Apologies for absence were received from Councillors Borg, P Carpenter, Cordiner-Achenbach, D Hammond, Murray-Smith and Rundle.

Councillor Martin declared a personal interest in item 14 as she has a family member who holds a Hackney Carriage Licence.

Her Worship the Mayor advised Council that she had no items of urgent business to be discussed.

Her Worship the Mayor passed on her thanks to all those that had attended her recent wreath making workshop that had been held in the Town hall and had been a successful evening.

Her Worship the Mayor also passed on her thanks to all those that attended her recent Civic Carol Service.

Members were advised of the upcoming murder mystery event to be hosted by Her Worship the Mayor in February 2025.

The Leader commented on how well he thought the Civic Carol Service had gone and that he felt the school children who had attended performed really well.

The Leader advised with regard to the mounting speculation on devolution, he reassured Members that he has meeting planned with all Leaders to discuss the White Paper once it has been published.

The Leader provided Members with an update on the MV Ruby, he advised that he had been kept updated as much as possible but that recent events had raised a series of questions, he had therefore written to the Secretary of State to raise his concerns. He reported that in light of the recent resignation of the Secretary of State for Transport he had written a further letter to the newly appointed Secretary of State to ensure this was received. The Leader advised that the letter contained a number of question posed around the concerns of the recent issues. The Leader advised that he would circulate a copy of the letter to all Members.

Councillor Jeal asked for the following to be added to the item 11 in the minutes of the meeting held on the 17 October 2024 :-

Councillor Jeal commented on the need for Standards Committees and the sanctions that could be given to be looked into as these processes were costing money to the rate payers of the Borough but yet sanctions appeared to lack any power. He advised that he had been informed that this investigation had cost around £2500.

RESOLVED :

Prosper : Councillor Smith

Seconder : Councillor T Wright 

That the minutes of the meeting held on the 17 October including the amendments as detailed above be confirmed.

CARRIED 

Council received and considered the Independent Remuneration Panel's report.

Mr Ivor Holden of the Panel, presented the report to Members, and advised that following the one year review of the Member Special Responsibility Allowances, which was approved by the Council at its meeting on the 25 July 2024. Council requested that the Independent Remuneration Panel review the Special Responsibility Allowance of the Mayor / Chairman of the Council at a meeting to be arranged in October 2024.

He advised that the Panel met on the 14 October 2024 and reviewed the Mayoral / Chairman of the Council position. The panel discussed at length the Special Responsibility Allowance of £3188 currently paid to the Chair of Council during their term of office and those of neighbouring authorities, and also took into account and considered the additional payment of £5908 that is paid to the Mayoral role post holder during their term in office.

Following discussions the panel concluded unanimously, having considered the feedback received, benchmarking data and allowances paid, that the two allowances currently paid to the Mayor of Great Yarmouth, remain at the same rate, but that these be consolidated to one allowance totalling £9096 for transparency purposes and in order to show that the Council are offering a competitive remuneration to their Mayor / Chairman of the Council when compared to other Councils.

The panel also acknowledged that the allowance paid is indexed linked to staff pay awards, at the time of writing the report the pay award for 2024 had not been approved, this has since been approved and therefore appendix one of the report provides the updated figures for all Member Allowances.

Proposer : Councillor Wainwright

Seconder : Councillor Smith 

RESOLVED : 

That Council :

(1) Agree that the two allowances currently paid to the Mayor of Great Yarmouth, remain at the same rate, but these be consolidated to one allowance totalling £9096 and note that this allowance remains indexed linked to staff pay awards.

(2) Receive the updated Scheme of Allowances - Appendix 1.

(3) Note that a full review of the Scheme of Members Allowances is due to be undertaken in December 2025.

CARRIED

Council received and considered the Licensing and Election Manager's report.

Councillor Wells, Portfolio Holder for Environment, Sustainability, Licensing and Waste presented the report to Members.

Councillor Wells reported that Licensing Authorities are required to publish a statement of principles and review it every 3 years.  The policy has been reviewed and updated to reflect the minimal changes in legislation, Gambling commission guidance and related matters.

It was advised that the policy had been subject to an 8 week consultation period which included responsible authorities and a range of organisations including the Gambling Commission, existing gambling operators and organisations representing vulnerable people. Two comments in response to this consultation were received, and these have been set out in the report at Appendix 1, together with officer comments as to whether these have been incorporated into the policy.

Councillor Wells advised that Licensing Committee of the 4 November 2024 recommended approval of the attached draft policy by Council.

Proposer : Councillor Wells

Seconder Councillor Candon

RESOLVED : 

That Council agree the attached draft policy as the new Gambling Statement of Principles.

