Agenda and draft minutes

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

The Leader declared an interest in item 6, the Borough Local Plan - the landowners of proposed AB2 site were clients of a company that the Leader worked with in a private capacity as a senior advisor.

Councillor Downs declared an interest in item 6 – as a resident in close proximity to a site being discussed this evening.

Councillor Jones declared an interest in item 6  - as an employee of Harper & Keele Veterinary School but would take part in the debate.  Also, a declaration of interest was made for item 10 – protecting green spaces as both of his children attended Madeley High School.

The following Members declared an interest in Item 10 – withdrawing from the Local Government Association – who had benefited from training and guidance from the LGA: Cllrs: Beeston; Bettley-Smith; Fear; Holland; Heesom; Hutchison; Lefroy; Sedgley; Swain; J Tagg; Whieldon; Whitmore and S Tagg who had also undertaken mentoring for the LGA.  

To consider the Minutes of the previous meeting(s)

Councillor Whieldon referred to item 15 on the Minutes regarding her request for a timescale for the implementation of the recommendations and asked when that would be done.

The Mayor advised that a detailed report would be brought to the September meeting of Full Council.

Resolved:              That the minutes of the meeting held on 20 May, 2026 be agreed as a correct record.

The Mayor made one announcement:

His Civic Service would be held on Sunday, 26^th July, 2026 at St Giles Church with the procession commencing at 10.15am approximately, from Castle House.

This report includes an amendment from the Conservative Group

The Leader introduced a report and moved the Motion setting out proposed changes to the Council’s Constitution stating that the changes were about clarity, efficiency and accountability. 

The proposed changes were shown at paragraph 1.2 of the report and concerned decision making, Council and Cabinet Procedure Rules, Planning Committee provisions- which had been set nationally, Code of Conduct complaints and the removal of substitutes from meetings.

Councillor Rogerson seconded the Motion stated that the proposed amendments would keep the Council’s arrangements clear, effective and fit for purpose.  He welcomed the changes made to the Council procedure rules.

Councillor Holland introduced the proposed amendments put forward by the Conservative group.  He stated that the Conservative group opposed on principle, measures within the report that impeded democratic accountability.  They were open to the reform of the  petition scheme and asked the Leader to justify his proposed changes.  The Conservative group amendment called for a Working Group to discuss the changes.

Councillor Simon Tagg seconded the amendment and reserved his right to speak.

The Leader and Councillor Rogerson did not consent to the Conservative groups’ amendment.

A debate took place on the Conservative groups’ amendment.

Comments were made by Councillors’ Fear and Whieldon stating that the proposed changes would close down local debate and also that the changes were not clear.

Councillor Lefroy stated that the restrictions placed on petitions would affect smaller communities of less than 100 people  and the Leader was asked to look into that point as part of the Working Group proposed by the Conservative group.  In addition, there seemed to be no provision for petitions between 101 and 249 signatures.

Councillor Jones raised concerns regarding appeals being delegate to the Chief Executive, particularly in terms of impartiality and whether the change would be ACAS compliant. Concerns were also raised regarding the questions time frame as they would have to be submitted before the Council agenda was available.

Councillor Parker arrived at 7.45pm

Councillor Simon Tagg stated that the Conservative group had concerns about several of the proposals and the change in direction of the Council.  He agreed that the changes to Planning with the National Scheme of Delegation was out of this Council’s control.  Reference was made to the Leader writing to the Government putting the case forward for change and Councillor Tagg asked that the Leader write a letter to the Secretary of State relating to the changes to Planning arrangements stating that local accountability was needed. 

Councillor Tagg referred to the removal of substitute members from committees and the benefit that would be lost in areas such as sub-committees.

The Leader stated that the peoples democratic rights had not been nullified as   they could attend committees, ask questions and submit petitions. 

A vote was taken on the Conservative groups’ amendment.

In favour:      14

Against:        25

Abstentions:  02

The Conservative amendment fell and a debate took place on the original Motion.

Councillor Simon Tagg stated that his group would be voting against the Motion but asked the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 4.

This item includes an amendment by the Conservative Group

The Leader and Councillor Downs left the room during the debate on the following item.

The Deputy Leader presented a report seeking to adopt the Newcastle-under-Lyme Borough Local Plan (2020-2040).  He stated that the Local Plan had been prepared, promoted and submitted by the previous administration.  Four consultations had been carried out prior to its submission.  Modifications were consulted on in late 2025 and changes were requested by the Planning Inspector before the Plan could be made sound, including  the removal of six proposed housing allocations.  The Planning Inspector’s final report arrived on 19 May, 2026, the day before the current administration took control. 

The new administration wrote to the Planning Inspector asking if changes could be made but were advised that no further changes could be made and that a new plan-making process would be required.  Therefore, it was felt that the danger of not adopting the Plan could have serious consequences for the Borough as it would fall back onto old policies.

