Transcript

Good evening and welcome to the Chantenbury leisure centre. It makes a change from Worsham and we had a good welcome and it's well set up. So I'd like to say thank Andy Dunston and the team here for all the work they put in and allowing us to come and I'm sure we will be in for a good evening. One or two housekeeping announcements. Please note the location of the fire exits. There's one there and at the back and I am told that there are no fire drills this evening so if you hear it it's the real thing. Please make sure your mobile phones and other devices are switched to silent and the meeting is being live streamed and an audio recording being made so please switch your microphone on when addressing the council off when you finish speaking and the clearer you speak and the better as far as those listening are concerned. And can I just remind members to talk to the point and cabinet members to ensure their announcements suggest that. So thank you. We'll move on swiftly to apologies for absence which is item 1. I have apologies from Sam Bateman, Councillor Sam Bateman, Emma Beard, Len Ellis Brown, Peter van der Bourgh, Cassie Greenwood, Clive Trott and Alex Jeffery. I had a phone call from James Brooks to say he was probably going to be late and didn't anticipate arriving till after 6.30 which I think will affect the vote if he is late. Are there any other apologies that anyone wishes to bring? Item 2 on page 5 to 24 the minutes of the previous meetings I move that the minutes of the meeting of the council held on the 21st of February be approved as a correct record. Do I have a seconder? Yes I will seconder. Councillor Henry thank you. Are you happy? Does anyone wish to comment on the accuracy of those minutes or are you happy that I may sign them? Happy agreed thank you. Are there any declarations of interest from members? No thank you. Which brings us on to the announcements and having asked everybody to be brief I have a few announcements. Today we're here and it's the anniversary the 50th anniversary this month of the formation of Portion District Council. You are all sporting or most of you are sporting little gold badges, pins which say that it's the 50th anniversary of the formation of Portion District Council. It was formed from Portion Urban District Council, Portion Rural District Council and the Rural District Council of Chantembert. So it's very apt that we are at Chantembert leisure centre. I have to inform the members of the sad passing of David Caldwell. David was a Councillor here for eight years, was well respected and a very attractive personality. Sadly he died recently the chief executive and I attended a celebration for his life which was an eye-opener as to all things he did and his attributes and I think that we found it quite moving really. I'd also draw your attention to the death of Sir Peter Horton. Sir Peter was the MP for 33 years for Portion and he lived in the causeway and was often seen around the town and I've written to his widow to express condolences. Also the sad death of Andy Flack. Many of you will remember Andy. He was a member or an officer at Horton for 50 years and I knew him for many years and I'm sure others did. Always cheerful, always happy, always willing to help and I think that he will be missed by many of his friends in and around the town and it from the Council. And finally I would like to welcome two new Councillors, well one new Councillor and one returning. Joe Perry, Councillor Perry at the back. I won't ask you to stand up but it's good to see you and welcome. And Councillor Vickers who is well known to probably most of us. Good to see you back. Those are my announcements. Do we have any leaders announcements at all? Just one short announcement. Thank you, Chairman, which is that Councillor Jonathan Taylor has stepped down from Planning Committee North which I need to report to the Council. However, as I'm sure we're all aware, thank you, thanks to our Constitution. Both Planning Committee North and Planning Committee South are conspicuously well stopped with Councillors. So I don't know if we'll see any problems as we talk to this. Thank you. Are there any cabinet members announcements? I'll stop at that end in our work through Councillor Milne. Thank you, Chairman. I'd like to you share with members an update on house building rates across Horsham District and also the current status of the local plan. As you know, all councils are obliged to maintain a five-year land supply. This is a formal measure of our ability to meet the government's house building target for behind and our ability to control house building is limited. The key way to maintain a five-year supply is via site allocations in our local plan and the day in approving Horsham District's new plan added to the disruption caused by COVID and water neutrality means our supply has now fallen to just 2.9 years. This is exceptionally low. Across the District, from the point when we lost our five-year land supply in October 2021, until the end of last month 850 permissions have been granted. Our five year supply, or lack of, was a significant factor in most of those. Largest likes on that list include 83 at Duckmore Farm, Bill Exest, 170 at New Place Farm, Colbre, 78 at Raven's Croft Storington, 133 at Lower Brawbridge Farm, Brawbridge Youth and indeed many others. However, that total could have been much higher without the limits placed on us by water neutrality. As of today, there are roughly applications for another 1,500 or so houses in the pipeline, all of which claim to have their own water neutrality solutions. Councils will remember that the local plan we approved last December set a target of just 480 per annum for the first five years of our local plan, which is the lowest this century. That means that the number of houses potentially coming through from speculative applications threatens to exceed our entire local plan allocation over the next five years. This is the reason why it was so important to pass a plan efficiently, and I thank all members who gave their support. The local plan consultation has now closed, and we're looking to submit the plan in June. This suggests examination hearings around about November of December, and from that point, the plan will start to have significant weight in planning terms, which will increase our ability to resist inappropriate applications. However, it's not until next spring or even summer that we can expect the plan to reach formal adoption, according to the schedule we're obliged to follow and restore our land supply completely. Thank you. Thank you very much, Janet. I just wanted to give a brief update. One of our main priorities has been on helping people through the cost of living crisis. This last year, Horsham Matters gave out 10,000 emergency food parcels, and we're still going through a very tough time, particularly for our most hard-up residents. One of the things that we've really focused on to help our residents who are struggling with insufficient income is our lift, low-income family tracker software, and the council officers who have been helping to sift the data and find ways of helping residents. The key focus on this is on benefits that people are entitled to, but aren't yet claiming. We're able to use this data to help identify those people and help them to claim the things that they need, particularly when budgets are so tight. If you're not getting the things like pension credit, people are in dire need. I just wanted to give a little bit of a positive update about how well this is going. In the last year, we've been able to identify 89,000 pounds of severe disability premium of housing benefit, and it's been awarded. We've also identified 686,000 pension credit, so we've found and enabled residents to claim, so this is stuff that's already been claimed. There are many more people that we're hoping to help, but it's just over 3/4 of a million pounds that will be going into the pockets of the most in need residents in our district, so I just wanted to give that update to everybody. Thank you. Thank you. Councillor Ralston. Thank you, Chair. We have a very special weekend planned over the first Maybank holiday as we bring a festival feel to Ocean Town Centre, with the launch of our May Zing, see what we've done there, Spring Events program. The weekend will include free entertainment from a fantastic variety of talented performers, as well as some great family-friendly activities at multiple sites across Ocean Town Centre, from West Street through Swanwalk to the Carfax, Market Square and Ocean Museum, and sees the return of our Sussex Sound Music program. The weekend long event will hopefully bring the whole district-wide community together to create a lovely atmosphere for everyone to enjoy, as well as provide a platform for performers and give a boost to local traders. You can check out the full lineup, detail timings and venues, at hoshing.gov.uk/a-may-zing, and again, this is the beginning of our warmer weather events program and the team is working on more events to run through the summer all across the district. Thanks. Council Member. Thanks, Chairman. I mentioned at last council that we were going to partake in a project called Wildways, and I can now announce the details around that project. It's an initiative with West Sussex County Council's Green Print Project. A fun fact for councillors is that there are seven million square miles of road verge in rural Sussex. West Sussex County Council has one more than four million pounds of funding from the Department of Transport to work towards decarbonising our highway infrastructure, and is looking to some of these road verge miles for real sustainability opportunities. Joining forces with the University of Nottingham and Gloucestershire Council and others, West Sussex is adjusting its road verge mowing regime from a five times per year cut to a four times per year cut and collect operation as part of a project that is researching the repurposing of grass cuttings into biofuel and road materials. It is a pioneering initiative. At Horsham District Council, we are collaborating with the enterprise due to the tremendous nature recovery work being done by residents and groups in our district supported by our expert team of officers at our council. The Wildways pollinator corridors in North Horsham town that have been mapped by Horsham Greenspaces Forum will be allowed to grow throughout the summer in order to provide protection for wildlife moving through town before a cut and collect in early autumn. We are also changing our mowing regime across parts of 28 other sites including Billingshurst, Stenning, Southwater, Storington, Fulbright and Manning's Heath. I would like to emphasise that these actions are aimed at nature recovery and sustainability together and they are being done in a targeted, tailored, managed and deliberate way. The Wildways initiative brings me on to Wilder Horsham District. We were delighted to see so many of you at the presentation in January and I can let you know some actual numbers so you can better gauge headway. The partnership between Horsham District Council and Sussex Wildlife Trust is a unique collaboration. Certainly in the southeast there are no other wildlife trusts and councils working so closely together. The Trust Director of Conservation mentioned to us last week how much they value the collaboration and of course at HDC we equally prize the partnership and the vital urgent work that it is enabling. It has now been running for three and a half years and we're starting to see real progress. The partnership has awarded 31 grants for a range of projects such as installing swift and barn owl boxes and planting hedgerows and trees. More than 3,000 trees and 50 metres of hedge have been planted. Over 65 volunteer work parties have been run which represents nearly 2,500 hours of labour. The volunteers help landowners with work such as clearing invasive species and creating leaky downs, 82 of which have been built. Wilder Horsham District has given expert advice to over 100 landowners, many of those on 71 return visits. This builds stronger relationships which in turn are more likely to result in positive changes in land management as well as the development of new habitats. Ponds for example, 18 have been created. I can announce two further exciting examples of good collaboration resulting in real advances. At May's Park in Wornham, land drains have been broken up and new scrapes and ponds have been created which both supports wildlife and reduces water runoff. At Hope Farm on the River Aron there are five oaks. We are working with the Aron and Rather's Rivers Trust on a project where the landowner wants to recurrect the river to its previous meander. This will slow the flow of water and reduce flooding downstream. So all good progress steadily being made for nature recovery in our district in line with our adopted climate action and nature recovery strategy. Thanks Chairman. Thank you Councillor BACCA. Are there any other statements? No, thank you. Chief Executive. Thank you. Item five brings us to questions from the public and it's good we've got two questions from members of the public and we'll take them in the order that they were received. So the first resident to come forward with a question is Mr. Mark Kramer. Please. Mr. Kramer you have two minutes in which to ask your question on behalf of the Storington and Saltings and Paris Council. Okay thank you very much. We understand that housing targets have to be met and the Horton district local plan is including housing proposals that do not necessarily mirror those of the neighbourhood plans. Of particular note are the proposed developments of STO1 and STO2 in Storington and the application for a further 247 houses on the site of the mushroom farm in vacant. Horton district council will be aware that Storington acts as a hub village to neighbouring parishes and is in the unique but enviable position of having six million cars travelling through the village on an annual basis. Of these six million cars an estimated 600,000 of these exceed the speed limit and that's from community speed watch data. The provision of more housing will contribute to even more traffic which will place a further burden on a village that is already collapsing under the weight of traffic volumes. We assume that Horton district council considered not just the provision of additional housing to meet housing targets but the consequences of that additional housing in terms of the burden on the infrastructure on our village when the proposals were submitted. So can Horton district council please advise what additional infrastructure services there will be intending to provide directly and also advise if there are any discussions proposals in place with West Sussex County Council to ensure that highways bring our lamentable road conditions signage and inappropriate speed limits to a standard that supports the consequence of additional housing. Thank you very much. I'm going to invite Councillor John Milne, deputy leader and cabinet then the planning and infrastructure to reply. Thank you Chairman and thank you for your question I notice it is actually the first we've received since we restored the writer members of public to ask questions last May so so I thank you twice. Congestion in Storington has been a cause of concern for many years as I know as I have family locally but solutions of course have been hard very hard come by. The first thing to say is Horton district council doesn't have the power to make changes to the existing road network because West Sussex County Council is the statutory highways authority and received the relevant funding. However we do lobby county constantly and work with them to secure local improvements especially regarding new developments. This happens at both a political and officer level. For example officers are combining to work on the evidence space which is a statutory part of the new Horton district local plan. The problems you face aren't just in Storington the whole of Horton district is seen increased traffic. There's also pressure from outside the district especially along the coast where growth has exacerbated existing bottlenecks on an already overstretched transport infrastructure. The result of course is traffic gets pushed up on the A283. Policies 23 and 24 in the MPPF require that any new development must provide or financially contribute to infrastructure on which it places additional pressure. However local authorities cannot demand that a new development solves traffic problems which existed before it took place as