CARRIED 

Council received and considered the Licensing and Election Manager's report.

the Leader presented and reported that under the Electoral Registration and Administration Act 2013 all local authorities are required to complete a review of their parliamentary polling districts and polling places at least every five years.

The last review in Great Yarmouth took place in 2023 and was completed in January 2024. However, due to new Norfolk County Council (NCC) boundaries an interim review is necessary to align four polling districts with the county divisions for the next scheduled NCC elections on 1 May 2025.

The four polling districts affected are:

• BS2 (Bradwell South & Hopton ward)
• CL1 (Claydon ward)
• NE1 (Nelson ward)
• YN2 (Yarmouth North ward)

Plans are attached to the report to identify the proposed new areas.

A Consultation was carried out with the public and interested parties from 1 October until 4 November and one comment from a ward councillor was received, which is documented in the proposals attached.

It was advised that following the review it will still be possible to change polling stations if a building became unavailable at election time. 

The schedule of polling districts and stations has been published with recommendations on the council’s website and requires approval by Council.

Proposer : Councillor Smith 

Seconder : Councillor Plant

RESOLVED :

That Council 

(1) note the outcome of the interim review of the four polling districts in accordance with the Council’s statutory obligations.

(2) approve the schedule of polling districts and polling stations incorporating the proposed final recommendations as detailed within the Licensing and Elections Mangers report.

CARRIED 

Council received and considered the Monitoring Officer's report.

The Leader presented and reported that the Local Government Boundary Commission for England (“the Commission”) is undertaking its periodic electoral review of the Council to consider such matters as the number of councillors to be elected to the Council and to its wards, and the boundaries of the wards.

The purpose of this report is for Council agree its proposal to the Commission on Council Size, this question being addressed in the first phase of the review.

The proposed submission sets out a case to continue with 39 elected members. The second phase of the review in relation to ward boundaries will not be considered until the Council size phase of the process is complete.

The draft submission on Council size has been reviewed by the Member Working Group with positive feedback overall.

The Council’s submission including supporting data must be submitted to the Commission by 20th January 2025.

Proposer : Councillor Smith

Seconder : Councillor Plant 

RESOLVED :

That Council :-

(1) approve the submission on Council size as set out in Appendices 1 and 2

(2) delegate authority to the Monitoring Officer, acting in conjunction with the Leader of the Council to make any necessary minor changes to the document prior to submission.

Council received and considered the Head of Customer Services report.

The Leader presented and reported that the report sought approval of the recommended Council Tax Support Scheme 2025/26.

The Leader advised that In recognition of the Councils financial position, it was recommended to continue with the current scheme for 2025/26. It is also important that a hardship fund would be available to help mitigate the impact of the scheme on vulnerable households.

The Leader reported that it is proposed to make a minor adjustment to the scheme to introduce Universal Credit income thresholds. This adjustment would affect all working age recipients in receipt of Universal Credit and would simplify the administration and provide more clarity for customers. The Equality Impact Assessment recognises the impact of this change on individuals and households, however, also concludes that working age households on low income eligible for Council Tax Support are likely to be similarly impacted to those with additional disability financial support to help with day to day living.

The Leader advised that it is recommended to continue to provide a hardship scheme in the sum of £200,000 to help support individuals and households who may be in more financial difficulty. The scheme would only be eligible to working age recipients of Council Tax Support with an eligibility criterion prioritising the most vulnerable groups.

Councillor Smith passed on his thanks to the Head of Customer Services and her team for the hard work completed on this matter this year.

Proposer : Councillor Smith 

Seconder : Councillor Plant

RESOLVED :

That Council :

(1) Agree to retain the current Council Tax Support Scheme 2025/26 with the inclusion of a minor adjustment to introduce Universal Credit income thresholds

(2) Agree to make provision for a hardship scheme of £200,000 funded by NCC

(3) Agree to delegate the ability for the Head of Customer Services & Revenue & Benefits Service Manager to make any smaller adjustments to the scheme that may be required to align to the wider welfare benefits system for 2025/26

CARRIED 

Council received and considered the Executive Director, Resources  report.

The Leader presented and advised that the report presented for the 2024/25 financial year, The mid-year position for treasury management; the borrowing requirement and debt for the current financial year; the mid-year borrowing position and reporting on quarter 2 2024/25 treasury and capital prudential indicators compared with the Treasury Management Strategy and Investment Strategy.

The Council adopted the Chartered Institute of Public Finance and Accountancy’s Treasury Management in the Public Services: Code of Practice (the CIPFA Code) which requires the Council to approve treasury management semi-annual and annual reports.

the Leader advised that the report included the new requirement in the 2021 Code of quarterly reporting of the treasury management prudential indicators. The non-treasury prudential indicators are incorporated in the Council’s normal quarterly Capital report.

