Cabinet - Thursday 16 October 2025, 6:00pm - Slides Tab - Cotswold District Council Webcasting
Agenda
Slides
Transcript
Map
Resources
Forums
Speakers
Feedback
Votes
Speaking:
Agenda item :
Start of webcast
Share this agenda point
-
Councillor Mike Evemy
Slide 1
Agenda item :
1 Apologies
Share this agenda point
Agenda item :
2 Declarations of Interest
Share this agenda point
Agenda item :
3 Minutes
Share this agenda point
Agenda item :
4 Leader's Announcements
Share this agenda point
Agenda item :
5 Public Questions
Agenda item :
7 Schedule of Decisions taken by the Leader of the Council and/or Individual Cabinet Members
Share this agenda point
Agenda item :
8 Issue(s) Arising from Overview and Scrutiny and/or Audit and Governance
Share this agenda point
Agenda item :
9 Safeguarding Policy Update - July 2025
Share this agenda point
-
Councillor Juliet Layton
-
Councillor Mike Evemy
-
Councillor Mike Evemy
Agenda item :
10 Council Tax Support Scheme 2026/2027
Share this agenda point
-
Councillor Patrick Coleman
-
Officer
-
Councillor Patrick Coleman
-
Councillor Mike Evemy
-
Councillor Tristan Wilkinson
-
Councillor Mike Evemy
-
Councillor Patrick Coleman
-
Councillor Mike Evemy
-
Councillor Patrick Coleman
-
Councillor Mike Evemy
Agenda item :
11 Cotswold District Local Plan (2011-31) Regulation 18 Consultation
Share this agenda point
- Cabinet Report Local Plan Review Preferred Options and LDS
- Annex A Cotswold District Council Local Plan Review Regulation 18 Consultation Preferred Options (November 2025)
- Annex B Cotswold District Local Development Scheme (October 2025)
- Consultation Document - Final Version published as a supplement
-
Councillor Juliet Layton
-
Councillor Mike Evemy
-
Councillor Paul Hodgkinson
-
Councillor Mike Evemy
-
Officer
-
Councillor Mike Evemy
-
Officer
-
Officer
-
Councillor Mike Evemy
-
Councillor Andrea Pellegram
-
Councillor Mike Evemy
-
Councillor Mike McKeown
-
Councillor Mike Evemy
-
Councillor Tristan Wilkinson
-
Councillor Mike Evemy
-
Councillor Gina Blomefield
-
Councillor Mike Evemy
-
Officer
-
Councillor Mike Evemy
-
Councillor Gina Blomefield
-
Councillor Mike Evemy
-
Councillor Juliet Layton
-
Councillor Mike Evemy
-
Councillor Juliet Layton
-
Councillor Mike Evemy
-
Councillor Mike Evemy
Agenda item :
12 Budget Strategy and Medium Term Financial Strategy Update
Share this agenda point
- 2026-27 Budget Strategy and MTFS Update Report v3 FINAL 2025 10 07
- Annex A - Exceptional Financial Support FINAL
- Annex B - Fair Funding 2.0 Consultation FINAL
- Annex C - Fair Funding 2.0 indicative impact FINAL
- Annex D - Medium Term Financial Strategy 2026-27 UPDATE October 2025 FINAL
- Annex E - Capital Programme 2026-27 to 2029-30 FINAL
-
Councillor Patrick Coleman
-
Councillor Mike Evemy
-
David Stanley, Deputy CEO
-
Councillor Mike Evemy
-
Councillor Patrick Coleman
-
Councillor Mike Evemy
-
Councillor Gina Blomefield
-
Councillor Mike Evemy
-
Councillor Mike Evemy
Agenda item :
13 Next Meeting Date
Share this agenda point
-
Webcast Finished
Disclaimer: This transcript was automatically generated, so it may contain errors. Please view the webcast to confirm whether the content is accurate.
Councillor Mike Evemy - 0:00:05
Good evening everybody in the room and watching online to this meeting of Cotswolds DistrictCouncil's cabinet.
The first item on the agenda as always is apologies.
1 Apologies
We have apologies from Claire Bruma.
She certainly let me know that she unfortunately couldn't make it this evening.
Agenda item two is declarations of interest.
2 Declarations of Interest
Are there any declarations members wish to make? No? Okay we'll move then to item
3 Minutes
three which is the minutes pages 7 to 18. Does anyone have any corrections on the
minutes? Nope? Okay can somebody move those as a true record then? I see
someone proposed. Mike McEwen I saw first Tristan has a second so without any
Discussion will then vote then on the approving the minutes of the meeting on the 4th of September.
