Agenda and minutes

Click here to view the recording of this item on You Tube

Prayers were led by Rev Canon Ling.

To confirm as a correct record the Minutes of the Meetings of the Council held on 14 and 21 January 2021 (previously circulated).

Click here to view the recording of this item on You Tube

RESOLVED:  The Minutes of the meeting held on 21 January 2021 were approved as a correct record and signed by the Mayor.

Please indicate if there are any interests which should be declared.  A declaration of an interest should indicate the nature of the interest (if not already declared on the Register of Interests) and the agenda item to which it relates.  If a disclosable pecuniary interest is declared, the member should withdraw from the room whilst the matter is discussed.

Click here to view the recording of this item on You Tube

Councillor Long declared a non pecuniary interest as a director of Alive West Norfolk which was included within his declaration of interests.

To receive Mayor’s communications and announcements.

None

Pursuant to Minute CAB228: Financial Plan2020/2025of the Cabinet Meeting held on 2 February 2021, the “Financial Plan 2020/2025 and Council Tax Resolution 2021/2022” the document attached as a supplementary to the agenda for consideration and decision includes an updated summary of the Financial Plan 2020/2054, the County Council, the Police and Crime Commissioner - Council Tax for 2021/2022 and details of Parish Precepts and Internal Drainage Boards levies for 2021/2022. 

NOTE:In accordance with Statutory Instrument 2014 No. 165, Local Government, England, The Local Authorities (Standing Orders) (England) (Amendment) Regulations 2014, any decision taken on the Council’s Budget or Council Tax setting must be taken with a recorded vote

Click here to view the recording of this item on You Tube

Pursuant to Minute CAB228: Financial Plan2020/2025of the Cabinet Meeting held on 2 February 2021, the “Financial Plan 2020/2025 and Council Tax Resolution 2021/2022” the document attached as a supplementary to the agenda for consideration and decision included an updated summary of the Financial Plan 2020/2025, the County Council, the Police and Crime Commissioner - Council Tax for 2021/2022 and details of Parish Precepts and Internal Drainage Boards levies for 2021/2022. 

In accordance with Statutory Instrument 2014 No. 165, Local Government, England, The Local Authorities (Standing Orders) (England) (Amendment) Regulations 2014, Council was reminded that any decision taken on the Council’s Budget or Council Tax setting must be taken with a recorded vote

Councillor Long proposed the budget, seconded by Councillor Nockolds.

Councillor Joyce proposed the following amendment to substitute the Cabinet Member for Commercial Services for the Leader of the Council within CAB228: which read -Council is requested to approve the delegated authority to Assistant Director Resources (Section 151 Officer) in consultation with the Leader of the Council to finalise and sign the Grant Agreement to Alive West Norfolk on behalf of Borough Council of King's Lynn & West Norfolk".  The amendment was seconded by Councillor Jones.

The amendment was put to a recorded vote as follows:

The Amendment was lost.

Councillor Joyce proposed the following as amendments to the budget, seconded by Councillor Jones.  Each of the amendments was explained by members of the Labour Group.

"Approve the budget of £21,923,190 for 2021/2022 as amended by the revisions circulated previously, and note the projections for 2022/2023, 2023/2024 and 2024/2025 (as set out in Appendix 1 of this report )."

“Revisions to include.

£100,000 increase in parking income without increase in parking charges

Pilot free parking for fully electric cars.    Cost neutral

Abolish bulky waste item collections charges for first 3 items.  Cost £50,000

Enhance investigation, enforcement and prosecution of fly tipping to include piloting of DNA testing for such as irresponsibly disposed hypodermic needles.  Cost £25,000

Promote the wider take up of welfare payments.    Cost £25,000

Identify funding to improve Council Tax Support Scheme for 2022/2023 financial year.

Draw down from General Reserve Fund to allow free entry to Alive West Norfolk venues during August for local young people.    Cost  ...  view the full minutes text for item C:154

Click here to view the recording of this item on You Tube

Councillor Long proposed and Councillor Nockolds seconded the recommendations set out in the report.

RESOLVED: That proportionality be amended by the change of  seats as follows:

Independent Group gain 2 seats: 1 on Audit Committee and 1 on Licensing Committee.

Labour lose 2 seats: 1 on Audit Committee and 1 on Licensing Committee.

To receive any items of business which in the opinion of the Mayor are urgent. 

None

To receive petitions and public questions in accordance with Standing Order 9.

Click here to view the recording of this item on You Tube

The Mayor invited public questions under standing order 9.

Mr Alistair Kent

"Can the Council confirm that residents with EU Settled Status or Pre-settled Status will be eligible to vote in the forthcoming County Council elections?"

Councillor Long responded that there were multiple elections in May, and that those of settled status would be eligible to vote if they had registered.

By way of supplementary, Mr Kent asked  if information would be made available to electors in their own language.  Councillor Long responded that there would be national guidance and campaigns which would be made available.