is the case here. The second big limitation comes from paragraph 32 of the MPPF which states that development should only be prevented or refused on transport grounds where the residual cumulative impacts of development are severe and that word severe is the operative word here. In practice this means that even though a development may make an existing problem worse to a certain degree unless it can be defined as severely worse it won't trigger refusal. This is the reason County highways have approved more development in the Storington area and for that matter across the district. It's also the reason we very often can't refuse proposals on traffic grounds either in the local plan or in our day-to-day applications that we receive at more than planning south. That's the framework we have to work with and in all honesty it's not great. However I'd be happy to join in any meeting with yourselves and your local County of District Councillors to discuss options. If HTC can play a useful role we'd be very willing to try. Thank you. Can I ask a supplement? Yeah Mr. Graham you have a supplementary. Were there any impact studies done during that when the developments that were being proposed outside the neighbourhood plan in addition to the neighbourhood and were there any impact studies that were conducted to look at the effect of traffic and if so where would I find them? Yes the answer. On the website with the Loop Draft local plan there's an evidence base as well that covers all kinds of areas but transport study is one of those areas. So that looks at the transport implications across across the district for all the sites in the city. If you choose too many sites very close together that there is a multiple impact so so yes that's the best place to look at that study. As I say it's qualified by those two important things I said that you know traffic would have to be considered severe the increase in traffic or the worse conditions severely in order to trigger refusal but yes that's where you'll find information. Thank you very much Mr. Graham. I'm going to invite the second member of public to ask a question. Ms Charlotte for now please. Thank you very much. You may notice a slight common thread in my question but I guess that's largely reflective of perception of the problem and question that I'd like to pose. Are the residents of Starrington Village want to restore the look and fear and sense of the village which has become diluted due to a number of issues. Our residents suffer the consequence of over half a million vehicles using the high street each month that is drawn from data and that's recognised largely due to the juxtaposition of the location of the village the geography some local industry and the road infrastructure that sees us as a very convenient cut through. Again reflective of the last question the data shows we have half a million of those vehicles are speeding that sources from our local speed watch group of which I'm a member and we also have issues with illegal parking which is dangerous. So as a village we need help with funding VAS signs we need some action to tackle illegal parking and a general sort of ongoing cleanup and spruce up to make our village feel more like a village and not just somewhere that's six million cars passed through a year. So I guess my question is what can Horton District Council do to help our community which is is at breaking point and from those perspectives. Thank you. Thank you. I'll ask Councillor Ruth Fletcher a cabinet member for local economy in place to respond. Thank you. Thank you very much for your question and it covers a number of service areas and cabinet member responsibilities and however I'll be answering this. Yes sorry about that. We understand the importance of communities which is why one of our four council priorities agreed last year is specifically focused on supporting people and communities. Our annual plan sets out a whole range of activities and initiatives that are being undertaken to ensure that the whole district is a great place to live. I don't want to get sidetracked onto those broader plans of the district and we'll focus on the issues you've raised. As the highways authority as John said West Sussex County Council are responsible for traffic management. They have a responsibility to work with us on air quality matters where it's clear that traffic is the source of air quality concerns. Horton District Council has been conscious of the concerns around air quality in the area for a number of years and we continue to monitor air quality in the village and report on that through the Horton District Council and Sussex Air websites. We will soon be deploying new sensor equipment that will improve our ability to monitor air quality in real time. The air quality in Storington is within the statutory air quality levels as our vehicle fleet becomes cleaner. However we do recognise residents real concerns about air pollution and the other problems that are caused by high traffic levels. We're also conscious that the levels of nitrogen dioxide are above the proposed new limits. We recently successfully bid for funding for traffic surveys and modelling work in Storington to explore this issue in detail. The aim of this project was to help develop and assess traffic management strategies for Storington to reduce the impact of through traffic so far so good. Regrettably at the beginning of April the government minister decided to suspend the funding recently awarded to local authorities for air quality projects including the funding that had been awarded to this council. We're currently exploring alternative solutions to this and although it's unlikely that the project can be progressed as originally proposed without the funding support from Defra our officers are in regular dialogue with a Storington traffic traffic group and have been invited to attend their next meeting. In terms of speeding traffic I'm aware that the Police Commissioner recently attended a meeting of the parish council to discuss traffic concerns and I understand that suggestions around a 20 miles an hour speed limit have been floated. The council will work with and will support local communities who want to introduce 20 mile an hour speed limits. I also understand that the police are carrying out speed patrols in the villages has been mentioned and that when speed watch catch people breaking this brave limit let us get sent out to the registered owners as a method of education and mourning. This council is keen to support Storington residents and those from other areas who are seeking improvements such as vehicle activated signs including speed indicator devices which have already been installed in other passenger neighbourhood council areas through section 106 funding. We are holding some funds for use for highways and transport new purposes in Storington and although the majority of these have already been earmarked I would encourage you to contact West Sussex County Council to discuss whether they'd be prepared to fund these. If you'd like our help talking to the right people at West Sussex we can provide that. Yes please. Our parking team carry out regular patrols in Storington. The most common parking violations observed include vehicles parked on yellow lines and in loading bays. Over the past 12 months 233 penalty charge notices have been issued in Storington for these offences alone. In response to concerns raised by the parish council last year regarding insufficient parking capacity and village car parks we have taken action. This includes reducing the number of season tickets available freeing up more spaces for village visitors and reducing the likelihood of illegal illegal parking. More broadly regarding cleanliness in the village, HDC undertake regular street cleansing and litter and dog bin emptying and we don't believe that there's a particular lick at litter issue in the village. That said our community wardens have been working in the community to establish a new youth forum in Storington and they've organised a community litter pick that will be held on the 1st of June. Our wardens are also looking at opportunities to implement safer walking and cycling routes in the village with the aim of making it safer for children and older residents. More broadly we as a council are supportive of options to improve walking, wheeling and cycling and this could be by developing local cycling walking infrastructure plans which can help unlock external funding opportunities. I'd be very happy to meet you and other community representatives to discuss these ideas if it would be of help. Thank you. Mr Bernal you have a subsidiary question or supplementary question. No I thank you very much and thank you very much for giving such a comprehensive answer. We're just looking for to be make sure we're speaking to the right people, the important district council. I think that's very important to make sure our voices heard and to collaborate then ongoing with the other right people to ensure that our voices are heard as a community but thank you very much for asking. Thank you. Just to respond to that to say you may or may not be planning to sit and last out the whole of tonight's meeting so in terms of opportunities to meet and make sure that you and your colleague are talking to the right people it might be useful if you would like to give names and contact details to the officers and before you go. Thank you. That'd be lovely. Thank you very much. I need to do anything with this. Thank you. Thank you very much. At this juncture actually I would like to make a change to the order of the agenda. On pages 31 to 40 we have an item concerning the appointment of the independent persons awarded committee and I would like to move that up to this juncture for the simple reason that we have Mr Natalie with us who is the chairman of the independent finance and I'm sure he's going to add something to this particular debate. So if you are happy I have to take or make a motion which says that you are happy for us to move item number eight to this junction. It can be done it's part of the constitution so I'm going to move that the appointment of an independent member to the audit committee is considered first and then we will return to the rest of that item later on but I need a seconder for my proposal. I will second that. So if you are happy that we move this item up to this point then could you agree? Is there anyone who disagrees? You agree? Thank you very much. In that case we move on to item eight which is the appointment of the independent person and I'm going to ask Jane Eaton the chief executive to present this item. Thank you Sherman. I hope everyone can hear me on the little distance from the month. Shall I show yours? Thank you. This report concerns the appointments of an independent member to the audit committee as the chartered institute for public finance and accountancy recommends that local authorities include independent members on their audit committees. In addition our recent peer governance review recommended the use of independent experts were appropriate. Following a formal interview process the recommendation is that Paul King is appointed to the position. As well as being a qualified chartered public finance accountant Paul is a non-executive director and chair of the audit and risk management committee of the NHS Sussex Integrated Care Board and an ombudsman at the financial ombudsman service. I understand that the audit committee members are supported with this appointment too. As such members are asked first to approve this appointment, second to a green allowance in the sum of 800 pounds per annum, and third to delegate authority to the director of resources in consultation with the audit committee chairman and the cabinet member for finance and resources to extend the term appointment until the end of the 2027-28 municipal year if required. I will now hand over to Alan Latley of the independent remuneration panel to present his report in relation to the allowance playable to the independent member. Councillor Livingstone as acting chair to the audit committee will then make the recommendations from the normal way. Thank you. I'm obliged and thank you for bringing this forward. As you've heard this is a national recommendation. The slight hiccup for Horsham is that your common constitution only details one independent role which is that for the standards committee whether or for independent members, those people are remunerated on average 1,500 pounds per annum. We've done some work with looking at other authorities to see if we could get a benchmark for what you should pay the independent member for the audit committee and that's equally a grey area I'm afraid. It varies considerably around the area. There are only 16 other authorities in the southeast that have such a role at the moment and only three in Sussex and the figures there vary between 750 and 1,000 pounds around the county. So it is difficult. It's worthy of note that many of the most of the authorities that have an independent member for audit have synergy with other independent members on the authority. So in your case it would be the standards committee. However, the role on the standards committee is changing slightly as I understand over the coming months because the number of meetings is to be reduced and therefore there will be considerably more out of committee meeting work for them and of course the new role has yet to bed in within the audit committee. So it's difficult to compare the two at the moment. The adverts recommended an 800 pound annual remuneration and this seems fair at this stage to the panel bearing in mind of course that later this year we will be commencing a full review of the Councillors' remuneration under the regulations with the view to reporting this time next year and at that time we will be in a position to compare the roles and make sure there is some synergy as is a fair remuneration. So our proposals they are in the report are obviously that the new member be paid a remuneration of 800 pounds per annum as well as obviously any travelling assistance expenses as usual and of course it would require a slight change to the constitution in order to extend the independent member role to include the new committee. Thank you very much Mr lovely that's explicit and I'm glad you don't have to week through the whole. So am I sir. Once we've got through this Councillor doing stone I believe that you're going to move the proposal is accurate. Yes good evening. Before I move to the post I just want to say that the knowledge and experience that the selected independent member or the audit committee will be of great benefits to committee members. It will assist us in the correct exercise of our functions through actively contributing to discussions providing relevant technical expertise. So I'd like to move that the Council approves the appointment of Paul King as an independent member to the audit committee for the 2024, 25 and 25 to 26 municipal years and to dedicate a priority of the director resources and consultation with the chairman of the audit committee and the cabinet member for finance resources to be able to extend the term appointment at the end of 27-28 municipal year. To create a council scheme of members allowances be amended to include an allowance for the co-opted independent member of the audit committee of 800 pounds per annum as recommended by the council's independent remuneration panel and to also note that the co-opted independent member of the audit committee is entitled to traveling and subsistence allowances under the scheme council scheme of members allowances as recommended by the council's independent remunerations panel and to note the monitoring officer will reflect recommendations 1 and 2 in the council's constitution pursuant to their authority to do so for article 13 paragraph 13.3(b) of the constitution should these be approved? So I move the motion. Thank you. Do you have a seconder for the motion? Councillor Halters. Thank you very much. Do you want to speak now or later? No I'm fine I'll speak later. In that case I'm going to ask if there are any comments or any debate. Councillor Serfers. Thank you very much, Chairman. I wonder whether I could seek some clarification on sub paragraph 3.1.4 which makes the point that was touched on that we're only appointing one co-opted independent member now I took part as a number of members did in the recent peer review and we were told the essence of a peer review was to ensure that we as a council are following best practice. I assumed that on this issue the SIPF position