Agenda and draft minutes

To approve as a correct record the minutes of the meeting of the Council held on 10 July 2024.

RESOLVED that the minutes of the Council meeting held on 10 July 2024 be approved and signed by the Mayor as a correct record.

Members are asked to declare any disclosable pecuniary or affected interests in respect of any matter to be considered at this meeting.

Any Member with a Disclosable Pecuniary Interest in a matter should withdraw from the meeting when the matter is under consideration and should notify the Democratic Services Officer in attendance that they are withdrawing as they have such an interest. If the Disclosable Pecuniary Interest is not entered on the register of Members interests the Monitoring Officer must be notified of the interest within 28 days.

Any Member with an affected Interest in a matter must disclose the interest to the meeting.  There is no requirement to withdraw from the meeting when the interest is only an affected interest, but the Monitoring Officer should be notified of the interest, if not previously notified of it, within 28 days of the meeting.

Councillor Dorothy Hayes declared an affected interest in agenda item 7 as she had been the Chairman of the joint disposal board.

The mayor announced the sad passing of her husband Nick Penfold. He had passed away in late August and as consort, had attended many events with the mayor when his health allowed. 

It was noted that July had been a busy month with a number of interesting events taking place and August had been slightly quieter. Thanks was given to the deputy mayor for stepping in and attending events when the mayor was unable to.

It was noted that the following events were attended by the mayor:

·       Senior Schools Music Festival  

·       Bracknell Chorale Summer Concert

·       Awards Ceremony at Newbold College

·       AGM of Wokingham Arts Society

·       Home Start AGM

·       Winkfield St Mary’s Summer Fair

·       Opened High Score in Princess Square

·       Reading Pride

·       Citizenship Ceremonies

The following were attended by the Deputy Mayor:

·       Sovereign's Parade at RMAS

·       King's Award for Voluntary Service Nominees

·       Reading Pride

Mayor’s charity

The mayor’s charity 2024/25 was The Ark and Andrea McCombie, the chief executive officer was in attendance to speak about the work of the charity.

The chief executive advised of the history to the charity and that over the years it had greatly expanded its reach. The charity provided a number of social activities for disabled people, particularly those that found themselves quite isolated. This ranged from a Friday night disco to day outings. They had just completed a project with Holloway University, which hopefully would be published in the next couple of weeks demonstrating the value of those types of activities. 

The charity had also been involved with helping vulnerable people during the pandemic with support in transporting medication and doing shopping rounds.  They had delivered some 45,000 volunteering hours at the centre which took a lot of coordination and was a much valued service.

It also provided the signal for carers service on behalf of the council which provided support to unpaid family carers in the borough. There were just under 1,000 carers registered with it now and as a basic offer provided information and advice or one to one support for those in greater need. The care support worker in place had around a 99% success rate for attendance allowance and carers allowance forms and was highly valued.  She had won a Pride of Bracknell Award this year.

Overall, the charity was offering a vast amount of services to residents, and were excited to be the mayor’s charity.  Not only did it give them the ability to raise funds, it gave them the opportunity to continue to support more people as demand increased. They also felt privileged to be able to raise awareness for disabled people and unpaid carers. The Ark looked forward to work with the council and thanked the mayor and councillors for their support.

Staff Raffle

There would be a staff raffle before Christmas with all proceeds going to the mayor’s charity. Prizes for this were required and any donations from councillors, or people they knew, would be appreciated.

To receive the Leader’s report on the work of the Executive since the Council meeting held on 10 July 2024.

Council is asked to resolve a recommendation in respect of:

·       Capital Expenditure Outturn 2023/24

·       Revenue Expenditure Outturn 2023/24

 The leader of the council, Councillor Temperton, presented her report on the work of the executive since that reported at the Council meeting on 10 July 2024. The executive had met once on 16 July 2024.

The leader highlighted the matters that had been considered within her presentation:

Executive Report - Leader's Presentation .

The report contained recommendations that the council was asked to resolve in

respect of the following:

• Capital Expenditure Outturn 2023/24
• Revenue Expenditure Outturn 2023/24

On the proposition of Councillor Neil, Executive Member for Finance and Corporate improvement and seconded by Councillor Temperton it was

RESOLVED that the Council carry forward the specific schemes listed in paragraph 5.5 of the Capital Expenditure Outturn 2023/24 report, being:

• Management of open spaces software

• Library printers

On the proposition of Councillor Neil, Executive Member for Finance and Corporate Improvement, and seconded by Councillor Temperton it was

RESOLVED that Council noted the Treasury Management performance in 2023/24 as set out in Annexe B of the Revenue Expenditure Outturn 2023/24 report.

