Agenda and minutes

Apologies were received from Councillors Baker, Barnes, Clucas, Hay, Hegenbarth, Horwood, Jeffries, Mason and Sudbury. 

There were no declarations of interest.

The minutes of the meeting held on 20 July 2020 will be considered at the next meeting.

The minutes of the meeting held on 20^th July 2020 would be considered at the next meeting of Council.

The Mayor confirmed that there were very few ceremonial civic events at the moment, although there were a couple of socially distanced appointments in the diary.  He reported that the Mayor’s food bank had donated £2500 to the scheme due to launch on 1^st August to ensure that children who normally have free school meals would receive a hot meal over the summer holidays.  The fund also made donations to assist people who were previously homeless buy hardware goods for their new accommodation.

The Leader recognised all the efforts by staff involved in the holiday food scheme, and reiterated his thanks to all officers for all the efforts that they had made and continued to make. He added that Councillor Wendy Flynn would be joining the Licensing Committee.

There were none.

These must be received no later than 12 noon on Thursday 23 July 2020.

**Questions must relate directly to the business of this meeting**

There were no public questions.

These must be received no later than 12 noon on Thursday 23 July 2020.

**Questions must relate directly to the business of this meeting**

Report of the Cabinet Member Finance

The Leader introduced this item in the absence of the Cabinet Member Finance. He praised the significant work undertaken by the finance team and in particular the Executive Director Finance and Assets, in a difficult and unprecedented situation. He also thanked the Cabinet Member for her contributions.

He outlined the financial impact of the Covid-19 crisis, noting that in normal times, the council would be able to declare a surplus around this time. By the end of March 2020, however, £72,000 of extra Covid-related costs had already been accrued, on top of some £400,000 in lost income, mostly from car parking. Initial government support was meagre (around £50,000), due to how the first tranche of support was mostly aimed at authorities with social care responsibilities. In that context, he suggested that being able to declare an overspend of only £47,000 was remarkable. He added that there were a number of carry forward requests, as was to be expected.

He praised how the Golden Valley Cyber Central project had been able to continue during the pandemic. A number of groups were bidding to become the project’s development partner, and this had been whittled down to six at the time of the meeting. He welcomed the fact that the council’s key affordable housing projects were up and running, and thanked Cheltenham Borough Homes for their significant efforts in that respect.

The Leader acknowledged that after the end of March, the situation had changed dramatically. The current forecast was for a total loss of income of £3.5m, as well as extra costs of £1.7m. He added that the total government support received as of the end of June was £1.2m, and noted the gap between these figures.

He noted that CBC received £173,000 out of the government’s latest £500m support package to local government, and that the government had also pledged to underwrite 75% of local authorities’ losses. The situation was less clear when trusts were involved, for example in the question of leisure centres. Future announcements were expected from central government to clarify this. He reported that Cabinet had endorsed the report for Council approval on the 28^th July.

One Member thanked finance officers for their work in a difficult time, and stressed the importance of central government’s pledge to underwrite local authorities’ losses. He was hopeful that the Chancellor’s forthcoming Autumn Statement would offer further support to local government. He also praised the Holiday Hunger Fund, and placed on record his hope that this support would continue during the winter. The Leader of the Council responded that the Autumn Statement would be of considerable importance, and he hoped that CBC could ‘phase’ some of its losses over the next few years, although the size of these losses was not yet clear. The budget was likely to be reviewed towards the end of September, although they were still waiting on key aspects of government advice.

The Chair of the Budget Scrutiny Working Group added his support for the report, and asked  ...  view the full minutes text for item 9.

Report of the Cabinet Member Development and Safety

The Cabinet Member Development and Safety introduced the item as per the published report.  He explained that the revised policy did not take a moral position on sexual entertainment as it was permitted by law. Under the 2009 Act, sexual entertainment could take place by law under certain conditions without the requirement for a licence permitting the activity.

He reported that there had been a minor change the Policy, as outlined in Section 7 of the report. This encompassed the lower end of Bath Road and the High Street, at this was a location for an SEV. There were new conditions to provide additional protection for staff.  Consultation on the revised policy had taken place between November and January, with limited, but not particularly negative, feedback.

Councillor Harman proposed the following amendment:

“Council believes that there is no place within the Borough of Cheltenham in which it would be appropriate to licence a sexual entertainment venue. 

Therefore Council resolves to adopt a nil limit of sexual entertainment venues for the whole of Cheltenham Borough implemented through smaller relevant localities.  The relevant localities would be each of the twenty wards in the Borough to ensure that the characteristics of the relevant localities are taken into account.”

In speaking to the amendment, Councillor Harman explained that the last time this was debated by Council, it was lost by only one vote. He emphasised that Members should be free to express their own views, and that action was needed to deliver equality for women. He reiterated his belief that Cheltenham should not be a venue for SEVs.

One Member stated that passing the amendment would be a political and dangerous step.  While he sympathised with those opposed to the policy, it was the best practice to have a policy to regulate sexual entertainment. He suggested that national government had let local authorities down by including a loophole which allowed any premises to put on sexual entertainment once a month. This could allow businesses to move regularly to other venues, putting more people at risk and making the town more dangerous.

In seconding the amendment, Councillor Cooke emphasised that although adults should be free to choose, the easier you make it to visit these premises, the more likely you are to have more of them.

A point of clarification was then raised by the Chair of Licensing who explained that the debate regarding changing the rules for SEV’s included contributions from the police, GRASAC (Gloucestershire Rape and Sexual Abuse Centre), Chelt Fems, operators, performers and ward councillors.

Councillor Harman then summed up by stressing that the proposal was not political, and thanked Councillor Cooke for seconding the motion.

The amendment then went to a vote and was lost.

For:                  3

Against:           23       

Abstentions:    2

The following points were raised on the substantive motion:

-       One member noted that this was the final step to complete the licensing review.  Evidence was taken into account from all involved, including performers, operators, the police and local  ...  view the full minutes text for item 10.

There were none.

There were none.