Agenda and minutes

The Chairman to report on functions attended since the last meeting and other matters of interest to Members.

The Chairman reported that fifteen civic events had been attended since the last meeting of Council which had included schools, charities, military establishments, and civic and jubilee celebrations. The Chairman remarked on the inspirational people that he and the Vice-Chairman had met, and the opportunities to promote the work of the Council and to cement relationships that attending these events afforded.

The Chairman highlighted the spectacular Jubilee celebrations he had attended in Mortimer, Hungerford and Purley. The Mayor-making ceremony he had attended in Newbury had also been very impressive.

The Chairman also highlighted the inspirational visits relating to charities and schools which had included:

·         The fantastic concert in aid of Daisy’s Dream and Sport in Mind at the Hexagon, where children from many schools had performed brilliantly.

·         Also supporting Sport in Mind, the Chairman had enjoyed a game of Paddle with a nine year old fund-raiser in a revamped barn on the Englefield estate. This was part of a sponsored decathlon taking place over ten successive days.

·         A meeting of five schools from all around Europe at the Kenneth Valley Primary School in Calcot, all of whom were participating in the Erasmus project (a co-operation to foster educational innovation and projects to enhance the environment). The Chairman remarked that it had been wonderful to see the international collaboration, friendship and enthusiasm from the children for the project, and how it had provided an opportunity to promote the Council's environment strategy and actions.

The Chairman to sign as a correct record the Minutes of the Council meeting held on 10 May 2022.

The Minutes of the meeting held on 10 May 2022 were approved as a true and correct record and signed by the Chairman.

To remind Members of the need to record the existence and nature of any personal, disclosable pecuniary or other registrable interests in items on the agenda, in accordance with the Members’ Code of Conduct.

Councillor Graham Bridgman declared an Other Registrable Interest in Agenda Item 17 (Motion on Royal Berkshire Hospital Redevelopment) and determined to remain to take part in the debate and vote on the matter.

Councillor Richard Somner declared a Disclosable Pecuniary Interest in Agenda Item 17 (Motion on Royal Berkshire Hospital Redevelopment) and reported that he would be leaving the meeting during the course of consideration of the matter.

Councillors may present any petition which they have received. These will normally be referred to the appropriate body without discussion.

There were no Petitions presented to Council.

Members of the Executive to answer questions submitted by members of the public in accordance with the Council Procedure Rules contained in the Council's Constitution.

Please note that the list of public questions is shown under Item 6 in the agenda pack.

The Chairman re-ordered the questions as published in the Agenda which were instead considered in the order set out below.

A full transcription of the public question and answer session is available from the following link: Transcription of Q&As.

(a)       It was agreed that a question standing in the name of John Bibbings on the subject of the cycle lane on the A4 between the Co-op and Waitrose would receive a written response given that he was unable to attend the meeting.

(c)       It was agreed that a question standing in the name of Lee McDougall on the subject of the reintroduction of organised children’s football at Faraday Road would receive a written response given that he was unable to attend the meeting.

(b)       A question standing in the name of Paul Morgan on the subject of the Council’s increased spend on agency and temporary staff since January 2022 was answered by the Portfolio Holder for Internal Governance and Strategic Partnerships.

(e)       A question standing in the name of Paul Morgan on the subject of the Council’s decision to build one small 3G facility at the rugby club was answered by the Portfolio Holder for Finance and Economic Development.

(d)       A question standing in the name of Vaughan Miller on the subject of why the Council will not redevelop the Faraday Road Football Stadium was answered by the Portfolio Holder for Finance and Economic Development.

(f)        A question standing in the name of Vaughan Miller on the subject of the savings the Council could potentially make from redeveloping the Faraday Road stadium was answered by the Portfolio Holder for Finance and Economic Development.

(g)       A question standing in the name of Vaughan Miller on the subject of the Council’s spend on the stadium at the rugby club was answered by the Portfolio Holder for Finance and Economic Development.

The Council to agree any changes to the membership of Committees.

The Council noted that Councillor Howard Woollaston would be removed from the membership of the Transport Advisory Group, and that Councillor Woollaston would replace Councillor Hillary Cole on the membership of the Planning Advisory Group. These changes had been made in accordance with the wishes of the relevant political group.

The Council is asked to note that since the last meeting of the Council, the Licensing Committee met on 4 July 2022. A copy of the Minutes of this meeting can be obtained from Democratic Services or via the Council's website.

The Council noted that, since its last meeting, the Licensing Committee had met on 4 July 2022.

The Council is asked to note that since the lastmeeting of the Council, the Personnel Committee met on 15 July 2022. A copy of the Minutes of this meeting can be obtained from Democratic Services or via the Council's website.

The Council noted that, since its last meeting, the Personnel Committee had met on 15 July 2022.

The Council is asked to note that since the lastmeeting of the Council, the Governance and Ethics Committee met on 27 June 2022. A copy of the Minutes of this meeting can be obtained from Democratic Services or via the Council's website.

The Council noted that, since its last meeting, the Governance and Ethics Committee had met on 27 June 2022.