Councillor Ashworth seconded the Motion stated that the Local Plan was not what the Administration would have written and therefore had tried to change it through writing to the Planning Inspector. Challenges were made to targets around BREAM, energy statements, whole life carbon assessments and a fixed 10% on site renewable target.  Stronger protection was sought for agricultural land, a more pro-business approach in Policy EMP1 and tougher controls on HMO’s and a Borough wide Article 4 Direction was pushed for.

Councillor Fear presented the amendment submitted by the Conservative group.  He referred to the standard calculation which was used to calculate the amount of housing required in the Borough and therefore, any sites removed from the Local Plan would require another site being put in.  If the previous administration had not got a Plan in place, the additional 2000 houses that the Government had imposed in the new figures would have had to have been included in the Plan being discussed this evening.

The Conservative groups’ amendment, at page 211 of the agenda set out a number of true facts which indicate that the previous administration had done whatever it could to protect green spaces in the Borough.  Councillor Fear pointed out a typing error at point D where it should read AB2 instead of B2.

Councillor Simon Tagg seconded the amendment and reserved his right to speak.

Councillors’ Shaw and Ashworth consented to the amendment.

Councillor Fear stated that the Plan had been developed to try and ensure that impositions of national government were imposed upon the Borough as lightly as possible.  Reference was made to paragraph 3.17 which stated that, although the Borough was under the national average for unemployment, the figures were slightly over the national average in Staffordshire.  It was hoped that the Local Plan would help to provide the jobs required to bring the local unemployment figures down.

The Local Plan was good and sound and had gone through ample consultation and was offering the minimum amount of housing imposed  ...  view the full minutes text for item 5.

The Leader and Councillor Downs returned to the room

The Leader, Councillor Gullis presented the statement that had been circulated about the activities and decisions made by Cabinet to allow questions and comments.  He stated that in a short period of time, the new Administration had saved the taxpayer £6.2m by cancelling net-zero plans for the electric bin lorries.  He was proud of the introduction of the Community Funding and the Article Four Direction.

Questions were raised and responses were provided as follows.

On paragraph 2 – Waste Vehicles – Procurement Saving

Councillor Hutchison stated that the road map to net-zero had £7m for fleet replacement.  Electric RCV’s were put into the budget 4 years ago -in line with Government guidelines.  As the previous Portfolio Holder, Councillor Hutchison had agreed that the Council would not be buying electric waste collection vehicles.  The Council had been successfully using hydro treated vegetable oil in its vehicles, reducing carbon emissions so there was no need to purchase  electric vehicles.  Councillor Hutchison had considered it prudent to leave the budget unchanged and were acting with good judgement thinking about any possible penalties from the Government for not purchasing electric vehicles  and any price increases in the purchase of future waste vehicles.

The Leader stated that it was a serious implication to infer that the Council’s Section 151Officer had not made sure that the £2.1m saving from changing the Council’s procurement rules was a genuine saving.

There was a plan in the Capital Programme for a future procurement for electric collection vehicles.  There was a quote of £4.2m for the infrastructure that was not budgeted for.  £6.2m had been saved for the people of Newcastle from future spending in the Capital Programme and ending net-zero.  

Councillor Simon Tagg referred to Hansard where it stated that, previously as an MP, Councillor Gullis had welcomed a new electric bus fleet in Stoke on Trent through an investment and asked the Leader what had changed.

The Leader stated that he did argue for the electric buses in Stoke on Trent because a private company was willing to invest almost £40m into improving the bus network which had not been improved in over a decade.

Councillor Mark Harrison stated that he was not opposed to electric vehicles.  In his professional background he had been involved in electric vehicle technology – specifically air taxis.  For solar power, 3mw would be needed to charge a fleet of vehicles which equated to approximately 7000 solar panels.

Vehicle performance would dip in the winter so the national grid would have to be relied upon.

Paragraph 3 - Article 4 Direction

Councillor Casy-Hulme welcomed this particularly the recognition of uncontrolled growth of Houses of Multiple Occupation(HMO’s) and their affect on local communities.  The Article 4 Direction would ensure that they were subject to the Planning process allowing their impact to be properly assessed before any approval was given.  

The Leader congratulated Councillor Casey-Hulme for her hard work in her Ward in respect of HMO’s.  ...  view the full minutes text for item 6.

The following reports are attached:

a)       Finance, Assets and Performance Scrutiny Committee

b)       Economy and Place Scrutiny Committee

c)       Health, Wellbeing and Environment Scrutiny Committee

Reports for the Economy and Place Scrutiny Committee, the Health Wellbeing and Environment Scrutiny Committee and the Finance, Assets and Performance Scrutiny Committee were attached to the agenda.

Resolved:    That the reports be received.

