Agenda and draft minutes

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

The Chairman reported that he had attended several events since the last Council meeting. Specifically, he highlighted his attendance at the ‘Children in Care celebration of achievement’ event 2024, the ‘Annual interactive careers fair’ at Newbury College, and Newbury Town Council’s Remembrance service.

The Chairman to sign as a correct record the Minutes of the Council meeting held on 5 September 2024, 26 September 2024, and 7 November 2024.

MOTION: Proposed by Councillor Jeff Brooks and seconded by Councillor Denise Gaines:

That the Minutes of the meeting held on 5 September 2024 were approved as a true and correct record and signed by the Chairman.

The Motion was put to the meeting and duly RESOLVED.</AI2>

MOTION: Proposed by Councillor Tony Vickers and seconded by Councillor Jeff Brooks:

That the Minutes of the meeting held on 26 September 2024 were approved as a true and correct record and signed by the Chairman.

The Motion was put to the meeting and duly RESOLVED.

MOTION: Proposed by Councillor Tony Vickers and seconded by Councillor Jeff Brooks:

That the Minutes of the meeting held on 7 November 2024 were approved as a true and correct record and signed by the Chairman.

The Motion was put to the meeting and duly RESOLVED.

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 Nigel Foot declared an interest in Agenda Item 11 by virtue of the fact that he was a Member of Newbury Town Council’s Heritage Working Group and was West Berkshire Council’s Heritage Champion. However, as he did not believe these to be prejudicial interests, he determined to take part in the discussion, debate, and vote on the matter.

Councillor Dominic Boeck raised a point of order, concurred with by Councillor Owen Jeffery, that some Members had difficulties accessing the agenda and reports of the meeting through the Council’s meeting management software, Modern.Gov. The Monitoring Officer indicated that the reasons for this would be examined, and action taken to address this.

Petitions may be presented to Council. 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.

Details of the public question and answer session are available from the following link: Q&As.</AI5>

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

MOTION: Proposed by Councillor Jeff Brooks and seconded by Councillor Denise Gaines:

That Council approve the following changes to the membership of Committees:

-       That Councillor Stephanie Steevenson be appointed to the Governance Committee in place of Councillor Chris Read, and that Councillor Alan Macro becomes a substitute member of the Governance Committee in place of Councillor Stephanie Steevenson. 

The Motion was put to the meeting and duly RESOLVED.

To note Motions which had been presented to a previous Council meeting.

Council noted that there were no motions from previous meetings needing updates.

The Council is asked to note the meetings held since the last ordinary meeting of Council. The minutes of these meetings will be available on the Council’s website. 

8.a      The Licensing Committee met on 4 November 2024.

8.b      The Personnel Committee has not met.

8.c      The Governance Committee met on 1 October 2024 and 19 November 2024.

8.d      The District Planning Committee met on 13 November 2024.

8.e      The Scrutiny Commission met on 17 October 2024 and 26 November 2024.

8.f       The Health Scrutiny Committee has not met.

8.g      The Health and Wellbeing Board has not met.

8.h      The Joint Public Protection Committee met on 7 October 2024 and 11 October 2024.

Council noted the meetings that had been held since the last ordinary meeting of Council as laid out in Agenda item 9. Council also noted that an extraordinary meeting of the Personnel Committee had met earlier in the day, on 28 November, at 5.30pm.

Purpose: For Council to consider the Schedule of Proposed Main Modifications to the West Berkshire Local Plan Review 2022-2039 (LPR) post hearing sessions earlier this year. Also, the updated Sustainability Appraisal/Strategic Environmental Assessment (SA/SEA) Report, addendum to the Habitat Regulations Assessment (HRA) and the Schedule of Proposed Changes to the Policies Map. The Council is asked to approve the publication of these documents for an 8-week period of public consultation as instructed by the Local Plan Inspector. This is a regulatory stage of the LPR process and requires Council resolution.

Council considered a report (Agenda Item 10) concerning the Proposed Main Modifications to the West Berkshire Local Plan Review (LPR).