statement saying that we should have two independent members represents best practice. I therefore would like some clarification on the words and the position should be kept under review. How is that review to be conducted? Is this going to be part of the because mention was made of the relevant provision in the constitution? We are of course going to have a constitution working party. Is that review meant to be an element of the constitution review but it seems to me we should be aiming wherever possible the best practice and it does not look as if this is regarded generally as best practice so perhaps somebody could give me some further clarification particularly on the point of how we're going to review it and when. Thank you. Council Livingston. I would expect there would be a regular review of the position. Remember what we're doing now is improving the position where we are at the moment. We need to bed in, as I said earlier, this new member to understand how his role would work and then to evaluate if an additional member would be of any benefits. So with regards to the review period I will expect there will be an annual review and then which report back to council as necessary. Thank you. Any other questions? Councillor Walton. Thank you, Chair. The knowledge brought by Mr King is very welcome by me and I'm sure by all members of the audit committee. I very much welcome and support this appointment and I hope that everyone here will support that too. Thank you. Was there anything further that you wish to say, Councillor Livingston? No, okay. So before you is the proposal or proposal or recommendations and I'm going to take a vote on that all those in favour of approving the recommendation. Keep your hands up, I'm afraid. You've got to be counted. Thank you. I think it's unanimous. There's no one against or abstentions. Thank you. So that will proceed. Thank you very much Mr Levely for your comment. I'm obliged and obliged to bring it forward and I'll see most of you on shore later in the year when we can up air for review. We now move on to recommendations from the Cabinet on pages 25 to 28. The recommendations from Cabinet were made on the 21st of March. The item 6A on page 25, the local authority housing fund round 3, LAHF, in 2024, 25, 25 and 26 and I invite Councillor Mark Bonham, Cabinet Member for Finance and Resources to present this item and move the recommendations. Thank you very much, Chair. Members will by now be familiar with previous rounds of the local authority housing fund whereby the government has provided grants for the purchase of houses for settled refugees from Afghanistan and Ukraine and for temporary accommodation housing. Under the scheme so far, the government has funded 40% of the purchase price of each property with HTC covering the remainder. The government has recently announced round 3 of the fund but with two significant changes to previous rounds. These are an increased contribution from 40 to 45% per property and a two rather than one-year timetable to complete the purchases. The government has allocated this Council 1,000,000,029 for the purchase of five further homes, two being standard, one large and two temporary accommodation. This means we will need to approve spending of a further 2.305 million in the 2425 capital program which includes 1 million 0.276 from existing HDC funds. And in addition to that, 8,000 pounds to the revenue budget to cover transactional expenses. We hope to complete all the purchases in year one, albeit that the program gives us two years. The fund is a very successful initiative. Under rounds one and two we have already purchased 20 properties and there are further four progressing under round 2.5. In time these properties will revert to standard HDC housing stock so we are increasing our stock at a discount price which is good for our finances and good for those people that we house within them. I trust that the Council will continue to support this by approving recommendations one to three in the papers and hopefully unanimously as per previous rounds. Thank you, Chairman. Thank you. Have you got a second for your motion? Councillor Raby, do you want to speak now or later? Okay, in that case I'll open this for debate. It looks as though you may be speaking. I'll just be very brief. It's been a very well-run project so far in the previous rounds. The Council Office has done an absolutely sterling job so having a slightly longer window I'm sure that we'll be able to deliver what's gone on so far and I've made this comment because we've had this debate several times that our residents are in some of the most generous people in the country and opening their doors to take in refugees fleeing from Ukraine and giving them safety and sanctuary so I think this is an excellent way that we are following what our residents would like to see and also with the huge pressures on housing generally the fact that we're getting some more temporary accommodation stock that will help people on our housing list that we wouldn't otherwise be able to get is an excellent addition and support for our local residents. I highly recommend people voting for this I think it's just an excellent thing. Thank you. Thank you very much. Councillor Benham do you want to say anything further? In that case we will go to a vote. So can I have a show of hands for all those in favour of approving the recommendation on page 25 or are there any against and any abstentions? I think that's unanimous. Thank you. 6b on page 26 commercial food waste I invite Councillor J Mercer, cabinet member for environmental health recycling will waste to present this item and move the recommendations. Thank you, Chairman. This item is about the revenue and capital implications and processes for introducing a commercial food waste collection service by the 31st of March 2025 as required through the environment back to 2021. We're not legally obliged to collect food waste from businesses. It will however become a legal requirement for businesses over 10 full-time equivalent employees to have separate food waste collections by March 25th. We need to offer those collections in order to keep the business we already have and to grow the business to generate income for the council and reduce the overall burden on council tax of waste collection. We currently have 1851 commercial customers and 200 of those are in the food and accommodation sectors and they clearly will be and are already producing a significant amount of food waste. 10% of our current customers have already expressed an interest in food waste collections from us. There are several projects we'll mention in the next couple of items as well about which form the process of introducing weekly food waste collections which include vehicle procurement, receptacles, procurement, communications and marketing recruitment to increase the establishment. We project on this particular one that we will be able to make a small profit in year one which is 2526 and we can build on this to make a larger profit off to 72,000 in year two growing the service thereafter. The proposal comes with little risk in the sense that the vehicles that we would purchase and the staff we would employ could if the service would not significantly successful actually be absorbed into the domestic food waste collection. The cabinet report set out all the various associated projects and considerations for us to do this and the cabinet has approved the implementation of a weekly food waste collection to our commercial waste customers before the 31st of March 2025. It is also recommended to council to approve capital expenditure of 130,000 which is required to purchase the necessary vehicle and 5,000 for containers and to do that in 2425. cabinet has also recommended to council that the revenue expenditure of 51,903 pounds 75 and the income of 32,500, a net expenditure of 9400 required for this transition to commercial food waste collections in 2425 is approved. This expenditure includes staff wages and ongoing running costs and that is the proposal I put before you members. Thank you very much, Councillor. Seconder for the motion. Yes, I second that Councillor, Nick Graham. Do you want to speak now or later? Okay, in that case I will open up the debate. Councillor Serkis. Thank you, Chairman. I heard in our news bulletin this morning that the figure of 40% of the amount of food that is wasted and thrown away, which is absolutely a scandal of industrial proportions. I therefore wonder whether the cabinet member has any ideas about liaising and meeting with particularly food retailers in the district to see whether there are any ways in which we can play a role in addressing that issue in trying to reduce food waste. I'd also like to reiterate the request that I made at the cabinet meeting that we lobby the government to introduce recycling targets for businesses, the omission of which I have never understood and which nobody has ever been able to give me a satisfactory explanation for. Now, when I raise this at cabinet, Councillor Blackburn thought that this might be a bit of an oneness requirement on business. I can't see that because actually across the whole field of business waste, I think the success rates for recycling, I figure I've heard quoted in the party something like 60%, which means that business can, in some cases, have a more successful rate of recycling than many local authorities. So, I would like to just ask those two questions. I support the recommendation, but I would like to see us taking a more proactive stance in terms of doing anything we can on that, a polling, a polling figure of 40% of food waste wasted and also whether an appropriate juncture when we are corresponding with government, we could lobby for target figures to be introduced for business waste in the way that we have those two targets for domestic waste. Thank you, gentlemen. Thank you very much, Councillor Serkis. Would you like to come back on? Yes, I'm happy to come back on both points. Councillor Serkis would know I've always valued his experience in this area and his suggestions as to how we might be even more effective. We're very happy to take on the fact that we need to work with both householders and commercial providers on prevention of waste, because at the end of the day, taking away waste that could be prevented is a waste of activity and is, of course, a production of carbon that you don't actually need. We need to balance that against our requirements to be able to plan a service and to do that in good time and make sure that we don't need to break down elsewhere in the system because of sudden changes. So it needs to be about with the process, I'm sure you're aware. The issue about recycling targets for businesses is a little more complicated and forgive me if I don't go into the detail because I haven't yet got that. But what I understand is it's more difficult to have comparisons, which are essentially apples for apples comparisons, because of the differing circumstances of the commercial waste collections in a variety of different local authorities. That doesn't in itself owe you against having targets, but it does suggest that they might not be as useful in terms of comparison and knowledge about quality of service. So I think we need to look into that in more detail. But I have noted it and I do think it's a good suggestion that we should look at. Are there any other comments? Councillor GRUNT. No comment. And you didn't want to say anything further together. No, fine. So that brings us to a vote on the approving of the recommendation on page 26 of the agenda. So all those in favour, please show. Are there any against? Are there any abstentions? No, thank you very much, that's unanimous. Please bring us to 6C on page 26 domestic food waste weekly collections. I'm afraid it is Councillor MURSA again. Thank you, Chairman, and forgive me for having to once again speak, colleagues. Again, this item concerns the revenue, capital implications and processes for introducing a weekly food waste collection for all portion residents, including flats, either 31st of March, 2026, so a year later than the previous item. And this is as set out in the government's simpler recycling arrangements. As I've said before, there are several projects that will form this process of introducing weekly food waste collections around vehicles, caddies, vehicle storage, round routing, commons, recruitment, etc. And we also need to work closely with the West Sussex Waste Partnership, which, and to establish post-implementation monitoring, particularly around performance, to make sure that we are good at what we're doing in the new service. We had to consider a decision at Cabinet about the frequency of the residual waste collections taking into account these changed arrangements for recycling as they are set out in the Cabinet Report. We had a presentation from our consultants, Ricardo, to all Cabinet members, and we could see from their conclusions that we need to keep our fortnightly residual waste collections at this point to comply with government standards set and in order to ensure that we had access to government grants for the revenue and capital costs. There were a number of members both from all sides, I think, who were disappointed that we would not be able to look to move to a three-week collection of general refuse on the basis, as Council Circus has already mentioned, that such a significant amount of our general waste at the moment is food, and that food would no longer be in waste bins. The issue, of course, about the two-weekly and three-weekly collection of general use, unfortunately, and I'm sorry to mention this in public, is about the nature of the remaining rubbish, which may well include pretty noxious and other waste substances that people don't want sitting outside their back doors for three weeks. So we do have to crack that as well. And we've certainly said that, although we have agreed a two-weekly collection to go forward at Cabinet, that we should be bearing in mind whether it might be possible at some stage to consider three-weekly. And that is something that we will bear in mind when we review the success of the process. Government have released capital funding grants of 1.486 million, and we should have that, and I'm looking that that should have come to us fairly recently. Unfortunately, this is 1.2 million short of what we estimate the capital cost to be for, particularly for vehicle purchasing and a range of other capital items. We don't yet know what the revenue grant will be that we might seek from government, that we might get from government, and we hope that it will be nearer the actual cost for us. So Cabinet has recommended that, sorry, Cabinet has approved the introduction of domestic food waste service before the 31st of March, 2026 to all residents in Washington District. And the collection frequencies as residual waste fortnightly, dry mixed recycling fortnightly, garden waste fortnightly, and food waste weekly. And recommends to Council the capital expenditure of up to 2.617 million required to purchase vehicles, including cab technology and CCTV, caddies and bins. And this will be spent across the 24/25/26 years and profiled into the capital program in the relevant year by the Director of Resources, when the lead times for the orders of those capital items and none. Cabinet has also recommended to Council that we have additional revenue expenditure of 25,000 in 24/25. And this is to allow us to do the root planning required for transition to weekly food waste collection. And that's the recommendation I'm making to your members. Thank you, and you have a seconder for the motion. Councilor Blackburn. Do you wish to speak now or later? I can speak later, Chairman. In that case, I will add our debate on this. Yes, Councilor Fisher. Thank you, Chair. I very much welcome the introduction of regular food waste on a weekly basis. But I'm wondering if HTC will consider running alongside this scheme, a district-wide education plan to reduce landfill by encouraging residents to purchase less products with less packaging, to recycle soft plastic and recycle more generally. And also, really critically, making sure that waste does actually get collected by this scheme rather than being sent to landfill. An education scheme such of this could mean we would move to three weekly residual waste collections sooner and also collect more food waste. