Loading
The decisions as the council's minutes record them. A plain-language summary follows once it has been written.
RESOLVED: That having considered the decision, the Committee was ‘no longer concerned’, having received the explanations, but was not minded to indicate that it was ‘satisfied with the explanation’, therefore the Committee accepted but did not endorse the decision.
No declarations of interest were made.
The Democratic Services Manager advised that Cabinet had considered a report on ‘The Council’s Transition to a Restricted Capacity Residual Waste Collection Model’ at a meeting held on 23 July 2024. The decision (Record of Decision 4236) had been called in on two separate occasions and were shown as Call In Notice 1 and Call In Notice 2 in the Agenda. Copies of the Cabinet report, Record of Decision and Endorsement of Call in 1 and 2 were included in the agenda pack. The Democratic Services Manager explained the procedure for the call in of a Cabinet decision as detailed in the supporting document which was included in the agenda. The Chairman invited the signatories to present the reasons for the call-in to the Committee.
Decision as recorded
RESOLVED: That having considered the decision, the Committee was ‘no longer concerned’, having received the explanations, but was not minded to indicate that it was ‘satisfied with the explanation’, therefore the Committee accepted but did not endorse the decision.
Representations from Call In Signatories Councillors: Alastair Ibbotson, Bill Crease, Marion Bateman, Carol Ellis, Helen Brown and Richard Jones outlined the reasons for the Call In, expanding on the reasons outlined within the Agenda. Responses from the Decision Makers The Chief Officer (Streetscene & Transportation) and Regulatory Services Manager provided a detailed presentation in response to the concerns expressed by the Call In signatories. The Leader of the Council and Deputy Leader and Cabinet Member for Streetscene and Transportation responded to the comments made by the Call In signatories. The Chairman invited Members of the Committee to ask questions of the Decision Makers and Call In signatories. The Chairman invited the initiators of the call in to sum up. Councillors Alasdair Ibbotson and Richard Jones summed up on behalf of the call in signatories. The Chief Officer (Streetscene and Transportation) summed up the reasons for the proposals with the Cabinet Member for Streetscene and Transportation also summing up his support for the decision made by Cabinet. The Chairman invited the Democratic Services Manager to remind Members of the options for decision making as detailed in item 3 of the Agenda. Councillor Richard Lloyd proposed Option 2 and this was seconded by Councillor Simon Jones. Councillor Roy Wakelam proposed Option 4 and this was seconded by Councillor David Coggins-Cogan. An explanation was provided that a second proposal could not be taken ahead of a vote on the first proposal. On being put to the vote, the proposal for Option 2 was carried. RESOLVED: That having considered the decision, the Committee was ‘no longer concerned’, having received the explanations, but was not minded to indicate that it was ‘satisfied with the explanation’, therefore the Committee accepted but did not endorse the decision.
None.
Councillors must say when they have a personal link to something being discussed, such as a job, a property or a family member. A prejudicial interest is one strong enough that the councillor usually leaves the room and takes no part.
Declarations are read from the minutes once they are published.
The council hasn't recorded attendance for this meeting.
Lists the council's current councillors only. Co-opted members, officers and former councillors aren't shown.