The Council is asked to note that since the lastmeeting of the Council the District Planning Committee has not met.

The Council noted that, since its last meeting, the District Planning Committee had not met.

The Council is asked to note that since the lastmeeting of the Council, the Overview and Scrutiny Management Commission met on 24 May 2022. A copy of the Minutes of this meeting can be obtained from Democratic Services or via the Council's website.

The Council noted that, since its last meeting, the Overview and Scrutiny Management Commission had met on 24 May 2022.

The Council is asked to note that since the lastmeeting of the Council, the Health Scrutiny Committee met on 23 May and 14 June 2022. Copies of the Minutes of these meetings can be obtained from Democratic Services or via the Council's website.

The Council noted that, since its last meeting, the Health Scrutiny Committee had met on 23 May and 14 June 2022.

The Council is asked to note that since the lastmeeting of the Council, the Health and Wellbeing Board met on 19 May 2022. A copy of the Minutes of this meeting can be obtained from Democratic Services or via the Council's website.

The Council noted that, since its last meeting, the Health and Wellbeing Board had met on 19 May 2022.

The Council is asked to note that since the lastmeeting of the Council, the Joint Public Protection Committee met on 13 June 2022. A copy of the Minutes of this meeting can be obtained from Democratic Services or via the Council's website.

The Council noted that, since its last meeting, the Joint Public Protection Committee had met on 13 June 2022.

Purpose: To provide an annual summary of the activities of the Governance and Ethics Committee during the Municipal Year 2021-2022, a summary of key areas that the Committee has considered, and the actions and changes that have occurred due to the Committee’s activities.

The Council considered a report (Agenda Item 16) which provided an annual summary of the activities of the Governance and Ethics Committee during the Municipal Year 2021-22, a summary of key areas that the Committee had considered, and the actions and changes that had occurred due to the Committee’s activities.

MOTION: Proposed by Councillor Thomas Marino and seconded by Councillor Howard Woollaston:

“That Council notes the content of the report.”

Councillor Thomas Marino highlighted some of the key areas that the Committee had considered which included the approval of an Independent Person as a member of the Committee, audit and financial reports, a review of the Council’s Constitution, and risk management. Councillor Marino referred to the importance of producing a summary of the Committee’s work during the Municipal Year.

Councillor Woollaston had nothing further he wished to add to the debate.

Councillor Adrian Abbs queried why the former Portfolio Holder was named on the report. The Chairman advised that the report had been prepared during the tenure of the former Portfolio Holder and it had since been determined that the new Portfolio Holder would present the report to Council.

The Chairman advised that a vote was not required for this Motion as the report was to note.

Purpose: To consider the motion originally submitted in the name of Councillor Alan Macro at the Council meeting on 17 March 2022, following discussion on the matter at the Health Scrutiny Committee on 23 May 2022.

Councillor Graham Bridgman declared an interest in Agenda Item 17 by virtue of being the Council’s nominated Governor at the Royal Berkshire NHS Foundation Trust. As his interest was an Other Registrable Interest he determined to remain to take part in the debate and vote on the matter.

Councillor Richard Somner declared an interest in Agenda Item 17 by virtue of the fact that he was employed by the Royal Berkshire NHS Foundation Trust. As his interest was a Disclosable Pecuniary Interest he determined to leave the meeting during the course of consideration of the matter.

The Council considered a report (Agenda Item 17) regarding the Motion originally submitted in the name of Councillor Alan Macro at the Council meeting on 17 March 2022, following discussion on the matter at the Health Scrutiny Committee on 23 May 2022.

MOTION: Proposed by Councillor Graham Bridgman and seconded by Councillor Lee Dillon:

“That Council, following consideration at Health Scrutiny Committee, approves the following Motion:

Council notes that:

·                The Royal Berkshire Hospital Foundation Trust has been consulting on various options to re-develop the hospital. Several options involve various levels of redevelopment of the existing site and one option is the building of a new hospital on a new site.

·                The existing site is very cramped and contains a mixture of new, old and very old buildings, some of which are pre-fabricated. Many have very poor insulation leading to uncomfortable conditions for patients in hot or cold weather and also to poor energy efficiency.

·                Re-development of the existing site is difficult because of its cramped and dense layout.

·                It is very difficult for residents of some parts of West Berkshire to reach the hospital using public transport.

·                Car parking in and around the hospital is restricted and expensive.

·                It can be time consuming to travel to the hospital by any means, including ambulance, at peak times.

Council therefore resolves that its preferred option is the building of a new hospital on a new site that is readily accessed by West Berkshire residents by both private and public transport, and that this preference be conveyed to the Royal Berkshire Hospital Foundation Trust.”

Councillor Bridgman in recommending approval of the Motion highlighted how it did not seek to identify a specific site but instead put forward a not unreasonable request that any new site should be convenient for the residents of West Berkshire. Councillor Bridgman had invited the Health Scrutiny Committee to reflect that the location would ultimately depend on the amount of funding allocated by the Treasury for the project since the cost of refurbishing and redeveloping the current site would be different to the cost of building a brand new hospital elsewhere.  