The Councils treasury management strategy for 2024/25 was approved by Council on 22^nd February 2024. The Council has borrowed and invested substantial sums of money and is therefore exposed to financial risks including the loss of invested funds and the revenue effect of changing interest rates.

The successful identification, monitoring and control of risk remains central to the Councils treasury management strategy.

Overall, the Council remains in line with the Treasury Management Strategy and Capital Strategy as approved in February 2024. The treasury activities continue to be monitored on a daily basis.

Proposer : Councillor Smith

Seconder : Councillor Candon 

That Council approve the treasury management half yearly report for 2024/25.

CARRIED

Council received and considered the Executive Director, Resources report.

The Leader presented and advised that the report presented an update to the Council’s Medium Term Financial Strategy (MTFS) for the period 2025/26 to 2027/28.

It was reported that the update of the Medium Term Financial Strategy provided a key document to inform the forth coming budget setting process. It presented Members with an overview of the latest financial position and the priorities for setting the budget. The forecasts have been updated in light of known spending pressures taking into account the wider economic context including revised interest and inflation forecasts and known impacts from the October budget announcements.

The Leader advised that the MTFS set out the context within which the financial planning for the Council is undertaken and the priorities (the business strategy) that will mitigate future funding gaps. The MTFS also included the latest financial projections for the three years from 2025/26 that are covered by the strategy and have been informed by known pressures in the current year and levels of inflation and interest rates. This is ahead of the provisional settlement announcement which is expected ahead of Christmas and the detailed work on the service budgets for 2025/26.

Council were advised that there continues to be significant uncertainties around funding for Local Government. There will be a one year finance settlement for 2025/26 and now expected multi year settlements from 2026/27. Financial challenges continue to face the sector as a whole, whilst the Borough Council is not unique some of the challenges are similar and the financial resilience across the sector is not consistent.

The economic climate of high inflation and interest rates and demand for services for example temporary housing has impacted on the financial position of the Council in a significant way. It is a legal requirement to set a balanced budget each year and there will be a need to identify and deliver significant savings and additional income in the short term to medium term in addition to using reserves to manage the risks.

The assumptions included in the MTFS will be subject to review as the detail of the 2026/26 budget is finalised.

The report is recommending to Council a number of savings to be delivered from April 2025, the reason for approving them ahead of the budget in February allows for implementation where applicable. The report and strategy still highlights further work required on setting a balanced budget for 2025/26 for which work is still ongoing.

Councillor Smith advised that the Council were still awaiting a decision on the 2nd Home Tax.

Councillor Wainwright advised hat he had attended the Cabinet meeting, which had seen Cabinet members remove the addition of car parking charges to be introduced at Gorleston Marine Parade, which could have resulted in a £68,000 income. Councillor Wainwright commented that he was concerned jobs could be lost due to this saving not being taken forward. He advised that he was dissappointed to see this removed and would be looking to reintroduce as part of budget setting.

Councillor Wainwright referred to the savings with regard to the lifeguard facility and, commented that he hoped the Bid would consider allocating half of the funding in order to keep this provision. He commented that it appeared the budget for fireworks remained in the Bids budget but that he had heard they would not be willing to provide funding for the lifeguard provision.

Councillor Wainwright commented that the savings had been considered by a cross party Members Working Group and he acknowledged that there were some difficult decisions that were going to have to be made.

Councillor Wells endorsed Councillor Wainwrights comments with regard to the funding of the lifeguard provision and hoped that the Bid gave some serious consideration to this allocation of funding.

Councillor Jeal commented that he did not believe that the Bid would be willing to contribute funding for this provision.

Councillor Candon commented that this service was an important service to consider, and therefore he hoped that the Bid would considered the proposal of funding in order to provide this lifesaving function.

The Leader read aloud an email that he had received with regard to the Bid and licensing of events, he also advised that a number of businesses had been taken out of the Bid, He raised some concern that it appeared the budget only appeared to cover fireworks and events on the seafront. He advised that this matter would continue to be looked into and discussed.

Proposer : Councillor Smith 

Seconder : Councillor G Carpenter 

RESOLVED : 

That Council :

(1) Approve the updated Medium Term Financial Strategy (MTFS) and the key themes of the business strategy as outlined at Section 8;

(2) Approve the savings and additional income proposal as outlined at Appendix A for implementation for the budget for 2025/26 to mitigate some of the funding gap for 2025/26

Her Worship the Mayor called upon Councillor Wells to present the motion.

Motion

Councillor Wells presented the Motion on Notice as follows :

Following Licensing Committee’s decision on 4^th November NOT to agree changes to the Temple Road Hackney Carriage Stand, it has transpired that this decision creates an unacceptable clash between two pieces of legislation.

