Agenda and minutes

Apologies for non attendance were received from Councillor K Bradley and Councillor M Bradley.

All Members are required to disclose at this point in the meeting or as soon as possible thereafter, any disclosable pecuniary interest or personal interest in any item(s) being considered at this meeting

Councillor Hylands declared a pecuniary interest in the Gambling Statement of Principles

The Mayor welcomed Councillor Meenaghan following her recent election and she thanked the Members of Harbourside and Town for her election.

The Members were reminded about behavioral standards at Council meetings.

A Member advised that they had not received a response to an outstanding query but sought clarification that the minutes of the previous meeting should be corrected as the documents discussed on the Criterion at the Policy and Organisation Board meeting were no longer considered exempt. Therefore the minutes should be amended to rectify the amendment considered.

Members also advised that they believed the Leader’s answer to a previous Member’s question with regards to the Council being advised there were no estimates on the three different potential models, optimistic, pessimistic and realistic were incorrect as they were listed in the report. With one of the estimates predicting a cost to the taxpayer of £1.5m. It was requested that this also be corrected.

RESOLVED: That the minutes of the meeting held on 16 October 2024 be signed as a true and correct record.

(NOTE: Standing Order No. 3.4 requires that notice of a Deputation should be received by the Borough Solicitor NOT LATER THAN 12 O’CLOCK NOON ON MONDAY 9 DECEMBER 2024 and likewise Standing Order No. 3.5 requires that notice of a Public Question should be received by the Borough Solicitor NOT LATER THAN 12 O’CLOCK NOON ON MONDAY 9 DECEMBER 2024)

There were no deputations, there were 2 public questions

Question 1

Apart from following the out of date Hampshire County Multi Agency Flood Response Plan Version 1 dated July 2008, and the  PUSH Strategic Flood Risk Assessment – 2016 Update, does the Gosport Council have an uptodate action plan please for dealing with sea flooding of Gosport, specifically Alverstoke village, resulting from the sea overtopping of the retaining seawall at the end of Alver Creek as occurred  in April 2024 from a storm surge with a spring tide?

Answer

We are still awaiting the report on the cause of the flooding at Alverstoke last April which it is suggested was linked to drainage and was not necessarily as a direct result of any overtopping.  We are also still awaiting confirmation from the Environment Agency of the additional Government funding required to enable the proposed Alverstoke Flood Relief Scheme to go-ahead.  Both the past and present Governments have failed to respond positively to this Council's requests for that funding.  Until they do so there is little to add to reports already presented to this Council's Community & Environment Board.

Question 2

The last Council meeting minutes stated "Members felt that flood protection was important and should be addressed and that the
Environment Agency needed to make a decision on funding at Stoke Lake, but schemes had been delivered on Stokes Bay and Forton Lake."
At a community meeting on 29 Nov there was a strong sense that still questions need to be answered regarding funding for Stoke Lake defences.
In light of the Alverstoke flood we as a community feel  that no agency is taking true responsibility. Gosport Borough Council tell us the environmental agency are responsible and the environmental agency tell us that treasury must answer the funding question.  This leaves us no further on than April this year. We also understand a section 19 report is still not complete. In the meantime, we must shore ourselves up against further storms, uncertain of whether a Stoke lake surge will once again flood our village, homes and businesses.
Can you confirm in detailwhat is being done about this and who is responsible from the council to represent this issue to our community?

Answer: I refer the questioner to the answer just given to a similar question on the same subject

NOTE: Members are reminded that Standing Order No. 3.3 requires that Notice of Question pursuant to that Standing Order must be received by the Borough Solicitor NOT LATER THAN 12 O’CLOCK NOON ON TUESDAY 10 DECEMBER 2024 )

Question in the name of Councillor Huggins to the Chairman of Community and Environment Board.

Could the Chairman of Community and Environmental state the Boroughs strategy and targets for tree planting since May 2022? 

Answer: The strategy and target is to plant 1000 trees.