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you, wish to come there. I'm happy to answer that, Chair, on the basis that we will be looking through the waste partnership, as I said, at all the opportunities that there are to educate both householders and businesses on the implications of food waste collection. And that is something that the project team that are working on this will be developing, and I will be overseeing, and at different points, we can report on that and bring that forward through to the P-DAG or through to Cabinet, if there are decisions needed to be made. The second issue, I would just say that actually the amount of the proportion of waste that goes to landfill in Horsham is very small. So I wouldn't want people to take away the false impression that we are currently sending significant proportions to landfill. Obviously, the whole point of the recycling waste function is to reduce that as near as as near as possible to nothing. And that's something that we're very focused on. No other question, Councillor Boughton. Thank you, Chairman, just picking up on a point in there, and I'll probably find out I'm wrong here, but I'll just check anyway. In terms of the risk of reducing food waste going into landfill, if that was that was the point, I don't believe any of our food waste actually ends up in landfill at the moment, because it does actually get sorted and processed and is used to as other other purposes and capping old clay mines or something like that, I think remember, if you can correct me on that Councillor Mercer, that would be great. Significant amounts of general waste go through to the warning depot, remembering that we're responsible for collection and it's the County Council that she's responsible for disposal. And the food, as I understand it and have seen myself, the food elements are essentially taken out of the general waste, and they're put into anaerobic digesters. And so therefore, the anaerobic digesters deal with the food waste, it does not go into landfill in that sense. Anything that is re-climable in terms of metals, building materials, a range of other things, is again sorted out and then goes to those purposes. There are significant amounts, and you will see, if you visit the depot, not the depot, sorry, the warning station, significant bundles of flammable material that the County Council then sells to people elsewhere with incinerators, and they provide energy to those incinerators. So there's very little food waste that would get anywhere near landfill. Thank you very much, Councillor Mercer. It might be, I did spy the Leader of the County Council, come into the chamber, so I wouldn't want him to not get the credit for the good work they're doing there on that. All right, that aside, are there any other comments? In that case, Councillor Blackboard. Thank you, Chairman. I welcome this, of course. Waste is one of the important strands in our climate action strategy in order to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. As we keep reminding you, we cannot achieve zero carbon across our district on our own. We have to work with our residents to do it. And I agree with Councillor Cirqueus, over 40% of our average domestic waste bin made up of food waste is absolutely shocking, but even worse than that, a whopping 70% of that 40% can actually be avoided altogether. Councillor Fisher, there are two actions related to food waste in the climate action strategy. One is the introduction of food waste collection, which we're discussing now. But the other is the upscale of community initiatives that reduce food waste in the first place. I particularly wanted to mention the latter to reassure Councillors that we have no intention of communicating to residents that collecting it gets us all off the hook where food waste is concerned. The climate action community engagement that we carried out last year informed that food waste collection is very much desired by our residents and is likely to be a well-received service, irrespective that we are obliged to do it. The research identified that less popular were local community solutions to the problem. This is important data for us to have and will help inform our efforts in combating unnecessary waste. Some of the actions that are likely to be included will be community fridges as well as the work that the West Sussex Waste Partnership is doing with food charity UK Harvest to provide pop-up pantries. Composting either by individual residents' allotments or community schemes is also acknowledged in the strategy as being an important tool. And in addition to these, we will be promoting behaviour change around food buying, preparation and storage. The 70% avoidable food waste I mentioned is due to bulk buying too much. Pre-packaging fruit and vegetables is an obvious culprit here or cooking and serving too much. The way we see it is that as recycling packaging into the appropriate bin became normalised, so too can less waste for food management. There's far greater awareness and understanding amongst people nowadays than there was at the onset of separating waste into various recycling bins. So we do aim for much more quickly adopted behaviour change where food waste is concerned. I should add here too that there is a role for local food production via community food growing areas as well as local commercial food providers, all of which are likely to have additional carbon reduction benefits such as less packaging and fewer miles from source to plate. Less wasteful, more sustainable behaviour is entirely possible especially when starting more or less from scratch. And many, maybe most people, especially here in Horsham, are willing. They're just relying on us to support the behaviour change and make it as easy as possible wherever we can. We've every intention of doing so. Thank you, Chairman. Thank you very much, Councillor Batburn. Which brings us to the vote. All those in favour of approving the recommendation on page 27 of the Gender Please Show. Are there any against abstentions? No, that's carried unanimously. Thank you. 60 on page 27 to 28. An additional service for the isolated property rounds. It is you again, Councillor. Thank you, Chairman and apologies to colleagues. This is about the particular service for isolated property round collection. We have to collect domestic waste from all domestic properties within our district. And some of these, as you will know, because you may live in them, are cited along narrow lanes and tracks that are simply not accessible using the normal large collection vehicles. And therefore, we have to use smaller specialised vehicles which are at collection capacity. And despite this, some of the properties we're required to claim from have, at the end of very long narrow lanes, no space to turn. And that means that vehicles have to be reversed up narrow lanes, which poses a significant health and safety risk and increases the chance of accidents. And therefore, Cabinet has recommended Council to seek approval for additional capital and revenue budgets to purchase an extra suitable vehicle using a recognised purchasing framework and employer driver for the vehicle employed on full-time contract. We can thereby reduce the workload on the current two rounds and reduce the safety risk as a smaller vehicle can be driven up in narrow lanes, because it's easier to turn around. All of this, of course, is within the context of making sure that we're clear about the number of properties we have to collect from and establish the mileage that the vehicle will have to cover, because depending on the results of that work, we'll decide whether the vehicle needs to be purchased, would I be three and a half tons or seven and a half tons, and whether it can be electric if it can cover the range required, otherwise it would need to be like our other collection vehicles, HBO Diesel, which is 90% more efficient than Diesel. So, Cabinet has recommended Council to approve the additional capital budget in this year of 130,000 for an electric vehicle and charging point. If, of course, that may be a diesel vehicle of necessary, and to approve the additional revenue budget expenditure in the recycling and waste service 24/25 of 27,000. Thank you very much. We have a seconder. Councillor Noor. Do you want to speak now, Councillor Noor? Thank you, no, speak later. Okay, thank you. In that case, I'll open this debate. Are there any comments from the Councillors? No comments? Councillor Noor. Thank you very much, Chair. As someone who lives on a single track road with very few passing points, I'm always impressed by the cheerful efficiency with which I've been to collected. People who drive on this type of road are used to reversing for horse lorries, delivery vehicles, tractors, and people trying to avoid traffic. We're used to the mud, water-filled potholes, and treacherous verges with ramble-hidden ditches. Having a smaller vehicle for isolated property rounds is a great idea. Improving crew safety as these vehicles are easier to mover and turn rather than reversing down long stretches. Reducing wear and tear on mirrors, springs, and warning beakers will also save funds and help keep vehicles on the road. I welcome this recommendation. Help your join me in voting points. Thank you very much indeed. In that case, did you want to say more? We'll take a vote. All those in favour? Any against? Abstainsions? I think it's unanimous. Thank you very much indeed. Item 6E on page 28 is a one-off cost of living supplement in nine by Councillor Mark Fainan, cabinet member for finance and resources to present this item and the recommendation. Thank you very much, Chair. By way of background, last December, our recognised trade union, which is Unison, submitted a proposal for a fortune-weighting allowance of £750 per annum for all portion council staff. Their reasoning for this was that national pay awards were standard across the country, while areas such as Horsham and southeast generally were more expensive to live in than some other parts of the country and this disadvantaged HDC staff. We received this proposal and we costed it and we projected it at cost of £420,000 a year, recurring in all future years. This was considered but deemed by the Council as unaffordable. We went back to Unison explaining this and they did accept the unaffordability considerations but did provide anecdotal evidence that some council staff were happy to resort to food banks to make ends meet. We consider this and responded with the proposal to offer all staff in grades one to four, that's the lowest grades. A one-off cost a living award of £450 a year, per router, for a period of either nine months, starting from this month, or until the implementation of the 2024 National Joint Committee Pay Award, whichever was earlier. The Pay Award is typically settled late in the year and backdated to April. This one-off payment would benefit just the just under half of council staff who are on these lower pay scales. The total cost of the proposal is around £100,000 and funding for this is proposed from the unexpected second tranche of the government guaranteed funding settlement. Unison have indicated that they will recommend the proposal to their members. I therefore strongly recommend that council approves this one-off payment and thereby demonstrates our support for our council staff in what are undoubtedly difficult times for some of them. Thank you. Thank you, Councillor BAN. Councillor BAN, are you seconding? Thank you, do you want to speak now? No, I'll speak later if required. Thank you, Chairman. In that case, I'll open it up for debate from Councillors. Yes, Councillor Raby. Thank you very much, Chairman. I think we're all aware of how difficult the last year has been and the number of people that have been impacted and that goes all the way through to people who have previously been on very good salaries. I was out door knocking in the last month and I spoke to a resident in Horsham District. Both of her sons are police officers, which is a fairly well-paid and good salary job. She said both their sons have used food banks in the last year. I think when the whole society is going through such a difficult time with spikes in mortgage rates, people often paying 2, 3, 400, 500 pounds more a month, it's put people into really difficult positions. And I think that it's a top priority for us as a Council to help people through the cost of living. And I think if we've got Council, staff, officers working really hard to deliver important services and they're having to use food banks and we've got an opportunity to help those staff get through this really tough times. And I think we should do it. So I strongly recommend voting for this. I'll really prove it. Thank you. Is there any other Councillors wish to speak? Councillor Houghl. Thank you very much, Chairman. I won't keep you long. It just seems to me that this is in line with what we're, you know, we've said as a Council we want to do. We want to help people through the cost of living crisis. And you know, that begins with our organisation by showing leadership in this way. So I fully support this. Thank you. Thank you very much, Councillor Bailin. I take it you don't want to say anything else. Okay, in that case we will go to our vote. Those in favour of the recommendations on page 28, please show any against any abstentions? No, in that case it's carried unanimously. Thank you very much indeed. On page 29 we have committee recommendations. And I invite Councillor Dennis Livingstone, Vice Chair of the Audit Committee to introduce the capital strategy for 2024-25 and move the recommendations set out on page 29 of the agenda. Okay, this is going to be a bit of mopping up. The 2024-25 investment and 2024-25 treasury management strategies were recommended for full Council approval by the Audit Committee on the 6th of December 2023. But due to an administrative oversight, we're not put forward for approval at the Council meeting on the 21st of February 2024. In March, officers spoke to our treasury advisors who confirmed that we fulfilled all legal obligations to approve an affordable borrowing limit via the approval of the potential indications, indicators of sorry, and capital strategy which formed a part of the budget in February. There has been no impact from the three-week delay to the approval of the treasury management and investment strategies. We have continued with the 2023-24 investment and treasury management strategies and limits until the 2024-25 strategy is approved by Council, hopefully tonight. In December, the Audit Committee reviewed the capital strategy for 24-25. The key points being that the treasury investment indicators were largely unchanged apart from some longer term investments that have been increased by 4 million to give leeway from medium term investment. So the Audit Committee resolved to recommend that full Council approved the treasury management strategy for 24-25 and the associated limits and the specific indicators in Section 4 and Appendix B of the capital strategy for 24-25 report. And to recommend that full Council approve the investment strategy for 2024-25 and the associated limits and the specific indicators included in Section 4 and Appendix C of the capital strategy for 24-25 report. Thank you very much indeed. Do you have a seconder? Councillor Frankland. Thank you very much. I will then vote for opening it up for debate. Are there any comments? Are there any of the Councillors? No, Councillor Frankland. In that case, we will take this to a vote. All those in agreement, please show. Any disagreements? Any abstentions? No, it's carried unanimously. Thank you very much indeed. Which brings us on to item 9 because we've already dealt with item 8 in the beginning. The reports of representatives. There's any member who represents the Council on an outside body wish to make a report. All right. Hang on, let me write you down. So that's Councillor John Grett, Councillor Liz Kitchen. Anybody else? I had a written, or we had a written report from Councillor Beavis, I believe. And I also have Councillor Raby. You're not going to say it. Okay. I did have a comment from Councillor Tropp, but he's not here. So did you find it out amongst yourselves? Councillor Grich. Thank you, Chair. I thought it was back time I could do, yes, another update from the south-south left of Park. Three matters to update you with. One is personnel changes within the authority, which some people may know about anyway, but just in case. The Saetan National Park Authority Local Plan and a proposal for a new super national nature reserve within that includes the park. So the personnel changes. Anita Kerwin Nye has replaced Andrew Lee, who was a former Director of Countryside Policy and Management, and he retired in January as a Director