MOTION: Proposed by Councillor Denise Gaines and seconded by Councillor Jeff Brooks:

“That Council:

1)    Recognises that the Local Plan Review is still in the Examination Process and therefore, the Council is still under the Direction set out in the letter from the Minister of State for Housing, Planning and Building Safety dated 19 December 2023 that requires the Council to continue the Plan through the Examination Process.

2)    Notes that the Schedule of Proposed Main Modifications to the West Berkshire Local Plan Review 2022-2039 is published in accordance with Section 20 7(c) of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 (as amended) for an eight week period of consultation.

3)    Notes that the accompanying updated Sustainability Appraisal/Strategic Environmental Assessment (SA/SEA) Report on the Proposed Main Modifications and addendum to the Habitats Regulations Assessment (HRA) of the Proposed Main Modifications are published in accordance with Section 20 7(c) of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 (as amended) for an eight week period of consultation.

4)    Notes that the Schedule of Proposed Changes to the Policies Map is published for an eight week period of consultation.

5)    Delegates authority to the Executive Director of Place, in consultation with the Executive Portfolio Holder for Planning and Housing, to agree any further non-material refinements to the wording of the LPR and its accompanying documentation as appropriate, before consultation.”

Councillor Gaines introduced the report and highlighted that the Local Plan had been submitted by the previous Conservative led Administration before the election, and that the current Liberal Democrat Administration believed it to be flawed. Although the policies were sound, they did not believe that the housing site allocations were right for the residents of West Berkshire. She informed Council that the attempt to withdraw the plan was rejected by the Minister for Housing, Communities and Local Government (MHCLG), who directed the Council to proceed with the process.

In addition, as the current Government had indicated that they would intervene and take over the Plan should the Council refuse to progress it, she believed that the only choice remaining for the Council was to proceed to the next step of the Local Plan process, the public consultation. She emphasised that the decision to move to consultation was only taken after every other avenue had been exhausted, including securing legal counsel, and that this was the final chance for the public to express their unhappiness with the Plan. Overall, in order to ensure that the Council had some influence on the Plan and that it was not taken over by the MHCLG, who could then force housing site allocations on the district, she encouraged Council to approve the recommendations.

Several Members expressed their concern about the Local Plan and indicated that they would not support the Motion. In relation to the site that had been allocated in Theale, it was indicated this would lead  ...  view the full minutes text for item 9.

Purpose: To outline proposed changes to the Newbury Town Centre Conservation Area, Kennet and Avon Canal, Newbury (East) Conservation Area and Kennet and Avon Canal, Newbury (West) Conservation Area boundaries and enable the new boundaries to be varied as per legislative requirements, and to outline the proposed Newbury Town Centre Conservation Area Appraisal and Management Plan and allow this to be adopted as per legislative requirements.

Council considered a report (Agenda Item 11) concerning the Newbury Town Centre Conservation Area Appraisal (CAA) and Boundary Review

MOTION: Proposed by Councillor Nigel Foot and seconded by Councillor Denise Gaines:

“That Council:

1)    Approve the changes to the Newbury Town Centre Conservation Area, Kennet and Avon Canal, Newbury (East) Conservation Area and Kennet and Avon Canal, Newbury (West) Conservation Area shown in Figure 2 of the report, and to designate them in line with the requirements of sections 69 & 70 of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990.

2)    Adopt and publish the Newbury Town Centre Conservation Area Appraisal and Management Plan as outlined in Appendix A in line with section 71 of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990.”

Councillor Foot introduced the report and highlighted that the Boundary Review and CAA review had been long overdue and that the Council was now in the position of adopting these documents. It was indicated that some responses to the boundary review raised concerns about certain heritage assets no longer being in their previous conservation areas. However, he assured Council that no existing protected area would be left unprotected due to this change. It was also emphasised that, upon the successful adoption of the CAA, all planning applications would be assessed against the requirements to preserve or enhance the area. Overall, Councillor Foot thanked the numerous stakeholders who played a role in the production of the documents and expressed his desire to continue working with them moving forward.