To approve the adoption of the proposed Contract Standing Orders into the Council’s Constitution. 

The council considered the report regarding a set of contract standing orders for inclusion in the council’s constitution.

On the proposition of Councillor O’Regan, Chairman of the Governance and Audit Committee and seconded by Councillor Neil it was RESOLVED that the proposed Contract Standard Orders into the Constitution be approved.

By resident, Chris Wright, to Councillor Temperton,  The Leader and Executive Member for Council Strategy and Climate Change:

At the Joint Waste Board Re3 meeting on October 8, 2020, which is on public record and video, it was clearly discussed that the data collection for the booking system at the Longshot Lane recycling centre should be minimal, focusing primarily on postcode data to identify residents from the respective council areas. This approach was intended to balance operational needs with the privacy rights of residents. The meeting emphasized: "We will ask all people making the booking to just let us know what their postcode is... We tried to take as little data as possible from residents, but only enough to make sure that we can identify where people are from the re3 area."

However, following a complaint to the council about the collection of data, which now includes name and detailed address information, in the Stage Three complaint response dated November 13, 2023, Chief Executive Susan Halliwell defended the broader collection of personal data, including names, email addresses, and postal addresses, justifying it under legal obligations and operational efficiencies. Ms. Halliwell also stated that these data collection practices were approved by councillors at the time of the system's introduction in 2020, saying: "I can clarify that the element of the privacy notice that you have highlighted has not changed since the system was introduced in 2020 which was approved by councillors at the time." This is false, it was not approved as referenced in the 2020 recording.

Given this context, I have several concerns related to the Nolan Principles, which underpin the ethical standards expected of public office officials:

1.     Integrity: The deviation from the initially agreed minimal data collection approach without councillor approval or public consultation undermines the trust that residents place in the council's commitment to protecting their privacy.

2.     Accountability: The decision to implement broader data collection practices appears to have been made without formal approval by councillors, lacking the necessary oversight and accountability.

3.     Openness: The lack of transparency and public scrutiny in making such a significant change to data collection policies suggests a departure from the principle of openness.

Furthermore, Ms. Halliwell's statement that the current data collection practices were approved in 2020 seems misleading, as the meeting records indicate an emphasis on minimal data collection.

In light of these concerns, can you explain Ms. Halliwell’s misleading statement and why the unelected council officials deviated from the initially agreed minimal data collection approach without councillor approval or public consultation, and what steps will the council take to redress this decision and rectify the damage to public trust caused by this misleading statement which has breached at least one of the Nolan Principles?

By resident Chris Turrell, to Councillor Gillbe, Executive Member for Planning, Transport and Countryside:

In the Local Plan adopted by Bracknell Forest Council on 19 March of this year, annual housing provision was set at 614 dwellings. This followed a full process  ...  view the full agenda text for item 20.

20.           Question Submitted Under the Public Participation Scheme

The questions and responses submitted under the Public Speaking Scheme were published in advance of the meeting – Public Participation – Question and answer

By resident, Chris Wright, to Councillor Temperton, the Leader and Executive Member for Council Strategy and Climate Change

Chris Wright asked for further clarification specifically on whether the chief executive made a misleading statement when she said that the element of the privacy notice was not changed since the system was introduced in 2020, which was approved by councillors at the time. This difference being from what was agreed and published in the transcript of the RE3 Joint Waste Board meeting in 2020. Clarification was asked on whether this statement was misleading.

Councillor Purnell, the Executive Member for Environment and Community Cohesion, responded that the council took concerns about transparency and accountability very seriously, particularly when it came to management data and adherence to principles of good governance. The statement made by the chief executive was intended to clarify the council position on the booking system and specifically in relation to data collection practices.

By resident Chris Turrell, to Councillor Gillbe, Executive Member for Planning, Transport and Countryside:

As a supplementary question Chris Turrell asked if the council 's consultation response included references to an evidence-based approach to planning policy and neighbourhood plans? 

In response, Councillor Gillbe the Executive Member for Planning, Transport and Countryside, advised that it was a thorough process that they were having to go through, but assured the speaker, and the wider public, that all consultation responses on any subject were evidence led and did take account of the planning policy framework.   

