Agenda and minutes

To receive declarations of interest from Members on items contained within this agenda.

Although a Member declared an interest in claiming the Winter Fuel Allowance, the Service Director- Legal & Governance / Monitoring Officer advised that, in line with national guidance , any Member receiving the Allowance could still take part in the debate at item 11 of this agenda.

To consider the Minutes of the previous meeting(s)

Resolved:              That the minutes of the meeting held on 24 July, 2024 be agreed as a correct record.

The Mayor made announcements on the following:

The Mayor welcomed the opening of a new production, ‘The Company of Wolves’ at the New Vic Theatre.

The Mayor was holding a charity event at Holditch Miners Club on 12^th October and would appreciate Members’ support.

The Remembrance Sunday Parade would take place on Sunday 10^th November and again called on Members’ support for the event. 

The Leader introduced a report on the Council’s Annual Report for 2023-24 which provided a summary of work and outcomes achieved during the first year of the Council’s 2022-2026 Council Plan.   A link to the Annual report was included within the report.

The Leader outlined some of the achievements of the past year which included a year long celebration of community events for the Borough’s 850^th anniversary of its Royal Charter; the commissioning of a statue of the late Queen Elizabeth II which would be installed in the Queens Gardens next month; becoming National Champions at Britain in Bloom Awards; Progress was made with the One Council Programme.

Councillor Sweeney pointed out that the Peer team continued to be impressed with how the Council managed its finances and found that the Council had strong leadership, financial stability and was poised to deliver once in a lifetime regeneration projects.

Resolved:    (i)       That the Council’s Annual Report for 2023-24 be received.

Watch the debate here

Consideration was given to a report setting out the findings and recommendations of a Scrutiny Committee of Inquiry following a Council resolution to undertake a public hearing.

The Chair of the Committee of Inquiry, Councillor Bettley-Smith introduced the report stating that the Committee had met on five occasions prior to the first inquiry day which took place on 23 July.  A second Inquiry took place on 14 August.  The findings of the Committee were listed on page 28 of the agenda report.   And the recommendation were listed at page 33 of the report.

It had been reported in a Parliamentary debate that Walleys Quarry was the worst performing landfill site in the country.

Councillor Dave Jones stated that the impact of Walleys Quarry on residents had been the Council’s primary focus for several years and the odours continued to have a detrimental impact on people’s health.  Public Health and the UK Health Security Agency had stated that the levels of H2S in the environment surrounding the site was of a concentration that would impact on human health, both physically and mentally.

The Leader stated that the report had been built on vigorous analysis, community input and expert guidance.  It could now be used by the Council to push for closure of the quarry and capping of the site and holding the Environment Agency to account for their failings.  The report should go to the Office for Environmental Protection for them to investigate.  It should also go to the new government and the new Secretary of State as the Council still wished to see a public inquiry.

Councillor Sweeney questioned what the point was of the Environment Agency if they could not deal with issues such as this. 

Councillor Whieldon stated that no representative from Walleys Quarry was present throughout the Inquiry but they had put something in writing which stated ‘we note that the UK Health Protection Agency concluded in a recent study that living close to a well-managed landfill site does not pose a significant risk to human health.  We work hard to ensure our operators do not impact local communities’.   This quote suggested that with the report of the Committee of Inquiry and all of the medical responses – Walleys Quarry was not a well-managed site.

Councillor Fox-Hewitt stated that some of the witness testimonies had been shocking and upsetting.  There was a need for all who were responsible – the operators and agencies to be held accountable. 

Councillor Adcock stated that there had been many opportunities to resolve the matter sooner if the right people had been listened to.  Local doctors had not been listened to regarding the health impacts of raising the tonnage; local campaigners had raised concerns about illegal dumping occurring; people had previously raised concerns about the risk of fire.  What was needed now was for people to be listened to.

Councillor Brown stated that she had met a lady, completely by accident, who lectured in waste management and she had a slide referring  ...  view the full minutes text for item 5.

The Portfolio Holder for Finance, Town Centres and Growth introduced the Treasury Management Annual Report for 2023/24, which had been produced in line with legislative requirements.

Councillor Stubbs asked the Portfolio Holder if the report could be modernised with the possibility of sections 5 and 6 being localised.   In addition, referring to the actual interest income amounted to £1.3m, the Portfolio Holder was asked where in the MTFS the amount was reflected.

The Leader stated that the request to modernise the report would be taken on board.  Regarding the interest amount, the Leader stated that the Council’s Finance Officer would update Councillor Stubbs on that matter.

Resolved:              (i)       That the Treasury Management Annual Report for

2023/24 be noted.

Watch the debate here

The Leader, Councillor Simon Tagg presented the statement that had been circulated about the activities and decisions made by Cabinet to allow questions and comments. Reference was made to the Council’s Annual Report and the Leader stated that this Council ‘made things happen’ and this Statement reflected that.

Questions were raised and responses were provided as follows.

On paragraph 2 – Medium Term Financial Strategy 2025/26 to 2029/30

Councillor Stubbs stated that Appendix A went to the Finance, Assets and Performance Scrutiny Committee and showed £100,000 for restructuring.  The Portfolio Holder was unable to provide details for it.  Would the Leader be able to provide details.  Also, given the average public sector pay awards, was the Leader happy with the proposal in the MTFS as it did not seem to be overly prudent.

The Leader stated that the restructuring was to build capacity in the legal team.

The Portfolio Holder for Finance, Town Centres and Growth stated that the Council’s Section 151 Officer had meetings with other 151 officers across the County who discussed what they felt would be an appropriate figure. 