of Landscape and Strategy. Her background is in the not-for-profit sector, her most recent role being the Executive Director of the Youth Hostile Association. She has a focus on young people and education, in particular, that of disadvantaged children, children with disabilities and children with special education needs, and the focus on inclusion as EG equal access to heritage, nature and cultural sites. And as such, she brings an impressive range of skills, experience and interest to the role that have a good fit with the purposes and the duty of the National Park. Another change is on the 1st of January, Trevor Beatty, retired as a CEO of the National Park Authority. He had been CEO for 12 years and was the authorities' first permanent CEO. Penny, the appointment of a new permanent CEO, they're recruiting right now. They're looking for candidates both from within the National Park Authority and outside. So Penny, here's the recruitment of a replacement. Tim Selaney, who was Director of Planning, has been appointed interim CEO, and Mike Hughes, who was the authority major planning projects and performance manager, has stepped into Tim's former role as interim director of planning. The idea is that when the post is filled, there will be a handover. On the local plan, the authorities currently review its local plan with the aim of having it ready for its regulation, 18 consultation in early 2025. There is some uncertainty regarding which system the new local plan will need to be made under due to the change in the system anticipated to be coming in late 2024. With the target for the regulation, 18 consultation being early 2025, it is by no means certain that the authority will meet the 30th of June 2025 submission deadlines for old-style plans. The authority is therefore being flexible in its approach to reviewing its local plans, so you can respond to whichever plan making system the plan is ultimately assessed under. So they're having fun with their local plan. The last thing I'm going to talk about is the Chalk Coast National Nature Reserve. And the reason I'm bringing it up, apart from the fact that it's really exciting, is that I can see parallels with it could be something interesting for us in the west of the park with our water problems. So, Natural England has proposed that the Wellington Heath National Nature Reserve, which is situated east of Eastbourne and north of the Brisbane Forest, be extended from its current 63 hectares, to become the Chalk Coast National Nature Reserve, covering over 2,000 hectares. Wow. Extending over, land owned and/or managed by eight organisations, including the South Downs National Park Authority, with a proposed inclusion of the Triple-S-I land within the 76th country park. Other organisations include National Trust and various other organisations. I didn't write them down, so I can't tell you. Whilst the site is in the east, sorry, given the area of the nature reserve, if in the area the new nature reserve will cover it, it qualifies to be called the Super National Nature Reserve. Whilst at the site is in East Sussex and at the eastern end of the South Downs National Park, its potential of interest to us in this area as a new national nature reserve will become the first groundwater-inspired Super National Nature Reserve. The drinking water for seafood is born and the surrounding villages is supplied by Southeast Water from two Chalk aquifers within the area, but the quality of the water is deteriorating, requiring Southeast Water to chemically treat the water supply, which imposes additional costs. The volume water available for obstruction is also under pressure due to climate change. The management of the area as a Super National Nature Reserve will help protect the underlying geology and support natural processes to protect groundwater, as well as enabling nature recovery across large areas of connected habitats. Thank you. There's a lot of work gone through there, so thank you very much for attending. It's great. Please. I see you're staring at me, so I assumed it was really next. Thank you very much. There's not a lot to say, Chairman, but I did say I'd update you at the last meeting. The DCO is ongoing and is likely to be for at least another six months, so there's nothing we can do on that. But GATCOM at the moment is focusing on the review of night flights, which is currently taking place. The general feelings seems to be that they will keep the night flights, the same regime, and it's been for at least a couple of years. That doesn't seem unreasonable until you take into account the amount of dispensations that the airport is now giving to almost anybody who asks for it, not necessarily for the convenience of the passengers or for safety. This is serious concern, and I think GATCOM will be asking that the night flight regime is reduced to take account of some of these dispensations that are given, and that's where we stand on night flights, which is a concern, but I think reasonable, but the dispensations are a big concern because they are hundreds, not just a few. Thank you very much for highlighting that list. Which brings us on to item 10. We have received two notices of motion in accordance with rule 4-826 of the Constitution. The time allowed for this item is a total of 30 minutes, and we'll consider the motions in the order they were received. If we can keep it to 15 minutes per motion, I think it would be good management of time as we have three members' questions later on. So I'm going to ask Councillor Mike Crocker to present his motion, and you have five minutes, ma'am. Thank you, Chair. I expect that many members will have listened with some display to the start warning from the outgoing Chief Executive of the Climate Change Committee on how recent government actions have resulted in us falling back in our push to decarbonise. Combined with recent data regarding loss of biodiversity in the state of our rivers, the overall picture is bleak for current populations, let alone future generations. Nonetheless, I suspect that some members may be wondering what does the CAN bill have to do with Ocean District Council? My response revolves around what revolves around what effect central government policies have on horsham's actions to reduce the district's carbon footprint and reverse the visible decline in environmental health, as both our ambitions and our recently approved climate strategy. The short answer is lots, but to be more explicit, the bill intends to ensure that the United Kingdom, of which Ocean District is of course a part, plays its role in tackling biodiversity loss and climate change by requiring government action on five fronts. Firstly, we need to make our fair share of emission cuts necessary to limit the increase in global temperatures to 1.5 degrees C. That's the more ambitious end of the Paris Agreement. Whilst we may be on target to meet our fourth carbon budget, that target was set 12 years ago, a lot has changed in climate science since then, and the fifth carbon budget exceeds the UK's Paris Agreement target by 36%. Literally, we are burning through our realistic carbon budget too fast. Secondly, we should account for our entire carbon footprint whenever the emissions occur. This means taking real action on the emissions we cause overseas through the production, trade and transportation of things we consume. This is roughly 40% of the UK's true carbon footprint, which is only reduced by around 23% since 1990, as we switch from domestic coal power manufacturing to importing goods for consumption. Thirdly, we should halt and then reverse the decline of nature by 2030 in line with our COP 15 requirements. We need to protect and restore natural and energy ecosystems for healthy soil and water, increased biodiversity and thriving natural carbon sinks. After all, what does the environment ever done for us? Fourthly, we need to take responsibility for our harmful impacts on nature around the world. This means being honest about the damage of the environment caused by our financing, investments and consumption, making sure we reduce our global impact on natural resources. Finally, the bill requires the creation of a temporary climate and nature assembly that would put forward recommendations to Parliament for the strategy to achieve the above requirements. I appreciate that some members do not like the assembly approach, but I support it on the basis of the non-political discussion and consensus that have been shown to achieve. Elective representatives would do well to take note. To conclude, over 350 parish, district and county councils have expressed their support for this bill, and I see no reason why this council should not join them and also urge our representative members of Parliament to do likewise. I hope members can concur with this view, but I look forward to hearing their thoughts. Thank you. Thank you very much, Councillor CROKE. Is there a seconder for this motion? Yes. Councillor PERRY, thank you. Do you want to speak now or later? I'll speak now. I'm pleased to support this motion. The climate and nature bill has cross-party support in Parliament and from respected scientists, charities and organisations. I hope that we can also see much agreement here in Horsham. This council has already made positive plans towards net zero and nature recovery and recently passed emotional nights at rivers, but for everyone's safe and secure survival, climate and nature need to be even higher priorities on political agendas everywhere, especially at the top government level. This Monday 22nd of April was Earth Day, supported at the climate and nature bill, released an amusing social media video about ToadWatch showing how we all depend on nature to thrive and survive, which I think maybe Mike must have seen. I can send it to you. However, we should not need another reminder that climate and nature support us all. If nature is thriving, it can help prevent more jeopardy for people here in Horsham, the UK and across the world. In Hennfield, we have some small but recent examples of effects of the crisis beginning to impact our ways of life. More extreme weather and more frequent river floods on the river Ada are causing problems for residents. We've now been warned that an important public right away can no longer be defended against the flooding. The breach of the Ada Bank will be allowed to continue. This is pros and cons for nature and us all, but it will certainly result in the loss of a ministry for workers on one of our precious nature corridors. And West Sussex, as we recently told us that our potholes will take longer to repair because we've had so much rain and that includes in Horsham. I might be a new Horsham district councillor, but I'm old enough to remember the 70s and 80s. We sort of dimly knew that things were going wrong with the environment then and with energy provision, and that's something needed to be done about it. As a young teacher in the late 70s, I set up a lunchtime club for the students who wanted to protect endangered species. We all thought the oil might run out and that we were worried about the whole in the ozone layer and how it might give us all skin cancer. I stopped buying aerosols. I think I might even have been aware about the potential for rising sea levels as we did not want to buy a house to near a flood zone, but the tent barrier was built to protect us and of course we'd all be fine. My partner and I knew in 1982 that car emissions were damaging, so we bought the smallest car we could, a two CV. But even though we had all this awareness and took some easy personal decisions, we mostly trusted that our various governments would do something in good time to prevent the worst. If things were really going to get bad, surely they would tell us. So I carried on my adult life trusting this thought and waiting for clearer direction and certainly enjoyed more than my fair share of carbon going to Australia and being a two car family. But here we are now in 2024. We've now got carbon emissions from aviation, which we're expected to exceed all previous years this year. There's no let up in the decline of our wildlife. The UK is still one of the most nature depleted countries on earth. Globally two in five young people have said that the impacts of climate change have made them reconsider their desire to start a family. On the 6th of April we heard the UK is facing food shortages this year after extreme weather and due to low yields here and droughts abroad. In March, senior Swiss women succeeded in a court ruling that their human rights have been denied because of our failure to reduce emissions and the climate crisis will mean that average incomes will fall by almost a fifth within the next 26 years compared to what they would have been if there were no such crisis and the cost of damage will be six times higher than the price of limiting global heating to two degrees. The UN climate's chief has just set a two-year deadline for saving the world as more people worldwide deal with record-breaking temperatures and natural disasters. We as district councillors can help make sure our representatives in Parliament hear this message of concern from ordinary people in this area. Based on my personal experience of the last 50 years, we cannot rely on governments and businesses to deliver in good time without support of every level and a strong legal framework like the Canville. The scientific data tells us we're now beyond making promises for the future. We need to deliver now to secure a better future for nature and our children. I urge you to support this motion to encourage UK government to take robust action now on climate and nature. Thank you, Councillor PERRY. I'm going to throw this open for debate and a show of hands. I'll take Councillor MASSON first because I saw his hand goal. Thank you, Chairman. The motion tabled by Councillor Crocker calls on this Council to support the 10-minute rule bill proposed by Labor MP Alex Sobel in the House of Commons. The bill, which is separate from the government's legislative program on net zero, calls on the government to establish a new, unelected climate and nature assembly away from Parliament. Rather than passing a virtue-signaling motion to promote an ill-conceived climate and nature bill, the Alliance of Liberal Democrat and Green Councillors at Portion District Council have a chance to make an actual difference and withdraw their disastrous local plan. History has now recorded that three-quarters of Green Councillors at HDC voted with their Lib Dem partners for the Liberal Democrat local plan, including the Green Group Leader. Not a single one joined the Conservatives in opposing the emerging local plan to build vast quantities of properties across the Green Belt of our rural communities. Their record shows, as Councillor Milne pointed out to us earlier, approximately 1,420 buildings, the consequence of which would bury rare species habitats under concrete, fragment vital Green corridors for wildlife, reduced farmland for local food production and promote unsustainable communities in areas which are devoid of major social and physical infrastructure, and which will therefore rely entirely upon motor vehicle for all their essential services, compiling more traffic onto the road at the expense of walkers and cyclists to flushing more surface and wastewater into our sewers and rivers. The most pressing environmental disaster facing horse and residents is the Lib Dem and Green local plan. Conservatives at Portion District Council voted unanimously against this destruction of our rural community. Conservative environmental counsellors care passionately about our climate. We have provided over-action that has put the UK ahead of every other country in the world. We have had the fastest reduction in greenhouse gas emissions in the G7, down almost 50% since