Just waiting for Councillor Coleman to vote.
It doesn't registered on the system. Got you now Patrick. So that's seven votes
all voting in favour. So thank you for that. We will then move on to item four
which is my announcement. So just two. I wanted to make note of the horrific
attacks in Manchester a couple of weeks ago on the Jewish community and just to
4 Leader's Announcements
say on behalf of this council and any members of that community who live in that, within
our district, that we were horrified to see what happened in Manchester and really want
to feel that we can support them in any way that we can.
We don't clearly, obviously, want to see any repeat of that or of other, anything anti -Semitic
in our area.
So, you know, our hearts go out to the people who were affected and, you know, who are impacted
by such terrible, terrible things happening in our own country.
The second thing I just wanted to refer to, and there have been some media reports of
somebody found deceased in the Forum car park toilets.
I really just want to, on behalf of the Council, share our sympathy with their friends and
family at what must be a difficult time for them. Okay we'll then move on to item
five which is public questions. Do we have any member of the public who wish
5 Public Questions
to ask a question? Would you like to come up to the front so we have a public
speaker microphone next to Councillor Wilkinson. If you would like to introduce
yourself and if you are representing an organisation or you're speaking on your
in personal capacity and then ask your question.
Good evening.
Public Speaker - 0:03:21
I'm Rob Gibson.I have no, I'm not representing any organisation.
This question is in my own personal capacity.
On the 30th of September, a report prepared by the
Counter Fraud and Enforcement Unit was
presented to the Audit and Governance Committee.
The report mentions a counsellor who is involved
in the procurement irregularities.
Clearly it's in the public interest that identify
that the identity of this council is disclosed.
Please can you confirm whether this council is sitting,
is a sitting member of this cabinet?
Councillor Mike Evemy - 0:04:03
Thank you, Mr. Gibson.I'm not going to disclose the name of that councillor.
I'm not sure it is in necessary in the public interest. I don't think that person has been found to have done anything
Improper, so I'm not going to disclose the identity of that counsellor
Public Speaker - 0:04:24
Counsellor ever me. Thank you for your pie. INeed to draw your attention to the code of conduct which every member
of this Council and in fact every employee signs up to.
And it says very clearly that members have got to act within the Nolan principles.
And also, I mean you're probably very familiar with this,
and not behave in a manner which brings the Council into district repute.
In the findings of the 30th September, it was clearly highlighted
that there was fault with this member and in public interest short of actually
seeing this further the public information request I don't find will I
find it strange that you're not prepared to disclose who the Councillor is thank
Councillor Mike Evemy - 0:05:25
you I will thank you mr. Gibson I don't believe it did identify there was faultwith that member. I don't think there was a complaint as far as I understand made
against that member. So obviously you were able to as a member of the public
right to our statutory and monitoring officer who sat two seats away from me to
get a formal response because members code of conduct is a matter in which she
oversees but I am not aware that there was any any finding of fault against any
Councillor Mike Evemy - 0:06:00
Councillor Mike Evemy - 0:06:03
Councillor. Thank you. Thank you. Do we have any other member public questions? No, wedon't. So we will move on then to member questions. I understand we have received a question from
Councillor Daryl Corr with regard to Moreton in Marsh working group directed
to Juliet Layton a member for housing and planning so I will read
out Councillor Corr's question and then Councillor Layton will reply on behalf
of the cabinet so these are Councillor Corr's words hasten to add not mine so in
In light of the staggering number of houses being earmarked for Moreton in Marsh in the updated Cotswold District Council local plan review,
can the cabinet member for Housing and Planning please provide a date when the Moreton Working Group will next meet?
This grave situation surely triggers a meeting due to the urgency of the challenges now facing the town and the surrounding villages.
I'm sure local stakeholders selected to join this group will be urgently anticipating a meeting.
Councillor Juliet Layton - 0:07:12
Thank you. Thank you, Mike. Yeah, well, the date for this meeting has been set and invitationswill be sent out in the next few days to the Working Group. It's important to reiterate
at this point that since the Wharton Working Group was instigated, the game has changed
as we know. The government's new housing targets mean that we have to plan for thousands more
homes in locations across the district and as members will have noted from the
draught consultation document published in advance of this cabinet meeting the
options we have been forced to develop for meeting those targets proposed
indicative Lee at this stage thousands of homes in the north south and east of
the district Morton in Marsh is significant still significantly impact
that is well noted and understood, but given the challenge before us now, it supersedes the previous development proposals for Moreton in Marsh.
And the meeting will be to discuss how the Council best engages with stakeholders in Moreton moving forward.
