Agenda and minutes

Councillor	Minute Number	Nature of Interest
Cllr Gerald Vernon-Jackson	103	Personal.  Cllr Vernon-Jackson had previously been a council appointed director of Portico.
Cllr Derek North	103	Cllr North did not vote on this item in accordance with the provisions of Section 106 of the Local Government Finance Act 1992.
Cllr Hugh Mason Cllr Brian Madgwick Cllr Raymond Dent Cllr Graham Heaney Cllr Judith Smyth Cllr Gerald Vernon-Jackson	105/108	Personal. The councillor and/or their spouse or a member of their household had previously been in receipt of the winter fuel allowance.
Cllr Hugh Mason	106	Personal. Cllr Mason was over the age of 80 and therefore outside of the age range to receive the RSV vaccine.
Cllr Mark Jeffery	112	Personal, in respect of question 2.  Cllr Jeffery was employed by Portsmouth water

 

It was

 

Proposed by Councillor Steve Pitt

Seconded by Councillor George Madgwick

 

That the minutes of the Council meeting held on 16 July 2024 be confirmed as a correct record.

 

The minutes were agreed by assent.

Apologies for absence were received from Councillor Tom Coles.

The Lord Mayor did not have any communications to lay before Council.

Deputations by members of the public may be made on any item where a decision is going to be taken. The request should be made in writing to the contact officer (james.harris@portsmouthcc.gov.uk) by 12 noon of the working day before the meeting (so Monday 14 October 2024 for this meeting), and must include the purpose of the deputation (for example, for or against the recommendations). Email requests are accepted.

The City Solicitor advised that six oral deputation requests had been made for this meeting. 

 

The first was from James Gunston, against the recommendations in respect of agenda item 13, Portico Shipping Ltd Review.

 

The second was from Claire Udy, in support of Notice of Motion D, Winter Fuel Payments.

 

The third was from Karen Drayton, in support of Notice of Motion G. Connors Toy Libraries.

 

The fourth was from Jessica O'Rourke, in support of Notice of Motion G, Connors Toy Libraries.

 

The fifth was from Honorary Alderman Robert New, in support of Notice of Motion A, Changes to the Winter Fuel Allowance and protecting pensioners from fuel poverty.

 

The sixth was from Alan Burgess, in support of Notice of Motion D, Winter Fuel Payments.

 

At the invitation of the City Solicitor, James Gunston, Claire Udy, Karen Drayton, Jessica O'Rourke, Honorary Alderman Robert New and Alan Burgess delivered their deputations to Council.

The Lord Mayor advsied that no questions from the public had been received under the provisions of this standing order.

To receive and consider the attached report in the name of the Chief Executive.

It was RESOLVED that the overall political balance and allocation of seats as set out in paragraph 3.3 of the Chief Executive's report be AGREED, along with the following appointments:

 

(i)         Councillor Rajah Ghosh as a non-aligned independent member on the Licensing Committee;

 

(ii)       Councillor Rajah Ghosh as a non-aligned independent member on the Economic Development, Culture and Leisure Scrutiny Panel; 

 

(iii)      Councillor Yinka Adeniran as a Labour Group Standing Deputy on the Planning Committee; and

 

(iv)      Councillor George Fielding as a Labour Group Standing Deputy on the Education, Children & Young People Scrutiny Panel.

The Lord Mayor advised that he had not been made aware of any urgent business for this meeting.

To receive and consider the attached report and recommendation to note for information only arising from the Cabinet meeting held on 23 July 2024.

Council Agenda item 9 (Cabinet Minute 62)

 

Treasury Management Outturn Report 2023-2024

 

The noting recommendation contained in minute 62 of the Cabinet meeting held on 23 July 2024 was approved unopposed.

 

RESOLVED that Full Council NOTED the content of the report.

To receive and consider the attached report and recommendation arising from the Cabinet meeting held on 1 October 2024.

Council Agenda item 10 (Cabinet Minute 78)

 

Approval of Corporate Plan 2024-26

 

The recommendations contained in minute 78 of the Cabinet meeting held on 1 October 2024 were approved unopposed.

 

RESOLVED that Council:

 

(i)             APPROVED the new medium-term Council Corporate Plan - 2024-26 (see Appendix 1);

 

(ii)           NOTED that the plan demonstrates the Council's commitment to supporting the achievement of the Vision for Portsmouth that has previously been agreed with partners; and

 

(iii)         AGREED that delegated authority be given to the Chief Executive to make minor changes to the draft document prior to publication.

To receive and consider the attached report and recommendation arising from the Governance and Audit and Standards Committee meeting held on 2 October 2024.

Council Agenda item 11 (Governance & Audit & Standards Committee Minute 35)

 

Review of Polling Districts and Polling Places

 

The recommendations contained in minute 35 of the Governance & Audit & Standards Committee meeting held on 2 October 2024 were approved unopposed.

 

RESOLVED that:

 

(i)     no changes are made to the current polling scheme for the reasons set out in this report; and

 

(ii)    it be reconfirmed that the Returning Officer has delegated authority to make such variations to polling places as may be necessary arising from the availability of premises for use at a particular election.

That, under the provisions of Section 100A of the Local Government Act, 1972 as amended by the Local Government (Access to Information) Act, 1985, the press and public be excluded for the consideration of the following item on the grounds that the report(s) contain information defined as exempt in Part 1 of Schedule 12A to the Local Government Act, 1972”.

 

The public interest in maintaining the exemption must outweigh the public interest in disclosing the information.

 

Under the Local Authorities (Executive Arrangements) (Meetings and Access to Information) England Regulations 2012, regulation 5, the reasons for exemption of the listed item is shown below.

 

Members of the public may make representation as to why the item should be held in open session.  A statement of the Council’s response to representations received will be given at the meeting so that this can be taken into account when members decide whether or not to deal with the item under exempt business.

 

Members are reminded of standing order restrictions on the disclosure of exempt information and are asked to dispose of exempt documentation as confidential waste at the conclusion of the meeting.

 

Item Exemption                                                                                Para No.*

                                                                                                               

13. Portico Shipping Ltd Review                                                           3

(Exempt Appendices A and B)

 

*3. Information relating to the financial or business affairs of any particular person (including the authority holding that information).

 

The Lord Mayor advised that proceedings would be kept in open session unless Council wished to debate the details contained within the exempt appendices to the following report:

 

·       Portico Shipping Ltd Review

 

As Council approved the Cabinet minute unopposed there was no debate on this item and therefore no requirement to pass a resolution to exclude the press and public from the meeting.

To receive and consider the attached report, supplementary agenda containing revised legal comments and recommendations arising from the Cabinet meeting held on 1 October 2024.

 

Please note that the exempt appendices to this report have been circulated within the exempt agenda supplement.

Council Agenda item 13 (Cabinet Minute 74)

 

Portico Shipping Ltd Review

 

The recommendations contained in minute 74 of the Cabinet meeting held on 1 October 2024 were approved unopposed.