Supplementary question

Can the Chairman of the Board advice where this is detailed and why there have been no updates to meetings of the Council. An opportunity to create a mini forest in Stanley Park had been missed and was the Chairman aware of the Hampshire Forest partnership which had £1m available to support and would have provided elm disease resistant trees in an area that would also have helped with flooding.

Answer

It was reiterated that the strategy and target was 1000 trees

Question in the name of Councillor Meenaghan to the Chairman of the Policy and Organisation Board

I welcome the presence of Blayde Security in Harbourside & Town Ward and thank Hampshire’s Police & Crime Commissioner for funding this initiative, alongside CCTV in Alver Valley, to tackle ASB and reassure our community.

With 618 crimes reported in October 2024 alone, will the chairman of Policy & Organisation reinstate LIVE public space CCTV monitoring to help prevent crime and protect our residents?

Answer

The Councillor does not make it clear if the 618 crimes were in Gosport, but that one crime was one crime to many, but that was as a result of failing to deliver in 14 years of government additional police officers promised. With regard to the CCTV when the Councillor was previously on the Council the Council voted to scrap 24/7 monitoring of CCTV along with Fareham Borough Council and an attempted to bring back was voted against. The Conservative Police and Crime Commissioner had been asked to support the funding of CCTV but had not done so

Supplementary question.

It is important that we look forward, not to the past, the responsibility of CCTV funding was not that of the PCC. Can we have a straight yes or no as to whether the CCTV will be reinstated?

Answer

The PCC funded CCTV in the Alver Valley so could fund it and whilst they were doing a good job it was wished that the presence of Blayde security was not required as this would save money. The Conservative HQ had advised that Conservative Councillors were perceived to be not trustworthy and this had been seen in the leaflets distributed in the run up to the by-election.

Question in the name of Councillor Hammond to the Chairman of Policy and Organisation Board

Can the leader give us an update on how the Government’s proposal on Devolution and Local Government Reorganisation might affect Gosport?

Answer

We understand the Government proposals will be published next week and is currently unknown as to what it contains but it seems they are pressing ahead with their plans. This could be either a larger scale unitary or a directly elected Mayor. There has been much speculation over the years and  ...  view the full minutes text for item 54.

To consider the following PART I minutes of the Policy and Organisation Board

Proposals for the review of polling districts and polling places

Gambling – Review of Statement of Principles

Fees and Charges 2025

Consideration was given to the Part I recommendations of the Policy and Organisation Board.

PROPOSALS FOR THE REVIEW OF POLLING DISTRICTS AND POLLING PLACES

Members thanked the Head of Electoral Services and the Electoral Registration Officer for his work on the report and for all the work undertaken as he would soon be leaving the Council. This was echoed across the Council Chamber.

Members welcomed the slight amendment to the original report as it tidied up that polling district.

RESOLVED: To approve the changes as set out in this report

GAMBLING – REVIEW OF STATEMENT OF PRINCIPLES

Councillor Hylands left the room and took no part in the discussion or voting thereon.

i)     RESOLVED: That the final draft Statement of Principles be approved

FEES AND CHARGES

A Member advised that they had noted that the agreed amendment had been made to the report to reflect that the fees and charges had increased approximately 5% and had been rounded. It did not state in the report, but it was rounded up. However of the 195 charges that had been increased 17 had been rounded up by 5% one charge by 4.9% with the remaining 177 increased by more than 6% with the average increase sitting at 6.77% not 5% as stated. This was approximately three times the cost of inflation.

They advised that over 3 years car parking charges had increased 68.3%, car park permits 53.85%, Sports pitches 55.96% and even concessions had been hit in the Wildgrounds, and for beach huts.

The cost to hold events on GBC land had also increased by 160% but in addition, there was no longer to be electric and water provided.

An amendment to the recommendation was proposed and seconded as follows.

It is recommended that all fees and charges for 2025 be frozen at 2024 rates pending a review to ascertain whether previous recent increases have yielded the protected income.

The Member advised the Board that in previous year’s reports indications had been given as to the income that would be received as a result of projections with any increase in fees and charges and that this included any predicted downward turn as a result of increased charges. An example would be the any reduction in car park use and income as a result of an increase in charges. The proposed amendment was therefore a pause to any increase to allow a full review and analysis before commitment.