1. France is hovering around 22%. The United States have shown no change at all. China is up by over 300%. But when our share of global emissions is less than 1%, it is not right that the British citizens are now being told to sacrifice even more than others. What you never hear from the Greens is how well the Conservatives are doing. We are already home to four of the world's... What you never hear from the Greens is how well the Conservatives are actually doing. We're already home to four of the world's largest offshore wind farms. We are building an even bigger one at Dockerbank and we're improving our auction process to maximise private investment into this world leading industry. We've lifted the ban on onshore wind. We're investing in four new clusters to capture and store carbon from the atmosphere. And we're building new nuclear power stations for the first time in 30 years. I shall oppose this motion. Thank you, Council Member. Council, do you want to add this? As my fellow Councillor seems to have said, most of what I would have said, and what I will say is that this particular item takes power away through democratically electorate of parliamentarians with endless bureaucracy and consequently committees. It takes no consideration of what's actually happening and the action is taking to make our economy truly net zero. The next day to age is critical and the governance from uniting every business and citizen to tackle the threat to our planet with unprecedented efforts. We need real action, not virtue-sickling, as I believe has been said. But I say to the leadership of Portion District Council and to the proposal of this motion has cut this noise and just focus on our residents. Thank you, Councillor Dennett. Are there any other councilor service? Thank you very much, Chairman. In the late '60s, I can remember a man who walked up and down the strand in London with a great big sandwich board. Our illustrious Chairman is nodding, so perhaps he could remember this gentleman who used to walk up and down the strand with a big sandwich board that said, Prepare to meet thy doom. I think the problem is we all know from our childhood the story of the boy who cried wolf, and there is a very real danger of hyping up to an unrealistic extent the threats that are facing us. Now, that's not just me speaking. I'm relying, in fact, here on a quote from Professor Jim Skier, I think that's how it's pronounced, head of intergovernmental panel on climate change. One would assume he might know what he's talking about. He said, and others have been saying this, apocalyptic messages are undermining the main message. These apocalyptic messages have been overdone and are actually undermining what we're trying to do. He went on to say above 1.5 centigrade was not an existential threat to humanity. All I wanted to say is that this bill hypes up this horror story to an extent that risks undermining what the people who drafted it wanted to achieve, and therefore, I think that alone is a good enough reason to reject the motion tonight and vote against it. Thank you, Councillor Serkis. Are there any other comments? Councillor Fisher. Thank you, Chair. I just wanted to say, first of all, what a shame that our Council seemingly united stance that has been demonstrated motion after motion after motion up to this point has now been blown apart by petty party politics. Firstly, I'd like to say there is no lived-end green alliance as the cons know only too well. I have to say that the hypocrisy of Councillor Manton's comments are quite frankly laughable, given that the local plan and housing targets that he talks about this Council meeting are mandated by law put in place by the Conservative government. We are adhering to the law and it's unfortunate. Thank you. Thank you, Councillor Fisch. Thank you, Chairman. Very many thanks to Councillor COCA for bringing this motion forward to Council are fully sported. One of the main barriers to meaningful progress with climate change mitigation and adaptation is a lack of certainty of direction from our government. The climate and nature bill is sorely needed to focus minds and provide the kind of surety needed for business enterprise and the population to have a long-term meaningful response to the real risks facing us. The more time that passes without this happening, the more dangerous and disruptive the consequences and the more expensive and difficult is the road back. Frankly, in my opinion, the lack of leadership on this major issue of our time is unforgivable, but it is hopefully drawing to an end and in the meantime, it behoaps us all to focus on what we can do ourselves within our spheres of influence until national leadership re-emerges. It's painful to listen to, I know, but the country has been let down to the extent that sewage is flowing in our rivers and off our beaches. New oil and gas licenses have been provided for up to the maximum fossil fuel extraction in the North Sea. Sensible plans to make boiler manufacturers produce electric heat pumps as a proportion of their business have been dropped. There has been a U-turn on targets for electric vehicle uptake to the real irritation of even the motor industry. There have been cuts to air passenger duty. Fun fact, these cuts were provided the evening before we hosted COP26 in Glasgow. There was an abject failure to appoint a chair to the Climate Change Committee and on top of all of that, apparently the best that can be done for nature recovery is the Environment Act 2021, which purges to halt nature decline, halt nature decline. The UK is one of the worst countries on the entire planet for nature decline. There are 195 countries in the world and we're in the bottom 12. But apparently, don't worry, we're going to halt it there. When did we become a country that manages its own decline? We need to go past halting it and actually actively reverse it. Regarding the bill and its response to these realities, with the backing of the public, the aim is to deliver a joined up science led environmental plan to achieve net zero before irreversible tipping points are passed. In addition, it would ensure that there is a stronger link between actions that address climate and ecological emergencies. This is already the approach that HDC is taking through the climate action strategy and initiatives such as Wilder-Horsham District. Climate change worsens biodiversity loss and vice versa, which is why both need to be tackled together. Degrading habitats at home and overseas will accelerate the release of carbon emissions, but many ecosystems can absorb carbon and reduce the impacts of climate change. As an example, Wilder-Horsham District and our parks and countryside teams are already allowing for this energy in their initiatives, for example, restoring heathened, which absorbs carbon. The bill also addresses many of the weaknesses in the current national approach, which are important for action at a local level. These include that there is a need for joined up action across the UK and at all levels of government and for this action to be accelerated, that the fact that carbon budget, which underpinned the transition to net zero, were set over a decade ago. The science has evolved during that time and now endorses the importance of keeping a global temperature increase of 1.5 degrees. That it is imperative to take account of carbon emissions that are generated from goods that the UK imports in order to establish meaningful goals and actions. We can't continue to point the finger at China. For example, when using that country's manufacturing expertise to produce our goods and send them over to us is not included in our own carbon expenditure budget, we have to do that. There are currently no specific targets for important greenhouse gases such as methane. Targets need to be set in order that the problem might be tackled. That currently we're not even addressing emissions from shipping and aviation until 2033. This needs a review. That there is a need to reverse the decline in abundance of species by 2030 and not just halted as required by the Environment Act of 2021. As mentioned already, we're not in the business of managing our own declines. The bill also calls for climate and nature assembly to help develop a joint strategy for tackling climate change and nature recovery. This is to ensure an equitable approach to the transition needed to address these issues. It should help provide for a nuanced plan that appreciates the variety of circumstances that exist in our society. Since the consultation with the public is always valuable and such an assembly will undoubtedly prove to be as enlightening and move things along as quickly as is already happening here in Horsham. Finally, for emphasis, I would like to reiterate a plea for better partnership working and resourcing across all levels of government. Connectivity is a word often used when discussing these issues and it matters across the board. The crisis will affect us all to a greater or lesser degree and so a network of collaboration running through and between central and local divisions of government and public bodies and organisations will now be the most efficient way to rein in this bolting crisis if we are to have any hope of meeting our climate and nature goals. Thank you, Chairman. Thank you, Councillor Boughlin. Thank you, Chairman. I'll be brief because time is moving on. I won't take us back to the 60s like Council Service. I presume it was the 1960s as we're referring to. I'll just go back as far as the 1970s and give you a couple of things. I thought what crisis was Jim Callahan and the Labour Party, not the Conservatives, whereas it was Margaret Thatcher who said, I can't bear Britain in decline. I just can't. So there is a crisis, a nature is decline in decline and we need to do something about it. I'm also a little bit of a pedant, so Councillor Fisher's already sorted out one of the things that was made up this evening about the lived M Green Alliance. That doesn't exist. The other thing, just for Councillor Manton, your group didn't actually unanimously vote against local plan, but there you go. The rest of what you had to say, well, you know, back on planet Earth. But I'll say I agree with one of the things that Councillor Dennis had to say, actually, let's cut the noise and just get on with, you know, look after our residents. So let's vote. Thanks. Thank you very much. Are there any other comments? In that case, Councillor Prokaw, you have the right of reply. I'll be very brief, Chair. Thank you. I'd just like to thank Councillor Blackburn and Fisher for their support, which I do appreciate, said far more eloquently than I could have done, and perhaps suggest to Councillor CIRCUS that he goes and watches climate the movie, which sounds his sort of film on that. I'll stop. Thank you. Thank you very much. So you are proposing your three or your three proposals up on page 41. I'm going to put this to the vote. So the vote is that all those in favour of the motion, please, Chair. [inaudible] [inaudible] [inaudible] Yeah. Are there any abstentions, please? Abstentions? No? So it's... So the motion is carried. Thank you very much. Now, I am going to make a plea that actually, when we look at the Constitution, something is done about the time for motions, because I have 30 minutes allowable from motions. We've done one motion in 30 minutes. But the Council has a right to decide they want to carry on on the next motion. So I'm going to give it to you to make a decision. Do you wish to carry on with the next motion, or would you like to pass on the next motion? And I will be sure it comes up to the next Council meeting. Or do you want to go on to the questions? So my proposal is, or not proposal, my question to you, Councillors, is do you wish to carry on with the next motion, or do you wish to pass? Would you show me whether you want to carry on? [inaudible] [inaudible] [inaudible] [inaudible] [inaudible] 26 to continue, which is more than. So that's carried then. In that case, we will continue with the next motion. [inaudible] [inaudible] [inaudible] [inaudible] Please hold your meeting has been temporarily adjourned. [inaudible] Please hold your meeting has been temporarily adjourned. [inaudible] Please hold your meeting has been temporarily adjourned. [inaudible] Please hold your meeting has been temporarily adjourned. [inaudible] Please hold your meeting has been temporarily adjourned. [inaudible] Please hold your meeting has been temporarily adjourned. [inaudible] Please hold your meeting has been temporarily adjourned. [inaudible] Please hold your meeting has been temporarily adjourned. [inaudible] Please hold your meeting has been temporarily adjourned. [inaudible] Please hold your meeting has been temporarily adjourned. [inaudible] Please hold your meeting has been temporarily adjourned. [inaudible] Please hold your meeting has been temporarily adjourned. [inaudible] Please hold your meeting has been temporarily adjourned. [inaudible] Please hold your meeting has been temporarily adjourned. [inaudible] Please hold your meeting has been temporarily adjourned. [inaudible] Please hold your meeting has been temporarily adjourned. [inaudible] Please hold your meeting has been temporarily adjourned. [inaudible] Please hold your meeting has been temporarily adjourned. [inaudible] Please hold your meeting has been temporarily adjourned. [inaudible] Please hold your meeting has been temporarily adjourned. [inaudible] Please hold your meeting has been temporarily adjourned. [inaudible] Please hold your meeting has been temporarily adjourned. [inaudible] Please hold your meeting has been temporarily adjourned. [inaudible] Please hold your meeting has been temporarily adjourned. [inaudible] Please hold your meeting has been temporarily adjourned. [inaudible] Please hold your meeting has been temporarily adjourned. [inaudible] Please hold your meeting has been temporarily adjourned. [inaudible] Please hold your meeting has been temporarily adjourned. [inaudible] Please hold your meeting has been temporarily adjourned. [inaudible] Please hold your meeting has been temporarily adjourned. [inaudible] Please hold your meeting has been temporarily adjourned. [inaudible] Please hold your meeting has been temporarily adjourned. [inaudible] Please hold your meeting has been temporarily adjourned. [inaudible] Please hold your meeting has been temporarily adjourned. [inaudible] Please hold your meeting has been temporarily adjourned. [inaudible] Please hold your meeting has been temporarily adjourned. [inaudible] Please hold your meeting has been temporarily adjourned. [inaudible] Please hold your meeting has been temporarily adjourned. [inaudible] Please hold your meeting has been temporarily adjourned. [inaudible] Please hold your meeting has been temporarily adjourned. [inaudible] Please hold your meeting has been temporarily adjourned. [inaudible] Please hold your meeting has been temporarily adjourned. [inaudible] Please hold your meeting has been temporarily adjourned. [inaudible] Please hold your meeting has been temporarily adjourned. [inaudible] Please hold your meeting has been temporarily adjourned. [inaudible] Please hold your meeting has been temporarily adjourned. [inaudible] Please hold your meeting has been temporarily adjourned. [inaudible] Please hold your meeting has been temporarily adjourned. [inaudible] Please hold your meeting has been temporarily adjourned. [inaudible] Please hold your meeting has been temporarily adjourned. [inaudible] Please hold your meeting has been temporarily adjourned. [inaudible] Please hold your meeting has been temporarily adjourned. [inaudible] Please hold your meeting has been temporarily adjourned. [inaudible] Please hold your meeting has been temporarily adjourned. [inaudible] Please hold your meeting has been temporarily adjourned. [inaudible] Please hold your meeting has been temporarily adjourned. [inaudible] Please hold your meeting has been temporarily adjourned. [inaudible] Please hold your meeting has been temporarily adjourned. [inaudible] Please hold your meeting has been temporarily adjourned. [inaudible] Okay, I'm delighted to actually speak on this motion. I have voted in Fortune District for over 50 years. Now, I probably voted for the first HDC when it was first constituted as it is now. I was also married that same year. Thank you. But it was in very rare that I candidate my voted for one in our election, both the national and local elections. So as with many other voters, my vote felt devalued. The main residence now is not worth their time to vote. Numbers have been door knocking, and quite often people say I'm not going to vote. It's what's the point? Now, the system we use is first, past, or post. It is unfair, undemocratic, and completely fails to represent the views of the voters. That is my opinion. It's time for a proportion system at the ballot box, and where they can really be healthy competition. However, no political issue attracts more erroneous arguments and proportional representation. Perhaps the most foolish one is that a proportional system would be too difficult for voters to understand. This implies that the English voters are the most stupid in Europe. As most European countries use a system of proportional representation, including, of course, Scotland and Northern Ireland. Now, we as members of this council have been elected to represent our areas