 

RESOLVED that Council:

 

(i)       APPROVED Portico’s investment requirement of £20m over the next 10 years, to deliver an overall return at today's value (net present value) of £4.4m during the period 2024/25 to 2033/34, and agrees to finance this, as follows (subject to recommendations 2.2.2, 2.2.3, 2.2.4 and 2.2.5 below)*:

 

§  £1.9m funded from Portico’s existing loan facility;

§  £13.6m funded from an increase in Portico’s loan facility; and

§  £4.5m funded directly through the direct acquisition by the Council of equipment and lease to Portico on commercial terms.

 

(ii)           AGREED that the Council's Authorised Limit (the maximum amount of borrowing permitted by the Council) and the Operational Boundary (the maximum amount of borrowing that is expected) approved by Full Council on 13 February 2024 is increased to accommodate the phasing of Portico's £20m investment requirement.

 

 

* Agreed Cabinet recommendations 2.2.2-2.2.5 referenced in recommendation (i) above:

 

2.2.2     Updated subsidy control advice is gained by the Council.

 

2.2.3     The Council loan is provided on terms and at a rate consistent with subsidy control legislation.

 

2.2.4     Any draw down on the loan facility by Portico is subject to the following:

 

i)        A rolling annual review of the 20 Year Business Plan demonstrating the continuing viability of Portico and that the continued operation of Portico continues to deliver the best financial return compared with all other viable alternatives

 

ii)      The Capital Investment is necessary either for the sustainability of existing income streams or for the generation of additional income.

 

iii)     Any proposed Capital Investment itself represents the most favourable return when assessed against the balance of:

 

§   The financial return on a Net Present Value basis and over the whole life of the asset created versus other potential options for the same outcome.

§   The relative risk of each alternative option.

iv)     Approval by the S151 Officer.

 

2.2.5     Continued parent company support and the availability of the loan facility is subject to the annual review by the Company Advisory Board, and approval of a satisfactory Budget and 3 Year Business Plan, which must demonstrate to the shareholders satisfaction that:

 

§     The assumptions that underpin the 3 Year Business Plan are robust with a more than reasonable chance of being achievable.

 

§     That the 3 Year Business Plan is prepared to illustrate the financial effect of reasonable optimistic and reasonable pessimistic scenarios, in order that the shareholder is aware of the reasonable range of risk associated with the "Base Case" Business Plan.

 

§     Recognising the exposure of the company to cyclical trade factors and adverse weather, that the overall 3 to 5 Year financial results of the Company provide an overall net return to the Shareholder over the period taking into account all returns received by the Shareholder through rents, dues and all other income elements of services provided by the Shareholder (including the Portsmouth International Port (PIP)).

Proposed by Councillor Spencer Gardner

Seconded by Councillor Benedict Swann

 

Council Notes:

 

      i.         The Labour Government’s recent decision to restrict the Winter Fuel Payment to only pensioners in receipt of means-tested benefits like Pension Credit, as announced by Chancellor Rachel Reeves.

 

     ii.         The estimated impact of this decision, which Age UK says will mean 2 million pensioners who badly need the money to stay warm this winter will not receive it.

 

    iii.         The significant role that Winter Fuel Payments play in helping older residents Portsmouth and across the UK afford heating during the coldest months, thereby preventing 'heat or eat' dilemmas and safeguarding health.

 

   iv.         The criticism from Age UK, the Countryside Alliance and other charities, highlighting the social injustice and potential health risks posed by this sudden policy change.

 

     v.         The additional strain this decision will place on vulnerable pensioners, many of whom do not claim Pension Credit despite being eligible, further exacerbating their financial hardship.

 

Council believes:

 

      i.         That the Winter Fuel Payment has been a lifeline for many older people across the UK and that restricting its availability solely to those on Pension Credit risks leaving many pensioners in financial hardship.

 

     ii.         While some pensioners currently in receipt of the Winter Fuel Payment may not require it, many thousands across Portsmouth sit just above the cut-off for Pension Credit and will now lose their allowance.

 

    iii.         The decision to means-test Winter Fuel Payments, especially with such short notice and without adequate compensatory measures, is deeply unfair and will disproportionately affect the health and well-being of our poorest older residents.

 

   iv.         The government’s approach fails to consider the administrative barriers and stigma that prevent eligible pensioners from claiming Pension Credit, leaving many without the support they desperately need.

 

Council resolves to:

 

      i.         Bring forward a Council-led local awareness campaign to alert those eligible of Pension Credit which in some respects will help access to the Winter Fuel Payment for those most in need;

 

     ii.         Request that the Council Leader write to the Chancellor of the Exchequer, urging a review of the decision to means-test the Winter Fuel Payment and asking the government to ensure that vulnerable pensioners, particularly those who do not claim Pension Credit, are protected from fuel poverty;

 

     iii.            This Council supports the ‘Save the Winter Fuel Payment for Struggling Pensioners ’petition being run by Age UK and requests that all members be written to offering them the opportunity to sign the petition themselves; and

 

   iv.         Encourage local efforts to promote Pension Credit uptake through council services and partnerships with local charities and community organisations to ensure that all eligible pensioners in Portsmouth are supported in claiming their entitlement.

It was

 

Proposed by Councillor Spencer Gardner

Seconded by Councillor Benedict Swann

 

That notice of motion (a) as set out on the agenda be adopted.

 

As an amendment it was:

 

Proposed by Councillor Graham Heaney

Seconded by Councillor Yinka Adeniran

 

To add a new i after 'Council Notes':

 

'i. That the Institute for Fiscal Studies (IFS) and later the Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR) identified funding shortfalls in the financial plans (Departmental Expenditure Limits) put forward by the previous Chancellor Jeremy Hunt.'

 

Renumber subsequent paragraphs in 'Council Notes' ii to vi.

 

Add new paragraph vii at the end of the 'Council Notes' section:

 

'vii. That the government have committed to the triple lock on pensions for the whole of this parliament meaning that on top of the 8.5% increase in 2024-25 the increase in 2025 is estimated to be 4%.'

 

As an amendment it was:

 

Proposed by Councillor Steve Pitt

Seconded by Councillor Darren Sanders

 

To insert at the beginning of the motion before 'Council notes'

 

'The Council welcomes the Liberal Democrat administration's announcement of the Portsmouth Older Person's Energy Payment, which is calculated to support an additional 2,000 households with £200 payments for those under 80 and £300 for those 80 and over. We note that the scheme is targeted to those in receipt of either Housing Benefit or Council Tax Support but not in receipt of Pension Credit.'

 

In recommendation (i) of the 'Council resolves to:' section, replace 'Bring forward a' with 'Support the forthcoming'

 

Following debate, the proposer of the original motion, Councillor Spencer Gardner agreed to subsume the amendment put by Councillor Steve Pitt into the motion.

 

In accordance with Standing Order 48b, eight councillors stood to request a recorded vote.