It will be a chance to discuss how that group can most effectively represent its communities on the matter,
given that we're going to be unable out of fairness to replicate a working group model in all of the areas
impacted by the government's new housing
targets. Thank you.
Thank you, Juliet.
Councillor Mike Evemy - 0:08:39
Do we have any other member questions? I don't think we do.So we'll now move on to agenda item 7,
7 Schedule of Decisions taken by the Leader of the Council and/or Individual Cabinet Members
schedule of decisions taken by a leader of the council or individual cabinet members. We just have
one individual decision -maker meeting which was the first one from Councillor
Coleman when he took decisions about allocating funds from the car parking
levy at Boulton on the water to provide some support, a significant amount of
support I think, to the village in managing the volumes of tourism and
obviously we talked about that at our last council meeting and then also
Councillor Coleman took a decision about applications for discretionary rate
relief. So thank you Patrick for doing that. We're just noting that. We'll now
move on to Agenda Item 8 which is issues arising from overview and scrutiny and
or audit and governance committee. We have one recommendation, thank you
8 Issue(s) Arising from Overview and Scrutiny and/or Audit and Governance
Juliette for just passing me the paper from the overview and scrutiny committee.
And I think I will probably in interest of we've got the chair of the overview
and scrutiny committee here.
So what I'm intending to do is read out the recommendation
from the committee and the council's response.
So the recommendation, and this was in light of the agenda item 11,
what we're considering this evening on updating our local plan. The
recommendation was that the council continues to lobby government for a
significantly lower housing targets for the Cotswold district given a 80 % of the
district is within the Cotswold national landscape area, B the infrastructure
challenges across the district, sewage capacity, rural roads, public transport
etc, C lack of access to facilities and employment in many areas, D the need for
government support to address some of these challenges,
e .g. funding for a bypass, and e, the reality of what scale
of development and supporting infrastructure will be
deliverable in the remaining developer parts of the district?
And the answer is that I have drafted a letter,
which will be to Secretary of State Steve Reid,
which will go out within the next week,
subject to just final drafting.
and I'm hoping to get a broad agreement of that across the council before I send it.
And it will reiterate the messages I think that have been made and the points
made by the overview and scrutiny committee. It will set out the challenges
and constraints unique to the district which impact upon our ability to deliver
the government's housing targets. It will also reference infrastructure and ask
what support the government can provide to unlock funding and to ensure
utilities providers are positioned to support this growth
with adequate and timely provision.
I'm looking now at Gina.
Is there anything, Gina, that you would like to say in response
to that question and response?
Councillor Gina Blomefield - 0:11:51
Well, thank you very much, and thank you for seeing therecommendation from overview and scrutiny and taking that forward.
I was just going to say I've got a short little report.
not going to say a huge amount, but actually before I gave the comments on
the O &S recommendation I just wanted to thank Bromford for attending the meeting
on Monday. Bromford are very much linked in to some degree as one of our housing
associations to the local plan and to developing this housing so we were very
pleased that they had three representatives and we'd learnt more
about their approaches to managing their tenants, the maintenance of their
properties, including a work programme to make them more energy efficient going
forward, as well as their plans to expand their portfolio using government grants
towards social and affordable housing. Going forward onto the local plan as
such, and obviously this is the major item in our agenda, and it is of course
vital for the whole Cotswold District due to the very challenging and hugely
increased housing targets set by the government in our area. As you
imagine there was a lively debate and we were much helped by the significant
member of cabinet and officers present including Mike Evermeade, Judith Layton
supported by Matt Breton, Helen Martin and Geraldine LeConde. The O &S's
recommendation was unanimously agreed across all the different people
represented at the meeting and we really do strongly want not only at this is
wonderful you're going to another letter, but I think we've got to keep up this, because
it is not just a question of the housing targets, and as you, Councillor Evans, mentioned earlier,
it is making sure that they are supported by the required infrastructure. So I do thank
you for your response, and hopefully, you know, we can get somewhere. It would be lovely
Councillor Mike Evemy - 0:13:55
think so thank you thank you Gina and thank you to your committee for the workthat it's done on this if you're still around when we get to that item very
happy for you to add anything into the discussion when we get to the discussion
on the local plan so we'll now move to item 9 which is the safeguarding policy
updates so that's on page 23 see unfortunately Councillor bloomer isn't
able to be here this evening, but we do have officers Susan and Paul are there.
