).       publicly express regret at this occurrence, taking into consideration the needs of those people waiting for social housing in the Borough who will now not benefit from the use of over £1 million of these receipts for the purpose for which they were intended, namely the provision of new social housing;

(ii).      instruct the Leader of the Council and the Cabinet Member for Housing to provide a full explanation as to how this was allowed to happen, and to commit to taking all possible steps to ensure that no further receipts have to be paid back to the Government with interest in the future;

(iii).      request that in future, the Leader of the Opposition and the Shadow Cabinet Member for Housing are regularly kept informed as to the situation with regard to the spending of these capital receipts, and therefore made aware in good time as and when there is a danger of further receipts having to be paid back to the Government with interest.

To answer Councillors’ writtenquestionsunder Council Procedure Rule 11.3.

Councillors’ written questions, together with the answers, were tabled as follows:-

Questioner                    Councillor Irvine

Addressed to                 Cabinet Member for Housing

Subject                          Sale of Council Houses

Questioner                    Councillor Crow

Addressed to                 Leader of the Council

Subject                          Cost of running Borough Elections

Questioner                    Councillor Jaggard

Addressed to                 Leader of the Council

Subject                          The number of females having served on the Cabinet.

Questioner                    Councillor Guidera

Addressed to                 Cabinet Member for Wellbeing

Subject                          Memorial Gardens covenant and the ability to relocate the bandstand to the gardens

Questioner                    Councillor Burrett

Addressed to                 Cabinet Member for Housing

Subject                          1-4-1 repayments to the Government

Anopportunityfor CabinetMembersto report verbally (ifnecessary)on issuesrelating totheirPortfolio not covered elsewhere on the agenda.

As the business had not been completed within the additional period of 30 minutes after the initial vote on continuation, and in line with Council Procedure Rule 2.2, the Mayor required the Full Council to consider if it wished to continue with the meeting.

Having put it to the vote the Council agreed that the meeting be continued for an additional period not exceeding 30 minutes.

To answer questionsto Committee Chairs.

Up to 15 minutesisallocatedfor questionsto CommitteeChairs.

No questions were asked to Committee Chairs.

APPENDIXA

DisclosuresofInterestreceivedfrom Councillorsinadvanceofthe meeting