Council noted that there would be a review of the CAA every ten years and were satisfied that the historic buildings in the area would be receiving protection. Members also indicated their desire to see more areas protected, such as the Newtown Road Cemetery, for greater pedestrianisation of the town centre, and for the linking of these documents with the Newbury Town Centre Masterplan.

Overall, Members welcomed the CAA and boundary review but highlighted the need to support other, more rural, areas of the district with either creating or updating their CAA, such as at Bucklebury and Aldermaston.

The Motion was put to the meeting and duly RESOLVED.

Purpose: To provide members oversight of the annual Youth Justice Plan for 2024/25 which is submitted to the Youth Justice Board.

Council considered a report (Agenda Item 12) concerning the Youth Justice Plan 2024/25.

MOTION: Proposed by Councillor Justin Pemberton and seconded by Councillor Martha Vickers:

“That Council agree and formally endorse the Youth Justice Plan 2024/2025.”

Councillor Pembertonintroduced the report and highlighted that it was requirement in the Crime and Disorder Act 1998 to formulate an annual Youth Justice Plan. He indicated that the plan had been based on the Youth Justice Board guidance and included a roadmap for supporting young people and parents. The plan would build on the Council’s existing partnerships and direct resources into the places that best worked to produce positive outcomes and promote prevention. On prevention, the plan also outlined the Council’s attempt to prevent reoffending which would lead to safer communities and fewer victims.

Council noted that the Youth Justice Board provided positive feedback on plan, and that an inspection of the service by HM Inspectorate of Probation in 2023 resulted in an ‘Outstanding’ rating.

Members welcomed the Plan and were pleased to see the Council had received another Outstanding rated inspection. However, there were some areas of concern in the report that were raised, such as the increased number of girls that had been involved in violent crimes. Council noted that work was ongoing into researching the reasons behind this as well as on training in the team to try to tackle this rising problem. The number of school exclusions was also highlighted, and Members encouraged the sharing of best practices amongst schools to help combat this.

Overall, Council was satisfied with the Plan and noted that fewer young people were entering the justice system than in previous years which was very positive and reflected the low crime rate in the area more broadly.

The Motion was put to the meeting and duly RESOLVED.

Purpose: To consider the responses received during the eight-week consultation period on the revised draft Statement and make a recommendation to Council that it adopts the amended Statement of Licensing Policy Principles (hereafter referred to as The Statement) under the Gambling Act 2005 (the Act) as set out in Appendix A.

Council considered a report (Agenda Item 13) concerning the adoption of the Revised Statement of Licensing Policy Principles under S.349 of the Gambling Act 2005.

MOTION: Proposed by Councillor Justin Pemberton and seconded by Councillor Jeremy Cottam:

“That Council:

1)    Considered the draft Statement and the consultation responses received.

2)    Delegates authority to the Service Lead (Public Protection), in consultation with the Portfolio Holder, to make any minor corrections to the Statement prior to publication.

3)    Approves the Statement for adoption and publication by the 31 January 2025.”

Councillor Pemberton introduced the report and highlighted that it was a revision of the existing Gambling Policy which was last approved in 2022. He highlighted the need to promote the licencing objectives, those being the prevention of gambling becoming a source of crime or disorder, ensuring that gambling was conducted fairly and openly, and protecting children and vulnerable people.

The policy needed to be reviewed every three years and take account of any new guidance. Although a White Paper was expected, Councillor Pemberton indicated that they should not wait for this to be produced before updating the policy and so the report had been brought to Council. He also indicated that the policy had gone through consultation and as a result, had incorporated a number of minor amendments but that they were not significant or material to the Policy. Councillor Pemberton clarified a point raised in the consultation and confirmed that not all staff in a premises where gambling took place needed mandatory training. This requirement was attached to operating licenses of specific premises, such as casinos, rather than to all premises that hosted some form of gambling.

In response to a question about the lack of responses to the consultation, Councillor Pemberton indicated that as the document was a technical, statutory document, a large response was not expected. Some Members also expressed a desire for better identification of betting machines and that the value of prizes was clearly regulated.