Other Members felt that the proposals were acceptable and that it was to be accepted that costs overall had increased and unfortunately needed to be passed on. They felt the proposed increases were relative. There had not been any complaints to date and the events in the high street were proving to be popular. The fees and charges were for those that utilised the facilities and this should not be subsides by other council tax payers.

A Member expressed concern that the increases to the sports and leisure facilities were increasingly damaging to a Town  ...  view the full minutes text for item 55.

Motion to the Council proposed by Cllr Maynard

Seconded by Cllr Earle

This Council supports the principle of CO2 reduction by exploring the feasibility and possibilities for installing Solar PV (SPV) for:

1. Community Energy schemes
2. Bespoke installations for off-setting electricity costs at selected sites such as:

2.1 Splash Parks

2.2 Other operational facilities that consume electricity drawn from the National Grid

2.3 Canopy Solar PV for car park areas

2.4 Roof-top installations

Motion to the Council proposed by Cllr June Cully

Seconded by Cllr Jonathan Brown

This Council notes that:

• Gosport Borough is the proud home of a large, diverse and thriving LGBTQ+ community.
• Results of the 2021 Census show that 1.2% of people in Hampshire identified as Gay or Lesbian, in Gosport the figure was 1.6%. Overall in Gosport 3.15% of residents (aged 16 and over) identify as LGBQ+, approximately 1 in 32 (comparable with national data of 3.16%).
• Furthermore, 0.38% of residents stated that their gender identity is different to that assigned at birth.
• According to Home Office statistics sexual orientation hate crime in Hampshire rose by 65% in 2022 from the year before. In fact, all hate crime rose by 64% making Hampshire the highest rise in the South East.
• The Stonewall and YouGov 2018 ‘LGBT in Britain - health report’ stated that 1 in 8 LGBT people (18-24) had tried to take their own life in the previous year and almost half of transgender people surveyed said the same.

Council therefore notes:

• That harm has been done to LGBTQ+ people in the past and that discrimination exists.

• That more could be done to support and enable equity in Gosport
• That all LGBTQ+ people deserve to be treated with dignity and respect

Gosport Council resolves:

• To show support for LGBTQ+ people by flying the Pride flag during Pride month from 2025

• To explore how to ensure anyone dealing with the Council may be offered the opportunity to be addressed using pronouns of their choice if they wish.

A notice of motion was received in the name of Councillor Maynard and seconded by Councillor Earle as follows

This Council supports the principle of CO2 reduction by exploring the feasibility and possibilities for installing Solar PV (SPV) for:

1. Community Energy schemes
2. Bespoke installations for off-setting electricity costs at selected sites such as:

2.1 Splash Parks

2.2 Other operational facilities that consume electricity drawn from the National Grid

2.3 Canopy Solar PV for car park areas

2.4 Roof-top installations

A Member advised that under standing order 4.6.1 of the constitution the matter should be referred straight to the Board in question and that this approach added to the lack of Scrutiny of decisions. It was noted that previous board reports had been late to be presented to Members and that this reduced the time for consideration.

The Council was advised the removal of the Scrutiny Committee was saving the Council money and it was not required when operating under the Committee System as Gosport Borough Council does.

The presentation of a motion to Council allowed all Members to speak on it and allowed for consideration to be given and proposals to be progressed if agreed. The presentations of motions to Board was welcomed if it was appropriate but the motions presented were suitable for Full Council.

It was requested that Standing Orders be suspended to allow discussion to take place on the motion. This was agreed.

The motion was introduced as an aspiration, to reduce CO2 to explore Solar Panel options and explore other associated green energy options. The Solent Cluster had been established and included a number of influential partners including local authorities, the University of Southampton and Fawley.

There was a focus on exploring hydrogen and other green technologies and getting more residents engaged. In addition, the charity Protect Natural England were also involved and were undertaking research into solar panels and living rooftops.