based on the opinions and policies we've put to our residence during the election period. However, not all agreed with us, and I know many even at the last council election voted for other candidates representing other parties. For our first, past, or post election system, these voters are now possibly underrepresented. The council and its elected members strive to treat all our residents fairly. So a fair voting system of proportion representation will ensure that elections all votes count, and that seats one match the votes count. The seats can be allocated for portions of the votes cast by a residence. PL is not without source, but does result in a more balanced system of representation. The system of single transferable votes, as used in Scottish elections, where, on election day, the voters have listed candidates and simply put numbers in the voting box according to their preference. It's possibly best suited for our local elections. So rather than one person representing everyone in a small area, bigger areas, elect a small team. And this team reflects the diversity of the opinion in that area. Now PR is needed, especially in local authority elections, to ensure the elected members represent and reflect the communities that are elected. This will lead to improved decision making, wider participation, and increased levels of ownership of decisions taken. PR is also a national policy for many political parties, and is already used to elect parliaments and assembly to Scotland, Wales, and Northern Ireland. It's also used for local elections to Scotland, Northern Ireland, and it's a local option in Wales. Now I feel it should now be extended to include English local elections. So the motion before it requested the Leader of the Council to write to the Majesty's Government, His Majesty's Government, apologies. Calling for change in our outdated electoral laws to enable proportional representation to be used for local elections in England. Thank you, Chairman. Thank you very much, Councillor. Is there a seconder for the motion? Councillor Joanna Nolks, thank you very much. We wish to speak now all late. No, I'll speak later. Thank you. Thank you very much. So the Council have the motion as outlined by Councillor Lewinstone. I'm going to throw this open for debate, and be interested to hear from Councillor Serkis. It's interesting that no mention is made of a proportional representation in national elections. But that's very understandable, really, because the last time the Liberals won an overall majority in a national election was if my history serves me correctly, 1910. I think that was the last time the Liberals won an overall majority in a national parliamentary election. And then, of course, we had the coalition in 2010, an experience which was coalitions are a natural consequence of PR, as many members will know. And, of course, the Liberal Democrats had an experience of that in 2010. And let's just say it was not a pleasant experience. And I have not heard one Liberal Democrat, National spokesman, or spokesperson, should I say, advocating PR and proportional and coalition politics at a national level ever since. That meant for the Liberal Democrats. I think the problem with this is we're told that it's more Democratic. The truth is it is not more Democratic, it is less Democratic. Because if democracy means anything in local government or central government, it means a choice. Not a choice, a simple choice of your local candidates, who would have to be selected on much larger constituencies, losing, of course, the essential link with local communities, but that's another matter. It would mean that people would not know what they were voting for until after the election. When the line-up of the administration and the policies of that administration would be determined in what years ago we used to call smoke-filled rooms, that's how PR works. It leads to coalitions. And indeed, when the Liberals were very keen on the idea of proportional representation at a national level, they actually said Britain would benefit from having coalition government. Well, that's the consequence. We talk about choice. It's no choice for the electorate unless they know what they are voting for, not just in terms of names on a ballot paper, but also what they're voting for in terms of a team and the policies they are going to pursue based on their manifesto. And just to reiterate the point I made earlier, one of the consequences of PR is to make it work is you are almost certainly going to have to have much larger local government awards, much larger. And in doing so, that's always been one of the arguments against PR. You break the link or undermine the link between elected representatives and the communities they serve. This is not an aid to democracy. This will undermine democracy. It's a thoroughly bad idea. And I hope Council tonight will reject it in the vote to come. Thank you, Councillor. Thank you, Chair. Council circus like myself has a longstanding interest in the history of democracy, particularly in this district. And I thought, therefore, that he might appreciate hearing a story that I'm sure he might have heard before that was shared with me by our one of our two local MPs, Jeremy Quinn, concerning Edward Turner, Winterton, who had the unusual distinction between both the baby and the father of the House of Commons. His album was in the Irish period, so it didn't disqualify him from sitting in the House of Commons. And he sat as MP for various constituency versions of abortion constituency town and joint with wording for 47 years, during which time he attended precisely one public meeting in the final electoral campaign that he attended, where he answered precisely one question. So, so Jeremy Quinn said to me, which he responded by decrying that the question that had his hands in his pockets, and that it was terribly rude of him to ask such a question The argument in favour of first parts of the post-system has generally boiled down to, if it ain't broke, don't fix it. That's a fine argument to make when you're the only person who feels that it isn't broken. I don't think, and I am sad to say I've not had the 50 years that Councillor Livingston has had to vote in this district, but I don't think that I've very often been presented with a meaningful opportunity and a meaningful choice in my voting life. And any opportunity I have to improve the chances of a more representative, a more diverse and a fairer system of voting I will take. I will abide the consequences and the flaws of them too, but if it ain't broke, don't fix it, does not apply in the system where for very many people it is very badly broken. Thank you, Councillor Brooks, anybody else? Councillor Landon, do you? Thank you, Mr. Chairman. At the end of the day, it doesn't really matter what the political parties want, whether they're major or minor. It's what the people want. Going back to that coalition, after 2010, the Liberals were allowed to have a vote in 2011 by a alternative vote system that was defeated by 68%. So clearly, our great electorate aren't particularly over what sort of system they have, and they certainly went against PR. Thank you. Thank you, Councillor Cloud. Thank you, Chairman. My first comment is actually, FTP doesn't prevent independence or issue-driven candidates or councillors being elected. It's not necessarily driven by the main political parties. I am concerned, both at a local and national level, even at a local level, that effectively, with bigger constituencies, you dilute the relationship between the elected representatives and members of the public, because the focus is diluted. PR, unfortunately, and this is proven by study, it puts more power into the hands of small groups, which theoretically is not a bad thing, but in practice, enables the rise of more extreme groups, particularly right-wing groups, for example, to be heard and have a higher amount of oxygen to their diet. And I would point out what's happened in the Netherlands, with hit, builders, who's elected to, you know, almost being PM. So I'll just point that out as a small danger here. Of course, we're talking Ocean District Council, so we're not talking to your country. I think the picture is clear. You end up with less focus, because, as Philip has already pointed out, coalition politics, smoke-filled rooms, horse trading and all the rest of it that goes with it, I would argue is not necessarily a good thing. I'm not convinced that the electorate would be terribly happy with more complexity and a bigger choice, but, you know, Vaux-Poppily, Vaux-D, as they say. There's a inherent lack of stability, but all I would say, to another more jovial note, is that a positive thing on PR, as was a case in Belgium, where my relatives informed me and friends said, there was no government for 653 days due to ongoing coalition discussions. Then for me, it was a great time, because the politicians weren't interfering, and the country could get on and live. So, therefore, I would argue that PR is not necessarily a good thing, but I would give you that small ounce of flavour. Thank you. Thank you, Councillor. Councillor interjecting. Councillor interjecting. Sorry. Councillor interjecting. Thank you, Chairman. It's a debate about PR, so what kind of a lived-in would I be if I didn't want to say something on it? But just a few points. The referendum in 2010, whatever it was, that was over the alternative vote, which is just a slightly different version of FDP. See, basically, it's not a proportional representation at all. I don't think, and most people really, in this room, probably would be that interest in what national lived-in policy is, but it's always been in favour of PR. It still is. The reason you have it, don't hear anyone saying it, is because we only have 15 MPs in Parliament, so we don't actually get an awful lot of airtime, so they don't choose to talk to people about PR. That's basically about the size of it. Choice, that's an interesting one. It's about giving people choice. Well, actually, this motion does not seek to impose anything on anyone. First, it asks the government to do something, and what it's asking them to do is to make PR available not to enforce it on anyone. So, actually, it is about giving choice. The thing about it leads to coalitions and coalitions about, well, maybe I'm mad, but I actually think that the coalition government was probably the most stable government we had in about the last 10, 15 years, probably. Whether you liked what it did, or whether you didn't, at least you knew where you stood with them, because that hasn't been the case for quite some time, I don't think. Whilst, yes, it was probably kind of like it was a bad outcome for the Lib Dems. I wasn't a Med Lib Dems member at the time, but I would say it was the right thing to do now, and it would probably be the right thing to do at some point in the future, because what we do is we act in the public interest, hopefully rather than our own personal interest. But we're not talking about national elections anyway, we're talking about Washington District, and about what would happen here. I mean, the point about it, I always heard this one about these massive, unconnected constituencies that you would have. Well, actually, you could have a perfectly functional PR system working on constituencies that were barely bigger than a county division. Do we really think that's that unworkable? In that case, we're all completely unsatisfied with all our county councillors and the service they're able to actually provide at the moment. Maybe we are, maybe we're not. I don't know. And the point about all it leads to coalitions, I don't have the starting from me, I don't always have the staff, but anyone who's really actually interested in our government knows that there are massive amounts of no overall control councils in this country at the moment. It's almost like, the modus of brand buy in lots of places, so it's all this big, scary thing. What it would actually lead to is elected representatives from different parties talking to each other and working collaboratively about what was in the best interest of their communities. Now, wouldn't that be a lovely thing? And oftentimes, I think, the number of times I get people saying to me, I don't understand why it's all party politics or district council, or why isn't it more like parish councils? Well, this would actually lead to that, lead to that, because it would lead to more collaboration and discussion with each other rather than division. Whereas at the moment, the way it is, we all do, as we have to do, to actually get anything done, some of us might like the adversarial system, some of us hate it, but it is what it is. And it's what we have to work it all this for is an option to do things a different way. And also, I'll take my lead from council o'clock, because he's very wise about trying to end something on an update point. I can't believe I'm about to say this, because it goes against everything in me. But there's been no Labour representative elected for anything in this district for 50 years. Does anyone really, we might like that, we might all like that, I do. But do any of us think it's really fair? Thank you. Thank you very much, councilwoman. Thank you, Chair. So, yes, I fully support this motion, and I've, as, as council office said, this is about local issues and local elections, not national elections. Just a case of point, if the last election in 2023 had been held using PR, we might have seen Libden Green Alliance. We might have seen, let's take West Chortington, for example, a more productive council, because in that election, 746 people voted more against the Conservatives than they voted for. And I think we might have different representation and maybe more productive council meetings, if I have been in place. So, I'm absolutely for it. Thank you very much. Yes, councilwoman. Thank you, Chair. I think the concern that has to do to PR might change in the fairly near future. I think you might be, you might have guessed where I'm going with this, and that will happen when the vote for the support for the reform party comes to exceed the support for the Conservative party later this year. Thank you. Thank you very much. I'll honour it any other, before I ask council and all's too. Thank you very much, Chair. Outdoor looking, I was surprised by the number of people who have given up voting. My vote doesn't count, I've stopped voting, it never makes any difference. I can't get my kids to vote, they say their vote won't make any difference. Contrast these with quotes from Ireland. In Ireland, it actually feels like my vote makes a difference. Single transferable votes, STV, allowed me to consider the candidates in greater detail. Voting with proportional representation feels much more meaningful than the Westminster system. With STV in Ireland, politicians cannot afford to ignore people. The system here feels broken, and if we're going to get people interested in using their voices for local elections and the international elections, their votes need to ensure elective bodies represent them, we have to start making some changes. Proportional representation gets terrible press here, and yet there are over 100 countries which use either proportional representation or a mixed system to elect across the world. Less than 50 use our first past the post system. According to the Electoral Reform Society, proportional representation is the most popular form of democracy for countries in the world today. Proportional representation isn't one electoral system though, it's a simple idea that the strength of each faction in Parliament or in local government should closely match their popularity in the country. For many people, that is what living in a democracy means. Imagine a system where votes cast match seats one, an end to ignored safe seats and huge majorities on less than half of the votes. It means politicians having to work together, it means councils having to work together. It's already used all over the world to great effects, so why not here? Thank you. Thank you very much, Council knows. Well, only is right away. Do the past, yes. Dennis, you wish to say more. I'll say a very few words. I would recommend to our Conservative members to go onto the website for the Electoral Reform Society and download a guide for PR. Basically, the PR meets many of which you've raised tonight. And you will then be able to understand, possibly, possibly better. I would like to make one little note. The last district elections, for example, in Billingshurst, where they elected three excellent Lib Dem