RBC Council Meeting, 21/09/23

Rushcliffe Borough Council shows it cares….

The RBC meeting tonight started much as might be expected. After a moment of reflection on the folly of relying on the vagaries of the English weather compared to the steadfastness of God’s word; we were treated to the travelogue of the mayor’s meetings, the Leader’s announcements – served with a heavy dose of bragging about awards and low council tax – and the Opposition denouncing the Conservative’s use of taxpayers’ money for expensive hotel bills. This included the disparaging suggestion that perhaps going forward the Conservatives and their chums might save the residents’ money by “going to a Travel Lodge”.

This led to a series of informative updates from outgoing Scrutiny Committee Chairs, which often contained a charming ‘thank you’ to officers and Opposition Vice Chairs. Cllr Penny Gowland’s (Labour) request to see a complete list of topics/questions that were proposed to go to the scrutiny committees rather than only those that succeeded was agreed upon, but still, it was business as usual.

Then something amazing happened, the chamber decided to agree.

The change happened after a citizen’s question brought a moving account from a care survivor – Terry Galloway – who after highlighting his sister’s tragic death asked whether the Council might listen to the voices of people in care.

Galloway said: “I believe that protected characteristics and an extension of corporate parenting for all public bodies together will create the catalyst the care system needs.”

With strong support from Cllr Dora Polenta (Labour), Penny spoke about the stark inequalities and discrimination faced by people with care experience such as being twice as likely to be homeless and less likely to have access to higher education. She told the hushed chamber that extra support was required and suggested that the offer for care leavers needed to be reviewed to ensure this happened.

Cllr Dora Polenta seconded this, speaking passionately about this vulnerable group and highlighting the problems caused by the outsourcing of care which has resulted in greater numbers of children being moved away from their families and places they know.

If anyone expected disagreement from the Conservatives, they would have been disappointed. Cllr Wheelan (Conservative) agreed that care leavers should have greater access to housing, leisure, and discounted council taxes. Cllr Barney (Conservative) spoke movingly of his foster siblings who had experienced care and acknowledged the need for greater support. Overall, there was broad support for the Motion and agreement that the local offer should be reviewed. The only mildly dissenting voice came from Councillor Keir Chewings (Independent) who suggested Cllr Gowland’s more ‘detailed motion’ should have been debated. 

The motion was passed.

Hostilities resumed with the motion brought by Cllr Birch (Independent) who complained bitterly about the inadequate car parking in Bingham’s Town centre which he stated doesn’t “meet the needs of residents or businesses” and urged the Council to find a solution.

Cllr Grocock (Labour) was having none of it, describing Cllr Birch’s ideas as “ill-considered, ill-advised and undemocratic”. Other Councillors agreed, many echoing Cllr Grocock’s view that sidelining local Councillors and Town Council eroded local democracy. The Leader seemed exasperated and reminded Cllr Birch that the Cabinet had recently established a working group to consider this issue and come up with options. Others used this motion as an opportunity to call for fresh ideas, going beyond the concerns of motorists and suggesting the Council consider the development of an active, sustainable transport system.  The lone voice in support – Cllr Chewings – explained that the lack of parking In Bingham goes wider than the town and has negative impacts on the surrounding villages and towns, adding that the current situation was particularly bad for the disabled. 

As might be expected, the motion failed miserably.

The last motion was brought by Cllr Combellack (Conservative), highlighting resident concern over water and flooding.She complained this was being made worse by housing developments relying on old water courses and infrastructure. She also mentioned that modern farming practices and the removal of trees and hedges compound these issues. Her solution was twofold asking (1) the Secretary of State to strengthen consultation between the Council and water agencies and (2) Lobby DEFRA to produce more informed guidance on water attenuation and dispersal and farming practices.

Councillors although broadly agreeing with the spirit behind the motion raised a range of concerns.  Cllr Gaunt (Labour) proposed an amendment which he believed would strengthen the motion and suggested wording that highlighted the need for more resources. Cllr Councillor Thomas (Leake Independent) although in support of the motion, felt strongly that the underlying cause of our problems was the privatised water companies given their failure to invest in infrastructure leaving costs to fall to residents. Cllr Chewings proposed an amendment asking the Rushcliffe MP for an update on her Storm Dennis Flood Report to include feedback and progress, asking after the Councillors appeared to be against this amendment, whether they wanted “to hold our MP to account?”

In the end, the Council showed it didn’t care much for accountability or cash, as both amendments were lost, and the original motion was passed with little dissent.

The final part of the agenda – questions from Councillors – covered a range of matters including the breakdown of Rushcliffe’s expenditure on local events – which was supplied by Cllr Virdi – support for RSPCA’s Pets as Prizes campaign banning this practice at fairs or events held on council-owned land and a request for RBC take up food waste recycling.

The meeting closed at 22.20.