The reason for the proposed change is the County Council’s Bus Improvement Plan, for which the County Council, as Traffic Authority, intend to make a Traffic Regulation Order under the Traffic Regulation Act 1984. The proposed changes would require amendments to the existing Hackney Carriage stand at Temple Road, changing the hours from use at all times to use between 11pm and 5am, while other nearby ranks will increase in size and have operating times extended.

It has come to light that at the time Licensing Committee made their decision, they did not have full legal and practical information to ensure that they made a fully informed decision about the proposed change.

For this reason, the motion proposes that the decision is rescinded to allow Licensing Committee to reconsider the decision with a full range of information, including clear plans, and as necessary, further input from the County Council.

It will also give Officers the opportunity to engage further with the County Council before the matter is next heard by Licensing Committee, and will avoid unnecessary risk to both authorities arising from the legislative clash.

The Monitoring Officer advised that the motion to be considered by Council had been submitted following advise received from Counsel, a summary of the advise received was given and Members were advised that the rescinding of the decision, if approved would allow the Licensing Committee time to reconsider the matter taking on board the advise given from Counsel on the matter.

Councillor Plant hereby seconded the motion.

Councillor Robinson-Payne commented that she was surprised and saddened to see the motion on the agenda for Council, as the original decision had received a unanimous decision at the recent Licensing Committee. Councillor Robinson-Payne disagreed that the Licensing Committee had not received the correct legal advise at the time of the decision, as this had been given at the meeting and Members were aware of the advise and that the matter could be subject to legal challenge. Councillor Robinson-Payne commented that she was dissappointed that this matter was still being discusses as it had been to the Licensing Committee three times for consideration.

Councillor Jeal commented that he had never been aware of a time that the Council had rescinded a quasi-judicial decision and voiced his disappointment for this matter being considered.  Councillor Jeal advised that the Solicitor, Nplaw had fully explained to the Committee regarding the rights to preventing the County Council traffic order, and reiterated Councillor Robinson-Payne's comments with regard to the matter being heard 3 times. He commented that as there were several County Councillors appointed to sit on the Licensing Committee, he felt that they should have been aware of this matter. Councillor Jeal raised concern with regard to the hearing of the matter again by Licensing Committee as he felt that Members would be pre determining their decision.

The Leader advised that he had raised the matter of pre determination with the Monitoring Officer and had been advised this would not pre determine Members, it would simply allow for a clean slate for the Committee to consider the matter again.

The Leader advised that whilst he acknowledged it had been a unanimous decision of the Committee, he did not feel that all the facts had been presented to the Committee and this would allow the Committee time to reconsider the decision taking into account the advise from Counsel.

Councillor Candon commented that it did appear there was a mixed level of communication between legislation and regulations and in light of new advise that had been received from Counsel he agreed that this matter should be reconsidered as he felt in his opinion the advise that had been given at the time of meeting was incorrect. Councillor Jeal here raised a point of order regarding comments from Councillor Candon with regard to incorrect information being given but it was advised that this had been Councillor Candons opinion of the situation and not a statement.

Councillor Wells commented that he did not like the need for repeat meetings, but agreed in this instance in light of advise from Counsel and the need for the Licensing Committee to be able to understand this advise, there was a need to allow the Committee the oppurtunity to reconsider the matter. Councillor Wells commented that he fully appreciated the frustrations with regard to this matter having to be reconsidered.

Councillor Martin advised that there was a need to consider Health and Safety on this matter but was advised that this would need to fed into the debate at the Licensing Committee.

Councillor Jeal commented that he had been present at the meeting of the Licensing Committee and all Councillors had received the same advise from the legal representative at that meeting. The Monitoring Officer advised that this advise had been based on legal advice and had not included traffic regulations advise.

Her Worship the Mayor commented that there was a need to consider the duty of care to residents when the Committee were considering the matter.

Councillor Plant advised that this matter had been brought forward to Council in light of additional information being brought forward, therefore the Committee should be given the oppurtunity to reconsider the decision to be able to make an informed decision.

Proposer : Councillor Wells

Seconder : Councillor Plant 

That approval be given to the motion on notice to rescind a decision made by the Licensing Committee at its meeting held on the 4 November 2024 in relation to Amendments to Hackney Carriage Ranks – Market Gates, Theatre Plain and Temple Road.

CARRIED 

The following Members asked that their vote to abstain be recorded within the minutes.

Councillors Capewell, Green, Jeal, Martin, McCluskey, McMullen, Newcombe, Pilkington, Robinson-Payne, Sharp, Thompson, Upton, Waters-Bunn, Williamson, T wright and B Wright.

Council RESOLVED :

"That under Section 100(A)(4) of the Local Government Act 1972, the public be
excluded from the meeting for the following item of business on the grounds that it
involved the likely disclosure of exempt information as defined in paragraph 3 of Part I
of Schedule 12(A) of the said Act."

CARRIED