Members advised that in principle they supported the motion and that a set of actions had previously been provided and that the way forward was complex. Whilst charities and partnerships existed they were run by volunteers and whilst it was great news to see them working together action was needed rather than aspirational intent. Work needed to be undertaken to influence, impact, action and engagement were all important. It was felt that it should be presented to the Policy and Organisation Board as the Climate Change Strategy, which was previously worked on and that feasibility and action should be taken, as it had not been in the past 2 years.

Members felt that climate change action should be core business, considered at all points of the Council’s work and decision making.

Members agreed that this was an area that should be progressed, and that an action plan continue to be implemented and objectives set.

RESOLVED: That this Council supports the principle of CO2 reduction by exploring the feasibility and possibilities for installing Solar PV (SPV) for:

1. Community Energy schemes
2. Bespoke installations for off-setting electricity  ...  view the full minutes text for item 56.

Community and Environment Board – 13 November 2024

Policy and Organisation Board – 27 November 2024

The Part II Minutes of the following Boards were presented to the Council.

Community Board – 13 November 2024

 A Member asked why the caddies were being sourced from abroad. The Council was advised that Hampshire County Council had turned down an approach from the Districts for them to procure and purchase. This would as a result increase the cost.

Members acknowledge that residents were keen to see its inclusion, and it was recognised that the delay had been as a result of the County Council not sourcing a site for waste. The Council was advised that this location had now been sourced and a packaged agreed. A Member questioned that they had been advised that no such facility had been secured and investigations were ongoing with Dorset and Surrey Councils for an alternative.

Members welcomed the report and congratulated the officer on the work undertaken.

Policy and Organisation Board Part II Minutes – 27 November 2024.

A Member under 4.13.2 questioned the accuracy of the minutes of the meeting of the Policy and Organisation Bard on the 27 November 2024 as a point raised on the minutes of the 30 September 2024 were not included in the Part II minutes.

The observation was that as the report and appendix were not exempt, the minutes of the meeting held on 30^th September 2024 were now inaccurate as they did not refer to the amendment that was proposed in the exempt part of the meeting.

The Member had written to the Leader and the Deputy Leader about this matter and the fact that the publication of the report had shown that incorrect and misleading statements had been made within the meeting

Members welcomed the progress on the War Memorial and commended the effort to get it into place, acknowledging that the Canadian Memorial would remain in place.

A Member raised concern that there was an ongoing issue with the license for the War Memorial and it was advised that this was being explored. A legal response was still outstanding at this stage.

It was reported that the Styler family had been contacted regarding the paintings on site and that consideration should be given to liaising with the museum to hold them if required. It was noted that it was sad to lose such an important piece of history but recognised the current security costs were unsustainable.

Member noted that the progress with the LUF project was encouraging to open up the waterfront.

Concern was expressed that dog walkers were being encouraged to use the Alver Valley as opposed to the Beach for walking as there were a number of significant protected species in the Alver Valley too.

The commitment to the LUF money was welcomed as was the improvement to the Don Styler’s site. UK docks were onside with the LUF project an there had been a positive response from external partners as part of the peer review.

Progress was being made with the waterfront, bus station and the people’s  ...  view the full minutes text for item 57.

To advise the Council of the results of the recent by-election.

Consideration was given to a report of the Returning Officer detailing the results of the recent by-election.

The report was noted.

To advise the Council of the balance of the seats on the Council following the Harbourside and Town by-election and the position with regard to Political Groups and to undertake a review in accordance with the “Proportionality Rules” of the balance of seats on the Boards and Committees of the Council.

Consideration was given to a report of the Borough Solicitor detailing the amendments to the Council’s proportionality as a result of the by-election.

The Board were provided with an addendum to the report including an amendment to the Board proportionality designations to parties.

RESOLVED: That the Board proportionality be agreed as below

RESOLVED: That Councillor Meenaghan be appointed to the Housing Board, Councillor Philpott be appointed to the Standards and Audit Sub Board and that Councillor Brown continue on the Community and Environment Board.

Members commended the work of both Julie Smith and Graeme Jesty who were shortly to leave the Council and it was requested that investigations be made into how best to thank staff that were departing.