Councillor Holland welcomed the MTFS and was struck by how positive the outcome was. Reference was made to the One Council Programme and its success in bringing savings to the Council and transforming the way the Council worked.

On paragraph 3 – Bradwell Dingle Play and Recreational Facility Improvements

Councillor Fox-Hewitt asked the Leader for assurance that all ward councillors would be involved in any meetings with partners or consultants regarding the dingle.

The Portfolio Holder for Sustainable Environment confirmed that it would be a good idea to get both the ward councillors and Friends of Bradwell Dingle involved.

The Leader stated that a commitment to include local members was made at Cabinet.  A consultation had also taken place to include local residents.

 On paragraph 5 – North Staffordshire Local Air Quality Plan

Councillor Gorton asked if the Basford Bus Gate had now been abandoned and also asked the Leader for the schemes and measures that would be put in place to improve air quality along Basford Bank.

Councillor Holland stated that earlier in the year, the government minister at the time had said that there was no longer a need for a bus gate and it would therefore be scrapped.  Councillor Holland wondered if the new government were of the same opinion as he was concerned that they would take a different view and reintroduce it.

Councillor Reece asked why councillors from the Wolstanton ward had not been briefed on the work that had been undertaken by this Council, Stoke on Trent City Council or Staffordshire County Council and why hadn’t the Health, Wellbeing and Environment Scrutiny Committee been provided with any updates.

The Leader stated that the issue had been in flux for a number of years and had now reached a point where it would not need to be put in place.  Members were advised that Stoke on Trent City Council took a confidential report  ...  view the full minutes text for item 7.

Written reports are attached for the following:

a)       Planning Committee

b)       Licensing and Public Protection Committee

Reports for the Audit and Standards Committee, Licensing and Public Protection Committee and the Planning Committee were attached to the agenda.

Resolved:    That the reports be received.      

Watch the debate here

Written reports are attached for the following:

a)              Health, Wellbeing and Environment Scrutiny Committee

b)              Economy and Place Scrutiny Committee

c)               Finance, Assets and Performance Scrutiny Committee

The reports for the Health, Wellbeing and Environment Scrutiny Committee,  Economy and Place Scrutiny Committee and Finance Assets and Performance Scrutiny Committee had been circulated with the agenda.

Resolved:    That the reports be received.

Watch the debate here

A motion has been received regarding winter fuel payments.

A Motion was received concerning changes to winter fuel payments and protecting pensioners from fuel poverty, proposed by Councillor Holland and seconded by Councillor Simon Tagg.

Following a debate, a named vote was taken.

In Favour (Y) –  35

Against (N) - 0

Abstain – 0

The motion was carried

Watch the debate here

Question from Councillor Dave Jones to the Portfolio Holder for Strategic Planning

“My question relates to action to be taken by the Council at 5 Boggs Cottages, where personal permission was granted, at appeal, for the landowner and family to reside at the site following discharge of a number of conditions.  Under the appeal, the conditions of granting permission required discharge of drainage details, provisions for facilities for water and sewerage by the 20th March 2023.  The Council has since refused to discharge these conditions.  Given that the deadline for meeting these conditions was nearly 18 months ago, can the Portfolio Holder outline when the Council will take action over the failure to meet planning conditions.”  

The Portfolio Holder for Strategic Planning stated that the planning permission in question was granted on appeal by the Planning Inspectorate and subject to a number of conditions.  It had become clear that compliance with the condition to provide a satisfactory drainage solution raised some technical issues which to date the owner had been unable to overcome. Consequently, the Council had not been able to discharge this condition.  In terms of subsequent enforcement action the Council had to consider a number of factors including what options would be available to enable the applicant to achieve an appropriate drainage scheme but also what the actual impact and harm of there being no drainage scheme in place was having on local residents/environment.

At the same time officers had been considering matters, they had also engaged legal advice.  In the light of national guidance and the Council’s own approved Enforcement Policy the  Council were obliged to assess the harm caused by the lack of an approved drainage scheme on the local residents and environment.  If no valid reasons could be put forward then arguably it would not be expedient to pursue any enforcement action.

Councillor Jones asked a supplementary question:

“Having spoken to the Planning Inspectorate he had been informed that the Council could take action as of 20 March, 2023.  Would the Portfolio Holder commit to taking action now, rather than later”.

The Portfolio Holder stated that part of the problem was with regard to the discharge of a particular condition.  Advice so far had been that the condition could not be discharged at this point in time.  Advice would need to be taken from lawyers regarding that but gave an undertaking that he would put that question to them and would report back to Councillor Jones.

Question from Councillor Paul Northcott to the Portfolio Holder for Strategic Planning

“There has been coverage in the media about the resurrection of plans for a ‘high-speed’ rail link between Birmingham and Manchester. This would follow the same route as HS2 through Newcastle Borough affecting both my Borough Ward and County Division.

Does the Portfolio Holder agree with me that such a move would be a hammer blow to residents along the proposed route in Whitmore & Madeley who were relieved that HS2 had been scrapped by the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 11.

To receive from Members any petitions which they wish to present to the Council.

There were no petitions.

To consider any communications which pursuant to Section B4, Rule 9 of the constitution are, in the opinion of the Mayor, of an urgent nature and to pass thereon such resolutions as may be  deemed necessary.

There was no urgent business

To resolve that the public be excluded from the meeting during consideration of the following report(s) as it is likely that there will be disclosure of exempt information as defined in paragraphs contained within Part 1 of Schedule 12A (as amended) of the Local Government Act 1972.

There were no confidential items.