Council voted on the amendment in the name of Councillor Graham Heaney.

 

The following members voted in favour:

 

Councillor Yinka Adeniran	Councillor Cal Corkery
Councillor George Fielding	Councillor Charlotte Gerada
Councillor Raj Ghosh	Councillor Graham Heaney
Councillor Judith Smyth	Councillor Asghar Shah
Councillor Mary Vallely

The following members voted against:

 

Councillor Richard Adair	Councillor Dave Ashmore
Councillor Chris Attwell	Councillor Kimberly Barrett
Councillor Simon Bosher	Councillor Hannah Brent
Councillor Stuart Brown	Councillor Peter Candlish
Councillor Matthew Cordy	Councillor Raymond Dent
Councillor Chris Dike Councillor Spencer Gardner	Councillor Nicholas Dorrington Councillor Ian Holder
Councillor Suzy Horton	Councillor Lee Hunt
Councillor Mark Jeffery Councillor Brian Madgwick Councillor Hugh Mason Councillor Leonie Oliver Councillor Darren Sanders Councillor Emily Strudwick Councillor Lee Tindal Councillor Matthew Winnington	Councillor Abdul Kadir Councillor George Madgwick Councillor Derek North Councillor Steve Pitt Councillor Russell Simpson Councillor Benedict Swann Councillor Gerald Vernon-Jackson

 

The following member abstained from voting:

 

Councillor Jason Fazackarley, Lord Mayor.

 

It was therefore RESOLVED that the amendment in the name of Councillor Graham Heaney was declared LOST.

 

Council voted on the substantive motion incorporating the subsumed amendment in the name of Councillor Steve Pitt.

 

The following members voted in favour:

 

Councillor Richard Adair	Councillor Yinka Adeniran
Councillor Dave Ashmore	Councillor Chris Attwell
Councillor Kimberly Barratt	Councillor Simon Bosher
Councillor Hannah Brent	Councillor Stuart Brown
Councillor Peter Candlish Councillor Cal Corkery Councillor Chris Dike Councillor George Fielding Councillor Charlotte Gerada Councillor Graham Heaney Councillor Suzy Horton Councillor Mark Jeffery Councillor Brian Madgwick Councillor Hugh Mason Councillor Leonie Oliver Councillor Darren Sanders Councillor Russell Simpson Councillor Emily Strudwick Councillor Lee Tindal Councillor Gerald Vernon-Jackson	Councillor Matthew Cordy Councillor Raymond Dent Councillor Nicholas Dorrington Councillor Spender Gardner Councillor Rajah Ghosh Councillor Ian Holder Councillor Lee Hunt Councillor Abdul Kadir Councillor George Madgwick Councillor Derek North Councillor Steve Pitt Councillor Asghar Shah Councillor Judith Smyth Councillor Benedict Swann Councillor Mary Vallely Councillor Matthew Winnington

No members voted against.

 

The following member abstained from voting:

 

Councillor Jason Fazackarley, Lord Mayor

 

It was therefore RESOLVED that the motion in the name of Councillor Spencer Gardner and incorporating the subsumed amendment in the name of Councillor Steve Pitt was declared CARRIED.

 

Council therefore:

 

Welcomed the Liberal Democrat administration's announcement of the Portsmouth Older Person's Energy Payment, which is calculated to support an additional 2,000 households with £200 payments for those under 80 and £300 for those 80 and over. We note that the scheme is targeted to those in receipt of either Housing Benefit or Council Tax Support but not in receipt of Pension Credit.

 

NOTED:

 

      i.         The Labour Government’s recent decision to restrict the Winter Fuel Payment to only pensioners in receipt of means-tested benefits like Pension Credit, as announced by Chancellor Rachel Reeves.

 

     ii.         The estimated impact of this decision, which Age UK says will mean 2 million pensioners who badly need the money to stay warm this winter will not receive it.

 

    iii.         The significant role that Winter Fuel Payments play in helping older residents Portsmouth and across the UK afford heating during the coldest months, thereby preventing 'heat or eat' dilemmas and safeguarding health.

 

   iv.         The criticism from Age UK, the Countryside Alliance and other charities, highlighting the social injustice and potential health risks posed by this sudden policy change.

 

     v.         The additional strain this decision will place on vulnerable pensioners, many of whom do not claim Pension Credit despite being eligible, further exacerbating their financial hardship.

 

BELIEVED:

 

      i.         That the Winter Fuel Payment has been a lifeline for many older people across the UK and that restricting its availability solely to those on Pension Credit risks leaving many pensioners in financial hardship.

 

     ii.         While some pensioners currently in receipt of the Winter Fuel Payment may not require it, many thousands across Portsmouth sit just above the cut-off for Pension Credit and will now lose their allowance.

 

    iii.         The decision to means-test Winter Fuel Payments, especially with such short notice and without adequate compensatory measures, is deeply unfair and will disproportionately affect the health and well-being of our poorest older residents.

 

   iv.         The government’s approach fails to consider the administrative barriers and stigma that prevent eligible pensioners from claiming Pension Credit, leaving many without the support they desperately need.

 

RESOLVED to:

 

      i.   Support the forthcomingCouncil-led local awareness campaign to alert those eligible of Pension Credit which in some respects will help access to the Winter Fuel Payment for those most in need;

 

     ii.   Request that the Council Leader write to the Chancellor of the Exchequer, urging a review of the decision to means-test the Winter Fuel Payment and asking the government to ensure that vulnerable pensioners, particularly those who do not claim Pension Credit, are protected from fuel poverty;

 

     iii.  Support the ‘Save the Winter Fuel Payment for Struggling Pensioners ’petition being run by Age UK and requests that all members be written to offering them the opportunity to sign the petition themselves; and

 

 iv.  Encourage local efforts to promote Pension Credit uptake through council services and partnerships with local charities and community organisations to ensure that all eligible pensioners in Portsmouth are supported in claiming their entitlement.

Proposed by Councillor Lee Tindal

Seconded by Councillor Brian Madgwick

 

 

Recently the guidance on the RSV vaccine has been updated to only allow eligibility to include elderly people within the narrow age range of 75 - 79 years old. This will exclude a huge portion of Portsmouth's most vulnerable residents.

 

RSV vaccine helps protect against respiratory syncytial virus. This is a common virus that most people have several times in their life. It usually gets better by itself however in some higher risker members of our society it can cause additional illnesses like pneumonia. This can cause serious breathing problems which usually need hospital treatment and can be life threatening. Over 14,000 people in the UK are admitted to hospital each year with complications from RSV. 

 

Many advanced countries across the world vaccinate all members of the public over the age of 75 with no upper age limit. In fact the CDC in United States of American recommends the vaccine to most people over the age of 60 and then becomes vital for those aged 75 years old onwards. 