councillors, they had a total share of votes between them of 39.5%. The remaining majority of those, the 60.5, that had voted, did not vote for these members. They're underrepresented. Now, PR does have flaws, but it's a far better system than first passed the host. So, therefore, we are going to repeat the final bit of the motion. The Council should approve that we request the leader of the Council to write to his Majesty's government calling for a change in our outdated electoral laws to enable proportional representation to be used for local elections in England. Thank you. Thank you very much for clarifying that, Dennis. Further debate, I'm going to put it to the vote, the motion, as Dennis described, and all those in favour, please. Thank you. Thank you. Those are gates. Any abstentions, I will ask you for any abstentions. So, what are the numbers? So, your motion is carried, Dennis, and thank you. Which brings us round to item 11, Member's questions on notice. We have received three questions on notice from Councillors Paul Clark, Philip Serkis, and Claudia Fisher. I'm just going to say that the constitution suggests time allowed for questions must not exceed 30 minutes. I'm not living with expectations, but I would say that if we can look at speaking fairly, a strange way, then I think it would be good. I will allow them two minutes for the question. There will be replies and there will be a final statement from the questioner in response, should they require it of five minutes. But if they don't require it, then I'm sure that will be accepted. So, the first question was received by Councillor Paul Clark. You have two minutes in which to ask Councillor Mark Vaidam cabinet member for finance and resources, your question. Thank you, John. Recent articles in the press have highlighted the problem of expanding size of our cars and the impact of this on entering exiting cars. The service indicator drives a barely the space of the size of a standard cereal box to gain access to their vehicles. The average width of cars to quality times has gone from five foot six inches to five foot eleven for ten popular family cars. For those that don't do imperial, 1.68 centimetres to 180 centimetres. We are in a program of continuous maintenance and upgrade of our car box according to our CAPEX program and forecast. BPA guidelines recommend spaces of 7 foot 11 wide, leaving typically one foot between the car and the bay edge, assuming a centred car. For the normal imperials, that's 240 centimetres and 30 centimetres respectively. In 2022, guidance has been revised to eight foot six and lengths from 15 feet eight inches to 16 feet respectively. 260 centimetres and 480 centimetres. Can the cabinet member for finance and resources confirm that there is an ongoing program of critical appraisal for what we are doing on car parks when realigning and refurbishing our car parks to reflect the changing growth of modern cars, be the electric or not, using the revised guidelines of minimum numbers in the future. Thank you. Thank you, Councillor. Thank you. Yes, thank you, Councillor, for your question. Just to say, I will speak in metric because I think it's been taught in schools for the last 40-50 years. Firstly, for clarification, the 2022 guidelines issued by the British Parking Association to increase parking space width from 2.4 to 2.6 metres, specifically relates to multi-storey and underground car parks only. The guidance for surface car parks remains at 2.4 metres. The BPA also makes clear, and I quote, These dimensions are neither minimum nor written in tablets of stone and may be revised to suit your particular needs. But we do take such guidance seriously. And for example, when Paris Place Car Park was rebuilt, the spaces were designed at 2.4 metre width with double thick lines in addition as per the BPA guidance at the time. And of course, there are a number of wider bays on the ground floor for blue badge holders. I frequently use Paris Place, and my car is 181 centimetres wide, which is at the top end of what's quoted in the question. Now, I personally have never experienced any problem in getting in or out of it. We are not currently planning redevelopment of Swan Walk and the Forum Car Parks, but if and when that happens, we shall take careful note of whatever the current guidelines are at that time. In the meantime, if you have a larger car and you find Swan Walk or Forum 2 narrow, you have the option you use in Paris Place. We're also taking a similar approach for surface car parks. The Stending Car Park Reef, for example, is currently in the design stage. It currently has 138 spaces, half of which are less than the 2.4 metre guidelines. If we were to universally apply 2.6 metres across that car park, we would lose 27 spaces or 20% of the total car park area. Now, that would not be good news for local users. However, we have taken a sensible approach in this case to apply the 2.4 as a minimum, with a small number of wider spaces for larger vehicles and, of course, a reasonable number 7 of even wider blue badge spaces. Thus, we have limited the reduction of spaces in the design overall to just mine. Now, as the rollout of car park reeferbs progresses, which are continued with our excellent car parking team, to appraise each one individually in order to come to similar sensible solutions. Finally, and I'm not sure if this was implicit in Council class question, I can confirm that we will not be adopting the cereal box as a standard unit of measurement in HDC. Council Park, you have the opportunity to ask another question. No, apart from the smine comments on Imperial, I have no further comment. Thank you. I can take it that Council Bainan has no further point. So, would you like to make a statement? No, I've had answers to my questions. Thank you. Thank you. At least they were informative. The second question was received by Councillor Philip Serkis. Councillor Serkis, you have two minutes in which to ask Councillor Muffey, Leader of the Council, your question. Thank you, Chairman. Given the significance of the sale of the drill hall, does the Leader agree that the issue should have been brought to Council whether or not there is a formal requirement to do so? Thank you. Thank you very much, Chairman. And thank you for your question, Councillor Serkis. Your question refers to the significance of the decision. Holding the office that I do, I proceed at all times on the basis that all decisions taken by this Council are significant. In terms of your question, I would note that you did not query with me whether the matter of the drill hall should be considered by a Council at any point prior to your question being submitted, i.e. after the decision had already been taken. Nevertheless, it was something I myself had considered and felt I needed to raise with the monitoring officer in advance, which I did. The advice I received was that constitutionally this was an executive decision and therefore sat with Cabinet. Whatever my personal feelings about that might be, I am not in that habit of ignoring the advice of the monitoring officer, not least because, as I am sure you are aware, decisions taken in an inappropriate way are open to challenge, which creates uncertainty, damages public confidence and wastes public resources. I would also remind you that following our recent peer governance review, we need to be mindful of good governance and effective and efficient decision-making. All of that said, I would note that when considering the disposal of the drill hall, an all-member seminar was held on the subject in October 2023. The final proposal was taken to the local economy and place policy development advisory group on 4 March 2024, which all members were welcome to attend. In addition, the proposal was taken to the overview and scrutiny committee on 18 March at the request of the chairman of that committee. And finally, as you know, at the Cabinet meeting on 21 March, I opened up the floor to receive all comments from other present members. You may recall taking the opportunity to do so yourself. Therefore, I think it is clear that all members were afforded ample opportunity to make their views known in relation to the intended disposal to live spring and would reiterate, at no point before the decision was taken, did you raise any concerns about it not being considered by full council, even at the aforementioned Cabinet meeting. I am comfortable with the way in which this decision was taken and look forward to it being implemented. Thank you. Councillor SIR, because you have a supplementary question. I do hope I didn't hear correctly that the leader thinks it would have been a waste of public resources to bring an issue which has been of such public concern to the people of Horsham, to the premier debating chamber of this council on an issue which the public, the public believe is a really important issue for the town. Can the leader confirm that he didn't really mean that having a public debate here in council would have been a waste of public resources? No, that's not what I said. What I said was that taking decisions in an inappropriate way leaves them open to challenge and that then having to do the same thing all over again is a waste of resources. If decisions are debated in the constitutionally correct way, they are then not open to challenge. So if you get it right first time, you don't have to do it all over again. Now, it is a very important issue. No one knows that I would like to think better than me. And that's why public consultation was undertaken over this proposal in advance. Much more so than had happened on previous proposals for this site, I would suggest. So, I don't make the rules. I just have to follow them and do it to the best in my ability and try and say, it's not like it was just me. Everyone's had an opportunity. It's up to them whether they take it or not. But I'm confident that the right thing has been done in the right way and we've ended up with a decision. Thank you. Councillor Serks, you have five minutes after that. Thank you very much, Chairman. I think the Leader slightly misunderstood the point I was making. Nobody is saying the decision making was incorrect and that it wasn't done according to the Constitution. The point was that even though there was no formal requirement for it to come to Council, the perception is that the Council is the supreme debating and decision making body, which I think the people of Horsham would expect to be the forum in which this matter is debated. Can I say that just correct the Leader? Our group assumed it was going to come to Council. Certainly we were naive in that assumption, but we had to check with officers who confirmed that it wasn't coming to Council. I think the point is, Chairman, this is a significant local building in Horsham. When we looked at the issue, when the Conservatives were the administration, there was considerable concern about its disposal. Some people have used the word iconic. I'm not sure I would quite use that word myself. But let's just say there was much public concern and interest. I mean, we as a group hope that this sale will go through and be a success. Of course we do because we do actually care about the success of this venture. But we think nevertheless these issues should have been aired in Council, particularly given that there are - some of us have concerns. It doesn't mean we don't support and hope that this will go forward and be a success. We're dealing with a church group here that was only set up in 2019, and some of us had genuine concerns as to whether this splinter-church group, because it's a splinter of the King's Church, that this splinter-church with 200 members is actually going to have the financial heft to finance the project both in the short term and perhaps more importantly in the long term. Because if they don't, the community activities that take place there that are considered by those who use those facilities to be very important to the community of autumn will be let down. So I just make that statement, we hope it's a success, but we nevertheless have our concerns and we hope, we genuinely hope, we approve prom as far as there's concerns and as far as there's concerns. Thank you. Thank you very much, Councilor Serkis. The final question is from Councillor Fisher, and I think you're probably addressing the question to me, or at least you will be addressing it to me, so you'll like to go ahead. Yes, thank you, Chair. It's wonderful to have the Chantenbury Lesular Centre in Stowington host this HDC for Council meeting in celebration of 50 years of Portion District Council, which was created by the mouth nation of Washington Urban Council with Chantenbury and Horsham Rural Councils. As one of three members for Stowington and Washington, we are all three of us delighted to welcome members from other areas and Council staff to our area, Stowington. Thank you so much for the thought and for all those who must have worked very hard to make this happen, and I will say Chantenbury Lesular Centre has done us proud as well. This question isn't meant as a criticism, instead it's really to counter any possible impression that the focus of HDC is disproportionately on Horsham Town. Will this Council consider holding at least two, and I say at least two, full Council meetings each year in the south of the district? This would give residents in the south of the district better opportunity to attend Council meetings and to ask questions should they wish to? The residents without private transport attending Horsham evening may be quite challenging, for example, the last bus from Horsham to Stowington leaves before the start of the Council meeting at 6pm. It would be possible to travel by train, of course, but the return fare from Horsham plus the return bus fare would be just over £20 per person and is likely to deter those with a low income. And of course, as we know, the buses to and from Stowington are somewhat infrequent. So thank you. Thank you very much, Councillor Fisher. Yes, thank you for your considered question and for your kind words. I didn't take any comment about criticisms being important on that one if you don't mind my saying so. So thank you for your question. And it is appropriate that we're here. We've said already that it's the 50th anniversary of the formation of Horsham District Council with the amalgamation of those other rural and urban councils. And I think it is quite something to be here because it didn't take place very far from here than the original meeting. So I think thank you for your kind words. I mean, Horsham District Council was now looking after something in the region of 142,000 residents. And it spread in towns and villages, Ogan area of 530 kilometres squared. That's a huge area for our towns and villages. I came to a full Council meeting here in 2022. And I visited this vibrant community hub last summer. And it is encouraging to be out away from the centre of administrative district down in these areas. And I understand your question. I appreciate what you're saying. And I'm sure that this Council would be delighted to consider holding full Council meetings in other parts of the district. The chairman of the Council, and it won't be me, but it'll probably be my successor. And the chief of executive will need to jointly consider the matter to locate suitable venues, to assess the associated costs and there are costs. And above all, to determine the best access for residents. And I think that's important. And therefore, because those decisions will be and the fact finding will take place after my finishing the chair, I can't make any comment or commitment as to the timing. And I'm sure you appreciate that at the moment. But I think that one would reassure you that this is something that is not going to be kicked into the long grass. So thank you for your question. I'm trying to answer it as fairly as I can without being able to say much more to you than that. But do you have a subsidiary question or second question? I'd just like to say thank you for the considering and opening the conversation would be very good. I'd be happy to help continue with that conversation. I think residents in the south and other areas of the portion will appreciate it greatly. Thank you. Thank you very much. I don't have anything else to add to that. But thank you all for your patience and for what I've enjoyed a good debate. It's been interesting. I'm sorry we've gone over time. And I'm going to close the meeting, but I wish you a safe journey home. And we'll see you at the next annual meeting, which is in May. Thank you. Thank you very much. Enjoy.