Mr Ivor Rowlands

"Shakespeare’s Guildhall Trust (SGT) is a body with significant and relevant expertise in arts, theatre, history, heritage, education, and business, and has widespread community support. The vision of SGT is to establish St George's Guildhall as a community asset, supported by its role as a nationally and internationally significant heritage attraction. To achieve this, the Guildhall should be centrally and actively managed with a single strong common purpose for all activities on site, including food and beverage. SGT wants to work with and support all other parties to make the Guildhall sustainable and cease to be a burden on council finances. Many councillors and members of the public have responded positively to our recently published Vision, and we are grateful for the ideas, suggestions, and cash donations we are receiving.  

What can Shakespeare’s Guildhall Trust now do to make our Vision a reality?"

Councillor Nockolds responded:

The Council has a Vision and a Plan for the Guildhall Creative Complex.

The reason for this is because the Council held several excellent Guildhall Working Party meetings. During the meetings all Stakeholders attended and informed members of how they use the Guildhall and what is their expectation of their future use.

A conclusion of those meetings went to the R & D Panel. The Vision and the Plan came from those meetings.

SGT are in a privileged position for the following reasons.

A) I understand you receive reduced hire fee every time you use the Guildhall. The Council agreed to this to help you, as a new Charity, to produce a programme of events.

B) You were invited to attend a meeting with 2 Council officers during March 2020, just before the first lockdown. At that meeting you gave an undertaking that you would respect the confidentiality of the information you were given as there were legal implications to much of it.

The Plan, such as the Management structure , the  whole capital scheme, costs etc, the proposal to the  HLF and the Arts Council and the Lead Co-ordinator of the Activity Plan was explained to you.

Unfortunately I am now informed that you have produced a 'Vision' which directly stems from the confidential meeting, therefore it mirrors ours as if it were your own.

The SGT along with all stakeholders, some who have Charitable objects similar to yours, are an important part  ...  view the full minutes text for item C:157

(Members are reminded this is a debate, not a question and answer session)

To consider the following recommendations to Council:

CAB229: Capital Programme 2020-25

CAB230: Capital Strategy 2021-22

CAB231: Treasury Management Strategy Statement, Minimum Revenue Provision Policy Statement and Annual Investment Strategy 2021-22

Exempt report

CAB234: Hunstanton Bus Station

Click here to view the recording of this item on You Tube

Councillor Long proposed the recommendations individually, seconded by Councillor Nockolds.

CAB229: Capital Programme 2020-25

The item was debated and put to the vote, which was carried.

Click here to view the recording of this item on You Tube

CAB230: Capital Strategy 2021-22

The item was debated, put to the vote and carried.

Click here to view the recording of this item on You Tube

CAB231: Treasury Management Strategy Statement, Minimum Revenue Provision Policy Statement and Annual Investment Strategy 2021-22

The item was debated, put to the vote and carried.

Click here to view the recording of this item on You Tube

CAB234: Hunstanton Bus Station was approved with no dissenters.

RESOLVED:            That the recommendations from the Cabinet meeting on 2 February be approved.

To consider the following Notice of Motion (1/21), submitted by Councillor M de Whalley:

1.    This Council recognises the democratic mandate given to it by the people of West Norfolk in their overwhelming opposition to the King’s Lynn incinerator proposal. In keeping with this position and in recognition of this Council’s principled opposition to that scheme, this Council cannot and does not support the construction of a waste incinerator in Wisbech.

2.    This Council supports Wisbech Town Council, Fenland District Council and Cambridgeshire County Council in their stated opposition to the Wisbech waste incinerator.

3.    This Council will write to the Secretary of State to make clear its opposition to these plans.

Click here to view the recording of this item on You Tube

Councillor de Whalley proposed the following Notice of Motion (1/21), seconded by Councillor Kemp:

1.    This Council recognises the democratic mandate given to it by the people of West Norfolk in their overwhelming opposition to the King’s Lynn incinerator proposal. In keeping with this position and in recognition of this Council’s principled opposition to that scheme, this Council cannot and does not support the construction of a waste incinerator in Wisbech.

2.    This Council supports Wisbech Town Council, Fenland District Council and Cambridgeshire County Council in their stated opposition to the Wisbech waste incinerator.

3.    This Council will write to the Secretary of State to make clear its opposition to these plans.

Councillor Long proposed amendments to the Motion so that it read as follows, this was accepted by Councillor de Whalley and became the substantive motion:

1.  This Council recognises the democratic mandate given to it by the people of West Norfolk in their overwhelming opposition to the King’s Lynn incinerator proposal. In keeping with this position and in recognition of this Council’s principled opposition to that scheme, this Council does not support the construction of a waste incinerator in Wisbech.

2. This Council supports Wisbech Town Council, Fenland District Council and Cambridgeshire County Council in their stated opposition to the Wisbech waste incinerator.

3. That in doing so we do not negate the need for a technical or planning response, that we will make to the Secretary of state as part of the formal consultation process.

The Motion was debated. Councillor Long, with the required number of supporters requested a recorded vote which was carried out as follows:

RESOLVED: That the amended Motion above be adopted.

At this point in the meeting a vote was required to be taken on continuing to sit beyond the three hour time frame.  This was proposed by Councillor Howman and seconded by Councillor Lawton.

The proposal was debated, and put to the vote.  The proposal was lost.

Members with questions for Cabinet Members on their reports or portfolios, or Chairs of other bodies were requested to put them in emails to the member who would respond to them.  The meeting was then closed.