 

A recent study conducted by pharmacists analysed the NHS vaccination programme that they can not find any medical research that concludes that those who are over the age of 80 should not be vaccinated owing to a low level of immunity achieved or adverse clinical reasons. It is also noted in the research article that there doesn’t seem to be any plans to extend the age range in future years. The conclusion of the article states that it can only be reasonably concluded that the NHS decision has been made on a cost basis only.

 

With this in mind, Full Council requests that:

 

      i.         The Cabinet Member for Community Wellbeing, Health & Care writes to the Governments Secretary of State for Health and Social Care to express our councils concerns about excluding people over the age of 80 and asks the Government to review their policy for future years; and

 

     ii.         Asks the Councils Administration to review whether we have the ability to support elderly members of our society who are excluded from the Government’s policy to access this vaccine via alternative means this winter.

It was

 

Proposed by Councillor Lee Tindal

Seconded by Councillor Brian Madgwick

 

That notice of motion (b) as set out on the agenda be adopted.

 

Council debated the motion.

 

Following a vote, the motion was declared CARRIED.

 

It was therefore RESOLVED that:

 

Recently the guidance on the RSV vaccine has been updated to only allow eligibility to include elderly people within the narrow age range of 75 - 79 years old. This will exclude a huge portion of Portsmouth's most vulnerable residents.

 

RSV vaccine helps protect against respiratory syncytial virus. This is a common virus that most people have several times in their life. It usually gets better by itself however in some higher risker members of our society it can cause additional illnesses like pneumonia. This can cause serious breathing problems which usually need hospital treatment and can be life threatening. Over 14,000 people in the UK are admitted to hospital each year with complications from RSV. 

 

Many advanced countries across the world vaccinate all members of the public over the age of 75 with no upper age limit. In fact the CDC in United States of American recommends the vaccine to most people over the age of 60 and then becomes vital for those aged 75 years old onwards. 

 

A recent study conducted by pharmacists analysed the NHS vaccination programme that they can not find any medical research that concludes that those who are over the age of 80 should not be vaccinated owing to a low level of immunity achieved or adverse clinical reasons. It is also noted in the research article that there doesn’t seem to be any plans to extend the age range in future years. The conclusion of the article states that it can only be reasonably concluded that the NHS decision has been made on a cost basis only.

 

With this in mind, Full Council requests that:

 

      i.   The Cabinet Member for Community Wellbeing, Health & Care writes to the Governments Secretary of State for Health and Social Care to express our councils concerns about excluding people over the age of 80 and asks the Government to review their policy for future years; and

 

     ii.   The Councils Administration review whether we have the ability to support elderly members of our society who are excluded from the Government’s policy to access this vaccine via alternative means this winter.

Proposed by Councillor Matthew Winnington

Seconded by Councillor Richard Adair

 

Portsmouth City Council notes that two Portsmouth dental practices that held NHS contracts recently closed in the city with no notice to either the NHS or to their service users.

 

The company involved informed the Hampshire & Isle of Wight Integrated Care Board, who are responsible for the NHS contracts, of their practices' closure at extremely short notice which meant that there was no ability for there to be any advance notice to anyone who relied on these practices for their dental care.

 

This left many people in Portsmouth, both NHS and private patients, with booked appointments suddenly cancelled and left in the lurch in the middle of treatment.

 

This has brought to light a serious flaw in the way that NHS contracts are awarded under government rules and shows the need for change.

 

This Council therefore calls on the government to amend NHS dental contracting to require contract holders to inform the commissioning body if they are struggling financially or are otherwise likely to have difficulty in fulfilling their contract going forwards and to mandate a minimum notice period of three months if they wish to end their contract early. There would also be a mandate for them to ensure that dental care of their patients who have appointments already made are booked in with another local provider under whichever scheme (private or NHS) the treatment with the contract holder had been booked under.

 

A letter to this effect will be sent to the Secretary of State for Health & Social Care by the Portsmouth Director of Public Health.

It was

 

Proposed by Councillor Matthew Winnington

Seconded by Councillor Richard Adair

 

That notice of motion (c) as set out on the agenda be adopted.

 

Council debated the motion.

 

Following a vote, the motion was declared CARRIED.

 

It was therefore RESOLVED that:

 

Portsmouth City Council notes that two Portsmouth dental practices that held NHS contracts recently closed in the city with no notice to either the NHS or to their service users.

 

The company involved informed the Hampshire & Isle of Wight Integrated Care Board, who are responsible for the NHS contracts, of their practices' closure at extremely short notice which meant that there was no ability for there to be any advance notice to anyone who relied on these practices for their dental care.

 

This left many people in Portsmouth, both NHS and private patients, with booked appointments suddenly cancelled and left in the lurch in the middle of treatment.

 

This has brought to light a serious flaw in the way that NHS contracts are awarded under government rules and shows the need for change.

 

This Council therefore calls on the government to amend NHS dental contracting to require contract holders to inform the commissioning body if they are struggling financially or are otherwise likely to have difficulty in fulfilling their contract going forwards and to mandate a minimum notice period of three months if they wish to end their contract early. There would also be a mandate for them to ensure that dental care of their patients who have appointments already made are booked in with another local provider under whichever scheme (private or NHS) the treatment with the contract holder had been booked under.

 

A letter to this effect will be sent to the Secretary of State for Health & Social Care by the Portsmouth Director of Public Health.

Procedural note

 

This motion will fall under Standing Order 32b(ii) and not be considered at this meeting should the motion titled 'Changes to the Winter Fuel Allowance and protecting pensioners from fuel poverty' at agenda item 14a be proposed, seconded and considered by the Council.

 

Proposed by Councillor Kimberly Barrett

Seconded by Councillor Peter Candlish

 

Although some believe that universal Winter Fuel Payments are not necessary, this Council is deeply concerned that many pensioners on lower and middle incomes will now not receive those payments. Across England and Wales, the number of people eligible for winter fuel payments will fall by almost 10 million (from 11.6 million to only 1.5 million).

 

In Portsmouth, between 2022-2023, 28,824 pensioners claimed the winter fuel payment. Of those, only 4326 claim pension credits. This means that the number of pensioners affected by the change in eligibility criteria is shockingly at least around 24,457. 10,613 are in Portsmouth South (81.3%) and 13,844 are in Portsmouth North (87.8%). That means roughly 85% of pensioners in Portsmouth that were eligible for winter fuel payments will no longer be able to claim the payment from this winter onwards. New figures from the Department of Work and Pensions have also shown a rise in those figures in Portsmouth with 29,232 in the last year reaching out for additional support.

 

This Council believes that the Labour Government has set the threshold at which pensioners do not qualify for Winter Fuel Payments far too low. Only those receiving a pension of less than £218.15 a week (or £332.95 a week for couples) are eligible for pension credits. This is significantly lower than the living wage rate.

 

This Council is also concerned by the low take up of pension credit with only 63% of those eligible nationwide receiving them – and over 880,000 pensioners not doing so.

 

This Council recognises the role we must all play to increase awareness of benefits such as Pension Credit to ensure people are aware of the support they are entitled to. Additionally, to this, this Liberal Democrat administration is stepping forward to create a support scheme that will support some of those that now find themselves just over the threshold.