Overall, as Council were satisfied with the report, they agreed to adopt the revised statement of licencing policy principles.

The Motion was put to the meeting and duly RESOLVED.

Purpose: To recommend a timetable of public meetings for the 2025/26 Municipal Year. The timetable is proposed for approval and then publication to give advance notice of public meetings at which the Council’s key decision making takes place to help meet its wide range of business demands. The approval of the timetable will also assist with making administrative arrangements for the meetings.

Council considered a report (Agenda Item 14) concerning the 2025/26 West Berkshire Council Timetable of Public Meetings.

MOTION: Proposed by Councillor Jeff Brooks and seconded by Councillor Denise Gaines:

“That Council approves the timetable of public meetings for the 2025/26 Municipal Year.”

Councillor Brooks introduced the report and highlighted that it planned out the meetings for the upcoming Municipal Year, and thanked officers for putting the dates together. Council noted that Members had very busy schedules, especially those who were dual-hatted or attended multiple parish meetings in the week, and that some of these meetings may clash with others.

The Motion was put to the meeting and duly RESOLVED.

To receive any Motions submitted in accordance with the Council Procedure Rules contained in the Council's Constitution.

Council considered the under-mentioned Motion (Agenda Item 15 – Motion A). The Motion was submitted in the name of Councillor Jeremy Cottam relating to statutory licensing fees.

MOTION: Proposed by Councillor Jeremy Cottam and seconded by Councillor Justin Pemberton:

“That Council notes that:

· The Licensing Act 2003 provides for Statutory Licence fees to be payable to licensing authorities in return for the functions that they undertake in respect of the Act. The fee levels are set centrally by the Secretary of State.

· Following a consultation exercise the then Secretary of State announced the fee package on 20 January 2005. This was implemented by the Licensing Act 2003 (Fees) Regulations 2005 which took effect on 7 February 2005.

· The fees have not been uplifted since these regulations were introduced nearly 20 years ago.

· Licensing fees should be set on a cost recovery basis.

· The Bank of England Inflation Calculator suggests costs have risen by over 66% since 2005. This would mean that a £100 licence in 2005 would now cost around £170.

· This level of lost income is unsustainable for the Council.

· Reduced income has resulted in staffing reductions, which in turn, could result in an increased risk of non-compliance and risks to our residents.

This Council therefore calls on Central Government to review, as a matter of urgency the Statutory Licensing Fees under the Licensing Act 2003 and therefore asks the Chairman of Council to:

1) Write to the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport to ask that the statutory licensing fees be uplifted as a matter of urgency.

2) Request that the Members appointed to the Local Government Association General Assembly lobby the LGA to write to the government seeking that the statutory limits on fees related to the Licensing Act 2003 be uplifted.

3) Write to the MPs in the constituencies covered by the Public Protection Partnership and seek their support in lobbying Central Government to uplift the statutory licensing fees as a matter of urgency”

Councillor Cottam introduced the Motion and highlighted that, as Chairman of the Licensing Committee, he was made aware that the fees no longer covered the costs of the licensing service. He informed Council that the fees had been created and set in 2005 by central Government and had not been increased to account for inflation since then. He encouraged Council to recommend that the fees be reviewed and increased.

Some Members indicated that this could be done through the Chairman of the Committee, without needing a Motion. However, it was agreed that brining this through to Council would then carry the full weight of West Berkshire Council when requesting this uplift.

As Council noted that the Licensing Service was operating at a deficit, and that if the fees had kept up with inflation since 2005 they would be bringing in between £80,000-£100,000 extra income for the Council each year, Council agreed to support the Motion.

The Motion was put to the meeting and duly RESOLVED.

Council considered the under-mentioned  ...  view the full minutes text for item 14.

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.

Details of the Member question and answer session are available from the following link: Q&As.

Before the close of the meeting, Councillor Tony Vickers issued a formal apology to Enborne Parish Councillor Peter Tompkins in relation to a comment he provided to the Penny Post and was published in their 18 July 2024 issue. He sincerely apologised for any damage to Councillor Tompkins’ reputation that the comment caused and also for any distress he experienced.