The following reports are attached:

a)       Audit and Standards Committee

b)       Planning Committee

c)       Licensing and Public Protection Committee

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

Members were advised that the Audit and Standards Committee had not met since the last meeting of the Full Council.

Resolved:    That the reports be received.

Four Motions have been received:

·       Climate Emergency Declaration.  This includes an amendment by the Conservative group

·       Save Our Borough Campaign. This includes an amendment by the Reform UK group

·       Protection of Council-Owned Green Spaces.  This includes an amendment by the Reform UK group

·       Withdrawal from Local Government Association membership. This includes an amendment by the Conservative group

Four Motions were received:

The first Motion concerned the rescinding of the Climate Emergency Declaration, and was proposed by Councillor Gullis and Seconded by Councillor Ashworth.

The Leader stated that the Council would continue with practical, local environmental action but without the costly net-zero approach.  The UK accounted for less than 1% of global territorial greenhouse gas emissions and therefore the taxpayers money should be directed towards statutory duties and residents priorities.

A resolution was passed to continue the meeting as it approached the three hour deadline.

Councillor Ashworth, in seconded the rescinding of the Climate Emergency Declaration stating that it did not mean that the Council had stopped caring about the environment but meant refusing to foot the bill for problems that this Council did not create.

Councillor Parker left the meeting at 10pm

An amendment to the Motion - shown at page 231 of the agenda, had been proposed by Councillor Simon Tagg and seconded by Councillor Hutchison. 

Councillor Simon Tagg presented the Conservative group’s amendment which, although the new Administration’s  fresh approach was acknowledged, noted that a lot of valuable work had gone into the policy and it was important to commit to the impact of changing climate.  The amendment also requested that a new Sustainable Environment Strategy  be brought forward.

Councillor Hutchison seconded the amendment, stressing the need for a new Sustainable Environment Strategy.

The amendment was not accepted by the Leader and Councillor Ashworth, as the proposer and seconder of the original Motion. 

The amendment was debated.

Councillor Lefroy stated that he was in favour of the pragmatic approach in tackling climate change.  He had visited a factory, covering 40,000m2,  in his line of work and the entire roof had been covered with solar panels.  The factory used no electricity from the grid but did supply it.  This Council should be insisting that every new building had solar panels fixed on the roof which would then give no reason for agricultural land to be used to site them.

In summing up, the Leader stated that Councillor Lefroy’s suggestion regarding putting solar panels on all new buildings was common sense.  However, the country’s grid network could not handle the power that was generated.  Reference was made to air source heat pumps that had been proposed by the previous Administration for Jubilee2.  The Leader stated that no checks had been made as to whether they needed changing and he was now awaiting a report  on that matter.  If the report stated that they would not need changing, they would not be changed.

Councillor Simon Tagg stated that he stood by his group’s amendment.  In his time as Leader, he, along with two portfolio holders had taken a measured approach with the Sustainable Environment Strategy to make improvements.  Referring to J2, the funding for the new boiler, the funding was being focussed into energy efficiency to save taxpayers money.

A vote was taken on the amendment but was defeated.

A vote was then taken on the original Motion  ...  view the full minutes text for item 9.

Question from Councillor Sue Beeston to the Leader of the Council:

“Can the Leader explain why the Conservation Advisory Working Party (CAWP) meetings scheduled for June, July, August and September following the local elections have been cancelled?

The CAWP has long provided an important forum for members to review and comment on planning applications affecting listed buildings, conservation areas and the wider historic environment across the Borough. It also plays a key role in advising the Planning Committee, Cabinet and Council on conservation policy, enhancement schemes, design guidance for conservation areas, and applications for historic building grants.

Given the significance of this work, what were the reasons for cancelling these meetings, what arrangements have been put in place to ensure appropriate member input on heritage and conservation matters during this period, and when does the Leader intend the Working Party to resume its regular programme of meetings?”

The Leader stated that it was his intention to end CAWP.  Heritage protection in the Borough was not delivered by a monthly meeting but by rigorous experts, statutory scrutiny of every application affected depending upon listed building or conservation area.  CAWP was an advisory only, commenting on applications with no decision making powers.  Those powers sat and would continue to sit with the Planning Committee and officers under delegated authority, informed by the Conservation Officer and, where required, by Historic England.  He did not believe that a parallel advisory forum on top of the statutory process  justified the officer and Member time that it took up.

Councillor Beeston asked a supplementary question:

“Who would carry out the work that CAWP had done in the past”

The Leader stated that it would be the Planning Committee, officers under delegated authority – informed by the Conservation Officer and where required, by Historic England.

Watch the debate here

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

No petitions were received.

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.

Olwen Brown left the room during the debating of the next item

Appointment of Interim Service Director- Legal and Governance/Monitoring Officer – Olwen Brown

The Leader moved the motion and it was seconded by Councillor Simon Tagg

The appointment was agreed

Watch the debate here

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