 

This Council further notes that the Energy Price Cap is due to rise by 10% in October, which, combined by the removal of Winter Fuel Payments will push thousands of local pensioners into fuel poverty. It also places on record it’s thanks to the following groups and organisations preparing for and already offering support to those residents who will find themselves in increasingly difficult situations in the near future:

 

·       Switched on Portsmouth/Portsmouth City Council's energy team

·       Solent WASPI

·       Age UK

·       All the food banks and pantries across Portsmouth

·       Warm Spaces

This Council resolves to:

 

(i)    Ask the Leader of the Council and the Chief Executive to write to the Chancellor of the Exchequer calling for the policy on linking Winter Fuel Payments to Pension Credit receipt to be immediately paused and introduce a new threshold to determine eligibility for Winter Fuel Payments. This Council further requests that the Council Leader and the Chief Executive write to both the Portsmouth North and Portsmouth South MP's asking them to give their formal support to halting the changes to the Winter Fuel Payment eligibility;

(ii)   Request that group leaders within Portsmouth sign a joint letter to the Chancellor of the Exchequer calling for the new Winter Fuel Payment policy to be suspended and reviewed; and

(iii) Urgently commence a significant awareness campaign to maximise uptake of pension credits and asks all Councillors to share the messaging and support that Switched on Portsmouth and the Council's energy team will put out to try to help our residents in need.

As notice of motion (a) 'Changes to the Winter Fuel Allowance and protecting pensioners from fuel poverty' had been proposed, seconded and considered by the Council, the Lord Mayor advised that this notice of motion had thereby fallen under Standing Order 32b(ii) and would not be considered at this meeting.

Proposed by: Councillor Charlotte Gerada

Seconded by: Councillor Yinka Adeniran

 

This council notes:

 

(i)         Baby loss affects 1 in 2 of people in the UK every year. [1] In 2022, there were: 2,680 stillbirths across the UK; between 110,426 and 156,089 miscarriages in England and Wales; nearly 12,000 ectopic pregnancies; 1,825 neonatal deaths in England and Wales. [2]

 

(ii)        In England and Wales, babies from the Black ethnic group continued to have the highest stillbirth rate of 6.5 per 1,000 births, compared with 3.5 for the White ethnic group. The stillbirth rate in the Asian ethnic group is 4.7 per 1,000 births. [3]

 

(iii)       Baby Loss Awareness Week takes place every year between 9-15 October. Portsmouth City Council has marked this by lighting up Portsmouth Guildhall during the Wave of Light, a globally recognised event, which takes place during Baby Loss Week. [4]

 

(iv)      At present, the NHS follows guidelines that say a GP will refer someone to a doctor who specialises in miscarriage after they have had 3 recurrent early miscarriages or 1 late miscarriage. [5]

 

(v)        The “Three miscarriage rule” means women with undiagnosed underlying health issues are forced to go through multiple, in many cases preventable, miscarriages before receiving treatment.

 

(vi)      The charity Tommy’s is campaigning for improved care and support services for women and parents who experience baby loss. [6]

 

This council believes:

 

(i)             Baby loss can cause isolation, loneliness and feelings of hopelessness. It can have an immediate effect on the health and well being of individuals after they’ve experienced loss, but the grief and sadness can continue on in perpetuity. 

 

(ii)            Baby loss shouldn’t be viewed as an inevitability and that much more can be done to prevent baby loss, with increased medical intervention at earlier stages and medical research.

 

(iii)          Despite how common baby loss is, and the important work Tommy’s, Sands and the NHS does, not all parents experiencing baby loss get the support they need.

 

(iv)          Every Portsmouth parent who experiences baby loss should get the support they need, no matter their age, ethnicity or sexuality.

 

This council resolves:

 

(i)             To ask the Health Overview & Scrutiny Panel to conduct a review of baby loss in Portsmouth and possible improvements to local services for parents experiencing baby loss;

 

(ii)            To ask the Cabinet Member for Health and Social Care to proactively promote the support services available for parents who’ve experienced baby loss, including local support groups;

 

(iii)          To ask the Cabinet Member for Health and Social Care to continue to light up Portsmouth Guildhall pink and blue to mark the international Wave of Light Day; and

 

(iv)          To ask Group Leaders to write to the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care in support of the recommendations from Tommy’s charity about how to tackle the issue of baby loss, including: The NHS providing 24/7 clinical care during and after baby loss; adopting Tommy’s graded model of miscarriage care that supports understanding the cause of the loss and provides care plans for subsequent pregnancies; and recording miscarriages nationally.

 

References:

 

[1] Tommy’s, Baby Loss Awareness Week: https://www.tommys.org/get-involved/campaigns/baby-loss-awareness-week?gad_source=1&gclid=CjwKCAjw6c63BhAiEiwAF0EH1Gah1RQUYDsfEpVbT9wSRm7t9OxHZs_aM3Ut5tJ1Na-hAPdIYwrpZBoClJQQAvD_BwE 

 

[2] Tommy’s, Baby Loss Statistics: https://www.tommys.org/baby-loss-support/pregnancy-loss-statistics 

 

[3] Tommy’s, Baby Loss Statistics: https://www.tommys.org/baby-loss-support/pregnancy-loss-statistics 

 

[4] Solent NHS, News Stories, Baby Loss Awareness Week 2023: https://www.solent.nhs.uk/our-stories/news/posts/2023/october/baby-loss-awareness-week-portsmouth-guildhall-to-light-up-blue-and-pink/ 

 

[5] Tommy’s, Your Care After Miscarraige: https://www.tommys.org/baby-loss-support/miscarriage-information-and-support/tests-and-treatments-after-miscarriage/your-care-after-3-miscarriages#:~:text=The%20NHS%20follows%20guidelines%20that,to%20investigate%20after%202%20miscarriages. 

 

[6] Tommy’s, Campaigns: https://www.tommys.org/get-involved/campaigns 

 

 

It was

 

Proposed by Councillor Charlotte Gerada

Seconded by Councillor Yinka Adeniran

 

That notice of motion (e) as set out on the agenda be adopted.

 

Council debated the motion.

 

Following a vote, the motion was declared CARRIED.

 

Council therefore:

 

NOTED:

 

(i)     Baby loss affects 1 in 2 of people in the UK every year. In 2022, there were: 2,680 stillbirths across the UK; between 110,426 and 156,089 miscarriages in England and Wales; nearly 12,000 ectopic pregnancies; 1,825 neonatal deaths in England and Wales.

 

(ii)    In England and Wales, babies from the Black ethnic group continued to have the highest stillbirth rate of 6.5 per 1,000 births, compared with 3.5 for the White ethnic group. The stillbirth rate in the Asian ethnic group is 4.7 per 1,000 births.