(i)         By Councillor McLean to Councillor Wright, Executive Member for Adults and Public Health:

The new Labour Government having taken the winter fuel allowance away from many elderly residents, what steps will the Council be taking to make sure those effected are kept warm this winter?

(ii)        By Councillor Harrison to Councillor Jefferies, Executive Member for Culture, Delivery and Public Protection:

Following yet another occurrence of waste being fly-tipped in Wellers' Lane in Warfield, will the Executive Member responsible please update the Council on how many new CCTV installations to deter this crime have been made since Council last passed a resolution on fly-tipping?

(iii)       By Councillor Allen to Councillor Neil, Executive Member for Finance & Corporate Improvement:

            In the 2023/2024 financial year, Bracknell Forest Council posted an overspend of £1.225M – the only overspend the Council has ever had.  How much additional funding does the Council need from central government to balance our books for this year and for the following two years?

(iv)       By Councillor McLean to Councillor Temperton, Leader and Executive Member for Council Strategy and Climate Change:

We understand that a decision has been made to re-name the Executive as the Cabinet.  How much will this cost our residents?

The four questions and responses submitted under the Council Procedure Rule 10 were published in advance of the meeting –Council Procedural Rule 10 – Question and answers

(i)         By Councillor McLean to Councillor Wright, Executive Member  for Adults and Public Health:

As a supplementary to his questiondetailed in the agenda papers, Councillor McLean asked the Executive Member whether they supported Peter Swallow’s recent block on an attempt to stop the cuts to the winter fuel allowance.

Councillor Wright, Executive Member for Adults and Public Health responded that she was not aware of this recent occurrence and would look into it. She felt that the Council had a very good system to support people struggling with their energy bills and there was a welfare program in place. They were well aware of that people were struggling and they knew where to come to with warm hubs and support of voluntary services.

The Mayor advised that it was not relevant to the supplementary question whether or not the executive member supported Peter Swallow, the member of parliament for Bracknell, proposal to the House of Commons and referred to the question which had been already answered.

(ii)        By Councillor Harrison to Councillor Jefferies, Executive Member for Culture, Delivery and Public Protection:

As a supplementary to his question detailed in the agenda papers, Councillor Harrison requested whether the executive member would commit to getting funding for additional cameras to be built into next year's budget plans? 

In response, Councillor Jefferies, Executive Member for Culture, Delivery and Public Protection advised that he was fully committed to upholding public protection for Bracknell Forest. The fly-tipping for environmental crime fell under the Public Protection Partnership (PPP) remit and this was a very important matter to the administration. On, 1September 2024, members were invited to participate in a session being run by the PPP and collaborate on priorities and the pressures that affected the PPP. The strategy around environmental crime went far beyond CCTV.  The current strategy took an intelligence led approach to tackling the issue of fly-tipping. This included looking at trends and locations identified by the analysis of intelligence as well as looking at high risk areas. Hotspots were constantly sought to raise awareness and seek information from the public. The PPP would continue to deliver an effective service. 

However, it was noted that, financial pressures would be dictating the priorities of the future but would like to commit and assure that this would remain an important issue on the council’s priorities in protecting the public.

(iii)       By Councillor Allen to Councillor Neil, Executive Member for Finance & Corporate Improvement:

As a supplementary to his question detailed in the agenda papers, Councillor Allen first asked for clarification on the answer given that when referring to Bracknell Forest’s core spending power reducing by 8% in real terms between 2010 and

2014, that it actually meant 2010 and 2024. It was confirmed that this was correct.

Councillor Allen went on to ask the executive  ...  view the full minutes text for item 21.

Motion 05/2024 moved by Councillor P Thompson and seconded by Councillor M Forster

Council expresses concern in relation to the Government’s statement in Parliament on 29 July, that the previous Government’s national New Hospital Programme (NHP) is to be completely reviewed. This has brought uncertainty and probable delays to the provision of improved, safe and modern hospital services for residents of Bracknell Forest. Council supports the statements made by the Royal Berkshire and Frimley Park hospitals that, pending clarification of what the Government’s review will entail, they will continue to progress at pace with their re-development plans.

Council notes that:

·       Bracknell Forest is the only borough in Berkshire without its own acute or community hospital. Consequently, our residents rely mainly on the Secondary Care hospital services provided by the hospitals at Frimley Park, the Royal Berkshire, and Wexham Park.