Councillor Alan Macro advised he had originally proposed the Motion following Reading Borough Council and Wokingham Borough Council publishing their views regarding the future of the Hospital. Reading Borough Council had resolved that its preferred option was to rebuild or redevelop the existing site. Wokingham Borough Council had proposed a new site  ...  view the full minutes text for item 37.

Please note that the list of Motions is shown under Item 18 in the agenda pack.

The Council considered the under-mentioned Motion (Agenda Item 18(a) refers) submitted in the name of Councillor David Marsh regarding fair taxation.

Councillor Carolyne Culver proposed alterations to the Motion under Procedure Rule 4.13.9. Councillor Steve Masters, seconding, agreed to the alterations. The amendments were additionally approved by Members present.

MOTION: Proposed by Councillor Carolyne Culver and seconded by Councillor Steve Masters:

“This Council notes that:

1.         Public opinion is strongly in favour of organisations paying their fair share of tax.

2.         Polling from the Institute for Business Ethics finds that corporate tax avoidance is the number one concern of the British public when it comes to business conduct.

3.         According to the Fair Tax Foundation:

Two thirds of people believe the Government and local councils should consider a company’s ethics and how they pay their tax, as well as value for money and quality of service provided, when awarding contracts to companies; around 17.5% of public contracts in the UK have been won by companies with links to tax havens;  and it has been estimated that losses from multinational profit-shifting (just one form of aggressive tax avoidance) could be costing the UK £17bn a year in lost corporation tax revenues.

4.         The Fair Tax Mark offers a means for business to demonstrate good tax conduct, and has been secured by a wide range of businesses across the UK, including FTSE-listed PLCs, co-operatives, social enterprises and large private businesses.

Council believes that:

1.         Paying tax is often presented as a burden, but taxation enables us to provide services from education, health and social care to flood defence, roads, policing and defence. It also helps to counter financial inequalities.

2.         As recipients of significant public funding, local authorities should take the lead in the promotion of exemplary tax conduct; by encouraging contractors to pay their proper share of tax, or by refusing to go along with artificial tax avoidance arrangements.

3.         Where councils hold substantive stakes in private enterprises, influence should be wielded to ensure that such businesses are exemplars of tax transparency.

4.         Procurement law significantly restricts councils’ ability to either penalise poor tax conduct (as exclusion grounds are rarely triggered) when buying goods or services.

5.         Local authorities can and should stand up for responsible tax conduct, doing what they can within existing frameworks and pledging to do more given the opportunity.

Council therefore resolves to:

1.         Support in principle the Councils for Fair Tax Declaration.

2.         Support HMRC’s General Anti-Abuse Regulations, which seek to set aside any artificial tax arrangements which are considered abusive, including where not-for-profit structures are being used inappropriately by suppliers as an artificial device to reduce the payment of tax.

3.         Celebrate the tax contribution made by responsible businesses proud to promote responsible tax conduct and pay their fair share of corporation tax.

4.         Welcome procurement law reform which would enable local authorities to better penalise abusive tax conduct through their procurement policies.

Council further resolves to request that the Executive:

1.         Lead by example  ...  view the full minutes text for item 38.

Members of the Executive to answer questions submitted by Members of the Council in accordance with the Council Procedure Rules contained in the Council's Constitution.

Please note that the list of Member questions is shown under Item 19 in the agenda pack.

A full transcription of the Member question and answer session is available from the following link: Transcription of Q&As.

(a)       A question standing in the name of Councillor Alan Macro to the Portfolio Holder for Adult Social Care was withdrawn prior to the meeting.

(b)       A question standing in the name of Councillor Adrian Abbs on the subject of the correct balance between encouraging biodiversity and ensuring the safety of pedestrians and road-users being achieved was answered by the Portfolio Holder for Planning, Transport and Countryside.

(c)       A question standing in the name of Councillor Martha Vickers on the subject of consultation regarding planned roadworks on busy main roads was answered by the Portfolio Holder for Planning, Transport and Countryside.

(d)       A question standing in the name of Councillor Steve Masters on the subject of the progress made with the restructuring of (what was called) Strategic Support was answered by the Portfolio Holder for Internal Governance and Strategic Partnerships.

(e)       A question standing in the name of Councillor Claire Rowles on the subject of the expected delivery of the Sports Hub and the implications from the delay due to the Judicial Review was answered by the Portfolio Holder for Housing, Leisure and Culture.

(f)        A question standing in the name of Councillor Alan Macro on the subject of the consultation hub preventing people from responding to the consultation on the proposed closure of the Notrees Care Home was answered by the Portfolio Holder for Adult Social Care.

(g)       A question standing in the name of Councillor Steve Masters on the subject of progress made towards hiring a legal professional to the post of Information Governance Solicitor was answered by the Portfolio Holder for Internal Governance and Strategic Partnerships.

(h)      A question standing in the name of Councillor Steve Masters on the subject of the recent changes to the Information Governance Team and whether this had positively impacted on response times, the number of requests for review, and the number of beaches and complaints was answered by the Portfolio Holder for Internal Governance and Strategic Partnerships.