 

(iii)    Baby Loss Awareness Week takes place every year between 9-15 October. Portsmouth City Council has marked this by lighting up Portsmouth Guildhall during the Wave of Light, a globally recognised event, which takes place during Baby Loss Week.

 

(iv)    At present, the NHS follows guidelines that say a GP will refer someone to a doctor who specialises in miscarriage after they have had 3 recurrent early miscarriages or 1 late miscarriage.

 

(v)    The “Three miscarriage rule” means women with undiagnosed underlying health issues are forced to go through multiple, in many cases preventable, miscarriages before receiving treatment.

 

(vi)   The charity Tommy’s is campaigning for improved care and support services for women and parents who experience baby loss.

 

BELIEVED:

 

(i)       Baby loss can cause isolation, loneliness and feelings of hopelessness. It can have an immediate effect on the health and well being of individuals after they’ve experienced loss, but the grief and sadness can continue on in perpetuity. 

 

(ii)       Baby loss shouldn’t be viewed as an inevitability and that much more can be done to prevent baby loss, with increased medical intervention at earlier stages and medical research.

 

(iii)      Despite how common baby loss is, and the important work Tommy’s, Sands and the NHS does, not all parents experiencing baby loss get the support they need.

 

(iv)      Every Portsmouth parent who experiences baby loss should get the support they need, no matter their age, ethnicity or sexuality.

 

RESOLVED:

 

(i)       To ask the Health Overview & Scrutiny Panel to conduct a review of baby loss in Portsmouth and possible improvements to local services for parents experiencing baby loss;

 

(ii)      To ask the Cabinet Member for Health and Social Care to proactively promote the support services available for parents who’ve experienced baby loss, including local support groups;

 

(iii)     To ask the Cabinet Member for Health and Social Care to continue to light up Portsmouth Guildhall pink and blue to mark the international Wave of Light Day; and

 

(iv)     To ask Group Leaders to write to the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care in support of the recommendations from Tommy’s charity about how to tackle the issue of baby loss, including: The NHS providing 24/7 clinical care during and after baby loss; adopting Tommy’s graded model of miscarriage care that supports understanding the cause of the loss and provides care plans for subsequent pregnancies; and recording miscarriages nationally.

Proposed by Councillor Derek North

Seconded by Councillor Chris Dike

 

As a council we rely on a DBS check service that has to go through the Hampshire & IOW Police service. This process is used across multiple departments in the council including, but not limited too, foster carers, adult services, children's services, HR/Recruitment and direct payments to parents whom qualify for support. 

 

Currently our council are experiencing delays of up to 6 months to receive a full response in relation to a DBS check which is seeing some of the most vulnerable people in our city be directly affected by the delays. Furthermore, some of our council departments are having to submit DBS checks up to 6 months in advance to meet the receive deadlines of our own staff. In relation to recruitment there are examples of jobs being offered but then waiting over 4 months for a DBS check to come back, by which point the person who was offered employment had moved onto alternative work, thus the process of recruitment needed to start again.

 

Due to the high importance of ensuring that the people within our organisation are checked to the highest standards it means other methods too fast track the process aren’t always available to us.

 

In one of the most serious cases reported to us there has been a local parent who was approved for direct payments for care support for their child well over a year ago whom was unable to receive the funding for this support due to delays within this process. This means their child was without vital care support they so desperately needed for over a year due to the delays in the Police service.

 

With this in mind, Full Council requests that Group Leaders and the Cabinet Member for Children, Families & Education write to the Hampshire Police & Crime Commissioner to express our concerns over the delay of DBS checks being returned and request the Hampshire & IOW Police & Crime Commissioner give us an update on the plans to improve the timescales of the service being provided.

It was

 

Proposed by Councillor Derek North

Seconded by Councillor Chris Dike

 

That notice of motion (f) as set out on the agenda be adopted.

 

Council debated the motion.

 

Following a vote, the motion was declared CARRIED.

 

It was therefore RESOLVED that:

 

As a council we rely on a DBS check service that has to go through the Hampshire & IOW Police service. This process is used across multiple departments in the council including, but not limited too, foster carers, adult services, children's services, HR/Recruitment and direct payments to parents whom qualify for support. 

 

Currently our council is experiencing delays of up to 6 months to receive a full response in relation to a DBS check which is seeing some of the most vulnerable people in our city be directly affected by the delays. Furthermore, some of our council departments are having to submit DBS checks up to 6 months in advance to meet the receive deadlines of our own staff. In relation to recruitment there are examples of jobs being offered but then waiting over 4 months for a DBS check to come back, by which point the person who was offered employment had moved onto alternative work, thus the process of recruitment needed to start again.

 

Due to the high importance of ensuring that the people within our organisation are checked to the highest standards it means other methods too fast track the process aren’t always available to us.

 

In one of the most serious cases reported to us there has been a local parent who was approved for direct payments for care support for their child well over a year ago whom was unable to receive the funding for this support due to delays within this process. This means their child was without vital care support they so desperately needed for over a year due to the delays in the Police service.

 

With this in mind, Full Council requests that Group Leaders and the Cabinet Member for Children, Families & Education write to the Hampshire Police & Crime Commissioner to express our concerns over the delay of DBS checks being returned and request the Hampshire & IOW Police & Crime Commissioner give us an update on the plans to improve the timescales of the service being provided.

Proposed by Councillor Graham Heaney

Seconded by Councillor Yinka Adeniran

 

Connors Toy Libraries was set up in 1973 with initial funding by the Lord Mayors charity so has a close connection with the city council.

 

The service offered by the charity has grown and developed over the years and it includes not only toys but plays a vital role in providing holistic support to ensure families get what they need from other services, for example, housing, health or education.

 

The community-based toy library sessions involve, parents, grandparents and carers and they provide mutual support and friendship for those involved in parenting. A mobile toy library service is provided, and an outreach project caters for vulnerable families.

 

The child carers toy store makes resources available to families, foster carers, nurseries, schools, pre-schools, childminders, play schemes and respite care.

Significant funding has come from the National Lottery over several years, but this cannot provide continuous funding for the organisation. Fundraising is undertaken on a regular basis and the organisation has built up reserves.

 

However, funding is only guaranteed until March 2025 unless new sources of funding are identified. The organisation intends to apply for the next round of Lottery Funding and is awaiting detail of the new criteria in the autumn so any new bid may not be processed before March 2025.

 

There is concern that this long established and valuable service is at risk of closing and some initial discussions have taken place with the city council about what support may be available to keep the charity in operation.

 

Therefore

 

Council acknowledges the valuable work done by the organisation over a long period of time and wishes to see its work continue.

 

Council asks the Cabinet to explore any opportunities to provide support for the organisation in preparing funding bids, in seeking work with partners that generate income for the organisation and alerts them to any opportunities where they can bid for contracts to provide their services.

 

Council asks the Cabinet to consider adding some interim financial support for the organisation to the potential list of budget pressures in preparing the budget for the next financial year.