·       Frimley Park Hospital is included in the NHP for complete re-development, because it was built using Reinforced Autoclaved Aerated Concrete (RAAC), which makes up around 65 per cent of the current building. RAAC deteriorates over time and is now at the end of its life, which the hospital has said poses a potential safety risk to patients, visitors, and staff. Two wards have already been closed, and temporary measures are being taken by the Trust.

·       The Royal Berkshire Hospital is also included in the NHP, for substantial re-development. That Hospital Trust has said that its ageing estate makes it difficult for them to deliver modern healthcare in the way they would like – the buildings were designed at a different time to care for fewer patients with different needs than those of today.

·       Both hospitals’ redevelopments were due to be completed by 2030, but the National Audit Office has reported numerous delays in implementing the NHP, and they have described it as ‘an ambitious and high-risk programme in many ways’.

·       The demand on our hospitals is huge. Over 7 million people in England are currently waiting for NHS hospital treatment. Also, the population of Bracknell Forest has almost doubled from 64,000 in 1971 to some 125,000 currently. Further increases are expected, not least because of the Government’s intention to require more new housing to be built in our Borough.

·       At its meeting on 19 March this year, Council approved the establishment of a Joint Health Overview and Scrutiny Committee, jointly with Hampshire County Council and Surrey County Council, to scrutinise the relocation of Frimley Park Hospital. Council appointed Councillors Egglestone and Virgo to sit on the committee; and requested them to undertake a programme of public engagement activities to communicate the committee’s work and decisions to residents, and to enable residents the opportunity to feedback into the process so that their needs and views are properly represented.

Council:

·       Asks the Leader of the Council to convey to the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, this Council’s concern over the impact on residents of any delay in the re-development of Frimley Park and the Royal Berkshire hospitals.

·       Asks Councillors Egglestone  ...  view the full agenda text for item 22.

Since the agenda had been published the mayor advised that there was a minor alteration to the motion (highlighted below in bold).

“Council expresses concern in relation to the Government’s statement in Parliament on 29 July, that the previous Government’s national New Hospital Programme (NHP) is to be completely reviewed because of their inadequate funding of the programme. This has brought uncertainty and probable delays to the provision of improved, safe and modern hospital services for residents of Bracknell Forest. Council supports the statements made by the Royal Berkshire and Frimley Park hospitals that, pending clarification of what the Government’s review will entail, they will continue to progress at pace with their re-development plans.”

Motion 05/2024 was moved by Councillor P Thompson and seconded by

Councillor M Forster.

“Council expresses concern in relation to the Government’s statement in Parliament on 29 July, that the previous Government’s national New Hospital Programme (NHP) is to be completely reviewed because of their inadequate funding of the programme. This has brought uncertainty and probable delays to the provision of improved, safe and modern hospital services for residents of Bracknell Forest. Council supports the statements made by the Royal Berkshire and Frimley Park hospitals that, pending clarification of what the Government’s review will entail, they will continue to progress at pace with their re-development plans,

• Bracknell Forest is the only borough in Berkshire without its own acute or community hospital. Consequently, our residents rely mainly on the Secondary Care hospital services provided by the hospitals at Frimley Park, the Royal Berkshire, and Wexham Park.
• Frimley Park Hospital is included in the NHP for complete re-development, because it was built using Reinforced Autoclaved Aerated Concrete (RAAC), which makes up around 65 per cent of the current building. RAAC deteriorates over time and is now at the end of its life, which the hospital has said poses a potential safety risk to patients, visitors, and staff. Two wards have already been closed, and temporary measures are being taken by the Trust.
• The Royal Berkshire Hospital is also included in the NHP, for substantial re-development. That Hospital Trust has said that its ageing estate makes it difficult for them to deliver modern healthcare in the way they would like – the buildings were designed at a different time to care for fewer patients with different needs than those of today.
• Both hospitals’ redevelopments were due to be completed by 2030, but the National Audit Office has reported numerous delays in implementing the NHP, and they have described it as ‘an ambitious and high-risk programme in many ways’.
• The demand on our hospitals is huge. Over 7 million people in England are currently waiting for NHS hospital treatment. Also, the population of Bracknell Forest has almost doubled from 64,000 in 1971 to some 125,000 currently. Further increases are expected, not least because of the Government’s intention to require more new housing to be built in our Borough.
• At its meeting on 19 March this year, Council approved the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 22.