It was

 

Proposed by Councillor Graham Heaney

Seconded by Councillor Yinka Adeniran

 

That notice of motion (g) as set out on the agenda be adopted.

 

As an amendment it was

 

Proposed by Councillor Steve Pitt

Seconded by Councillor Matthew Winnington

 

To between the below paragraphs:

 

'Council acknowledges the valuable work done by the organisation over a long period of time and wishes to see its work continue.'

 

 and...

 

'Council asks the Cabinet to explore any opportunities to provide support for the organisation in preparing funding bids, in seeking work with partners that generate income for the organisation and alerts them to any opportunities where they can bid for contracts to provide their services.'

 

insert:

 

'Council notes the significant financial support given to Connors Toy Library since 2004, totalling approximately £170,000 in subsidy below the commercial rent of their unit.

 

Council also notes the £2,000 invested in replacing carpets this year.

 

Council further notes that the current year's rent is £3,490 compared to the £16,700 commercial rent for their unit.'

 

Then after:

 

'Council asks the Cabinet to consider adding some interim financial support for the organisation to the potential list of budget pressures in preparing the budget for the next financial year'

 

insert immediately after 'year':

 

'recognising the significant budget pressures of £3.6m at the end of Q1 arising from rising costs and demand in Adult and Children's Social Care and Temporary Accommodation; issues negatively affecting almost all upper tier local authorities in England.

 

Council requests that the Leader of the Council write to Stephen Morgan MP, the Minister with responsibility for Early Years to:

 

(i)       ask him to lobby for a review of National Lottery grants which would enable organisations such as Connors Toy Library to bid for ongoing funding; and 

 

(ii)      request that he considers what help the government could give to voluntary sector organisations such as Connors Toy Library, to help them continue the excellent work they do for our communities, as part of helping to ensure every child has the best start in life, especially in the climate of ongoing uncertainty over the funding of local government and the pressures on council budgets.'

 

Following debate, the proposer of the original motion, Councillor Graham Heaney agreed to subsume the amendment in the name of Councillor Steve Pitt into the motion.

 

Following a vote, the substantive motion incorporating the subsumed amendment in the name of Councillor Steve Pitt was declared CARRIED.

 

It was therefore RESOLVED that:

 

Connors Toy Libraries was set up in 1973 with initial funding by the Lord Mayors charity so has a close connection with the city council.

 

The service offered by the charity has grown and developed over the years and it includes not only toys but plays a vital role in providing holistic support to ensure families get what they need from other services, for example, housing, health or education.

 

The community-based toy library sessions involve, parents, grandparents and carers and they provide mutual support and friendship for those involved in parenting. A mobile toy library service is provided, and an outreach project caters for vulnerable families.

 

The child carers toy store makes resources available to families, foster carers, nurseries, schools, pre-schools, childminders, play schemes and respite care.

 

Significant funding has come from the National Lottery over several years, but this cannot provide continuous funding for the organisation. Fundraising is undertaken on a regular basis and the organisation has built up reserves.

 

However, funding is only guaranteed until March 2025 unless new sources of funding are identified. The organisation intends to apply for the next round of Lottery Funding and is awaiting detail of the new criteria in the autumn so any new bid may not be processed before March 2025.

 

There is concern that this long established and valuable service is at risk of closing and some initial discussions have taken place with the city council about what support may be available to keep the charity in operation.

 

Therefore

 

Council acknowledges the valuable work done by the organisation over a long period of time and wishes to see its work continue.

 

Council notes the significant financial support given to Connors Toy Library since 2004, totalling approximately £170,000 in subsidy below the commercial rent of their unit.

 

Council also notes the £2,000 invested in replacing carpets this year.

 

Council further notes that the current year's rent is £3,490 compared to the £16,700 commercial rent for their unit.

 

Council asks the Cabinet to explore any opportunities to provide support for the organisation in preparing funding bids, in seeking work with partners that generate income for the organisation and alerts them to any opportunities where they can bid for contracts to provide their services.

 

Council asks the Cabinet to consider adding some interim financial support for the organisation to the potential list of budget pressures in preparing the budget for the next financial year, recognising the significant budget pressures of £3.6m at the end of Q1 arising from rising costs and demand in Adult and Children's Social Care and Temporary Accommodation; issues negatively affecting almost all upper tier local authorities in England.

 

Council requests that the Leader of the Council write to Stephen Morgan MP, the Minister with responsibility for Early Years to:

 

(i)         ask him to lobby for a review of National Lottery grants which would enable organisations such as Connors Toy Library to bid for ongoing funding; and 

 

(ii)     request that he considers what help the government could give to voluntary sector organisations such as Connors Toy Library, to help them continue the excellent work they do for our communities, as part of helping to ensure every child has the best start in life, especially in the climate of ongoing uncertainty over the funding of local government and the pressures on council budgets.

Sixteen questions from members had been received under Standing Order No 17.

 

The first question was from Councillor George Fielding:

 

"Following recent councillor interactions on social media, could the Leader of the Council please provide us with an update on the previously agreed motion from last October on the topic of Debate Not Hate?"

 

In reply, the Leader of the Council confirmed that the council had signed up to the Local Government Association campaign and that he had written to local MPs and the Secretary of State on 9 November 2023 asking for their support and endorsement of the campaign. 

 

A new digital process for reporting abuse and harassment had been developed and communicated to all councillors. Data through this reporting mechanism would make it easier to draw insight on which to engage with local policing and to implement effective and proactive safety measures for councillors where appropriate to do so.

 

Information about the support available to members and training in personal safety had been included in the new member induction in May 2024. A training course on personal safety had been offered to all members in July 2024, publicised via the member training catalogue and a guide titled 'Safer Interactions' had also been produced alongside. One member had attended the training event.

 

Discussions had taken place between officers and local policing about member safety, both during the local elections and remained ongoing. There had also been heightened security and briefings for candidates and agents on safety/security in advance of and during the general election. There was dedicated policing resource on the day of the general election and a police presence at the election count.

 

Members were reminded of the Nolan Principles at induction and these were also contained in the member Code of Conduct for Members within the council's constitution.

 

In reply to supplementary questions, the Leader agreed that new guidance for councillors around the use of social media would be useful and that he believed that the single most important responsibility he had as Leader of the council was to promote community cohesion.

The second question was from Councillor Asghar Shah:

 

"How much say does Portsmouth City Council have in the determination for the planning application for the water transfer pipe that will run through Drayton & Farlington?"

 

In reply, the Cabinet Member for Planning Policy & City Development, Cllr Hugh Mason explained that whilst the influence which Portsmouth City Council had as a statutory consultee was limited, it was essential.

The project was a nationally important infrastructure project and as such would be determined by the Secretary of State. 

 

As part of their pre-application work, Southern Water had set up a local authority liaison group comprising officers from the affected local authorities which met frequently to scope out the issues raised by the proposal and to inform and shape the project going forward. Portsmouth City Council had also provided significant input into the consultations which Southern Water had undertaken.

 

The key issues pertinent to Portsmouth were considered to be those mitigating the impact of the development on the local highway network in terms of construction traffic and mitigating the impact of the proposed above ground plant to be located on Portsdown Hill.

 

In response to supplementary questions, Cllr Mason confirmed that he would speak to the Assistant Director for Planning and Economic Growth in respect of Southern Water attending a meeting of the Planning Committee to explain the measures that would be taken to minimise disruption during the construction phase of the project. In respect of a public consultation meeting, Cllr Mason believed that it would be appropriate for any such meeting to be organised by the promoter of the project, Southern Water, and he agreed that consultation focussed around the affected area of Portsdown hill would be useful.

 

The third question was from Councillor George Madgwick:

 

"Can the cabinet member explain why, for the second year running, there will be no firework display in the north of the city?"

 

In reply, the Leader of the Council confirmed that once the football hub had opened at King George V playing fields, he had asked the firework company to survey the site to assess whether the fireworks display could be delivered. 

 

The firework company had confirmed that it could, and it was expected that the event would be delivered.  However, an officer site inspection to check safe egress in line with the purple guide guidance had unfortunately dictated that the event could not proceed safely.

 

Officers had continued to assess a range of sites and a full list of sites considered would be circulated to members.

 

Alexandra Park had been considered a viable option in 2023, but unfortunately the site was very exposed to the weather, as was demonstrated with the cancellation of the 2023 event. There had also been a considerable negative reaction from local residents to using the site for the event and therefore it had not been considered as an option for 2024.

 

Going forwards, the Leader stressed the need to devise and implement suitable alterations to enable Kinge George V playing fields to be brought back to being an events space for the north of the city.

 

In response to supplementary questions the Leader confirmed that Farlington Playing Fields had been considered, but the site was not well served by public transport and the size of the site would make it impossible to have both the event and parking on site.  In addition, there was a narrow single lane egress, the potential for smoke to blow across the M27 and the ground conditions could be very muddy in wet conditions.

 

Councillor Emily Strudwick was not present to ask the fourth question and therefore a written response would be provided to her in accordance with Standing Order 17(i).

 

The fifth question was from Councillor Raymond Dent:

 

"Six months on from the approved motion to reduce paper usage, can the cabinet member update us on the progress taken place to reduce the use of paper and provide alternative options to relevant members and officers?"

 

In reply, the Cabinet Member for Central Services, Councillor Chris Attwell, confirmed that all councillors had been reminded of the option to opt out of receiving paper copies of council papers following the March 2024 council meeting. 

 

In addition, all newly elected members had been advised of the option to opt out of receiving paper copies of papers during their induction and by email. To date, 12 councillors had opted out of receiving paper copies of non-exempt agendas

 

Officers were progressing software options for members to access their agendas digitally and that it was likely that the system would go live from early 2025.

 

The sixth question was from Councillor Brian Madgwick:

 

"Given the reassurances of the administration that Paulsgrove would have a number of roads resurfaced (first and foremost Chedworth Crescent), or have the top layer removed before the end of 2022 and then once again a renewed assurance by the end of 2023, can we have an update on why it's been delayed and what the plans are to complete the commitments made?"

 

In reply, the Cabinet Member for Transport, Councillor Peter Candlish, confirmed that the funds attributed to the maintenance of Portsmouth highways under the PFI covered the cost of repairing the Tertiary Road Network (TRN) to a safe level.  This was focused mainly on the structural security of the roads rather than aesthetics. 

 

The investigations and associated bid for funding to address thin surfacing had taken longer than first anticipated, but in 2023 a successful bid for additional capital (£200k) was made.  The first tranche of this budget was therefore allocated in this current 2024/25 budget year and there would be subsequent bids in future years. This programme would take time to develop and deliver because it included the need to survey many roads in Portsmouth and to test against new parameters.

 

Along with other priorities in the TRN, works would be carried out to a small number of overlaid concrete roads between January and March 2025, as was normal for the TRN works, including Chedworth Crescent.

 

In reply to a supplementary question, Cllr Candlish confirmed that the roads mentioned did not require repair on functionality or safety grounds, as they remained sound, but a budget existed for addressing lower priority cosmetic repairs.  This was however a lower priority than repairs needed on safety grounds.

 

In reply to further supplementary questions, Cllr Candlish confirmed that he was happy to advise all councillors of the schedule for priority roads for repair and to discuss further information that was, and could potentially be, forwarded to ward councillors by Colas in respect of the condition of roads and their schedules for repair.  There was an established way for councillors to submit requests for specific feasibility studies and this was currently being refreshed because he was aware some councillors had not received replies. This was an area for improvement and within the next month a revised system was anticipated to be in place

 

The seventh question was from Councillor Chris Dike:

 

"Following on from the approved motion to bring a community warden base back to the north of the city, can the cabinet member update members on the progress of the trial scheme?"

 

In reply, the Cabinet Member for Community Safety, Leisure and Sport, Cllr Lee Hunt, explained that Cllr Holder and the relevant officer had met with Cllr Dike and Cllr George Madgwick on 20 February 2024 to explain that the council would not be carrying out a trial at this time, but apologised that this was not fed back to all councillors in the north of the city.

 

In response to supplementary questions, Cllr Hunt explained that the statistics showed that 84% of reports for wardens to attend had been from the southern part of the city and it therefore made sense for them to be based in that area. 

 

He was very happy for the ward statistics to be made available to the Traffic, Environment & Community Safety Scrutiny Panel as part of its review of environmental anti-social behaviour.  In respect of making the warden's uniforms more visible, he believed that this could be counter intuitive, as they sometimes needed to be discreet whilst on patrol.  He would however discuss the idea with the relevant officers.

 

The eighth question was from Councillor Charlotte Gerada:

 

"Can the Cabinet Member for Transport provide an update for the £600k funding for the Wheelchair Accessible Taxis Lease Rental Scheme that was agreed in the 2024 council budget?"

 

In reply, the Cabinet Member for Transport, Cllr Peter Candlish, confirmed that officers had been exploring options and solutions following the allocation of the wheelchair accessible vehicle allocation. Initial investigations and industry engagement had found that the prudential borrowing scope of the funding agreed in the 2024 budget, where the funding needed to be paid back in full, was unlikely to be financially viable at rates which were attractive to an external provider.   

 

However, officers continued to explore alternative options.  A report was being developed that would summarise findings and engagement work to date with both trade and wheelchair users and suggest ways forward. This report with an officer recommendation would be presented to the Cabinet Member for Transport by the end of October 2024.

 

In response to a supplementary question, Cllr Candlish was uncertain whether the scheme or something similar would be implemented during the current financial year. However, officers were looking at alternative options to achieve the same result, but he wasn't yet able to share any details.

 

The 45 minutes allowed for this item having passed, the Lord Mayor advised that under Standing Order 17(h), written responses to the remaining questions included on the agenda would be provided within 14 days and circulated to all members (attached as Appendix A to these minutes).