So I'm going to do my best to introduce this, but obviously we'll defer to to
them to answer any questions that that colleagues may have. So in essence the
9 Safeguarding Policy Update - July 2025
policy you've got before you has been updated to remove the job titles of the
current designated and deputy and the safeguarding leads, basically ensuring
remains relevant and adaptable as personnel change in the future. So
safeguarding is a statutory duty for the council. We deliver a range of services
that directly impact the lives of adults at risk, young people and children,
placing the council in a key position to safeguard and promote their welfare. The
purpose of the safeguarding policy and procedures are to ensure that the council
Council is aware of its legal obligations to meet responsibility in safeguarding adults
at risk, young people and children with a consistent approach.
The policy outlines the Council's roles, aims and responsibilities.
Training and increased awareness equips employees and members to take proactive and informed
action when concerns arise regarding an adult at risk, a young person or a child's safety
or wellbeing.
The Council is a member of the Gloucestershire Safeguarding Adults Board and the Gloucestershire
Safeguarding Children's Partnership.
The previous policy was adopted back in November 2020, so five years ago.
And you'll note from reading the report that there is identified within there rising amounts
of activity on safeguarding in 23 -24, and there were 11 cases in 24 -25 and six cases
so far this year.
So, and the most frequent case of safeguarding concerns reported is around mental health
and suicide ideation.
The updated policy really consolidates changes to referral processes, clarifies key responsibilities, and ensures that the Council continues to meet its statutory duty of care to report safeguarding concerns to the appropriate authorities and agency.
You might note there's been a change of terminology from
vulnerable adults now, so we now talk about adults at risk in
line with safeguarding boards and there's been a national
change to that effect.
There is obviously going to be a requirement to deliver ongoing
training and awareness, which may have some financial
implication, but we believe that could be managed within the
existing budget for training.
It's currently undertaken for employees through the online IHASCO training suite to level
two for both adults and children.
And there's additional training, three have charged through Gloucestershire LearnPro.
So we are looking at resourcing the safeguarding function to ensure that the statutory responsibility
of the councils is effectively being met.
subject to that review and discussions with councils,
we may need to consider as a cabinet whether we need
additional staffing resources to make sure that we continue
to be compliant and effective.
But once the updated policy is implemented,
our officers will be working with the communications team
to update and improve the information that's provided
to all staff through our internal portal and is updated on the Council website for residents.
So also that for members, those of us as Councillors, we will be given the opportunity to undertake
Level 2 training for safeguarding children and adults through the eLearning scheme and
let's hope that that will be available to us early in the new year.
So the recommendations then are that we as Cabinet agree
and update the DOTS, the updated safeguarding policy
and procedures in front of us.
So do I have a seconder for that?
Tristan, thank you.
Anybody like to say anything yet?
Juliette, and then I'll come back to you, Tristan.
Yes, thank you very much.
Councillor Juliet Layton - 0:18:55
Well, I'm looking at on page 46 about the training.And when I had taxis and private hire drivers in my portfolio,
in the IRS, safeguarding was introduced, the training.
And I thought, oh, you know, the taxi drivers will get a bit
techy because they have to come in and do it and have their
safeguarding training.
And we had amazing response.
Everybody has to do it.
But what they all said was it gave them such insight that
they had no idea about.
And we have taxi drivers taking vulnerable children, vulnerable adults, you know, and
across the range of, you know, maybe the drunk girls on a Friday night and everything.
But what those taxi drivers said, it was invaluable and they really, really appreciated that we've
done it.
So it's very important and I'm thinking it'd be really good for the Councillors as well,
for members to be trained.
So I look forward to that.
So thank you team.
Councillor Mike Evemy - 0:19:57
Thank you, Juliet.Anyone else want to say anything?
I think it's fairly straightforward.
The officers come along.
Susan and Paula, have you got anything that you want to say
in addition to what I've said?
Are you happy that we've...
They're nodding, so they're happy with what I've said in terms
of what covers what's in the policy and why we should be agreeing
it this evening.
If there's no one else wants to say anything else, I will...
Can we go to the vote, please, on this, then?
Councillor Mike Evemy - 0:20:39
Thank you very much.That's unanimously supported.
Thank you to Susan and Paula for all the work that you and your teams have done on that
and continue to do what's a very important subject.
10 Council Tax Support Scheme 2026/2027
on subject. We'll now move to the next agenda item, agenda item 10, page 55 on hard copy
papers, council tax support scheme 2025 -26. And I'm going to hand over, not talk about
this one, I'm going to hand over to Councillor Coleman.
Councillor Patrick Coleman - 0:21:18
Councillor Coleman. Thank you chair. The Council tax support scheme proposedtoday continues the principles that were established when we commenced our
administration some six and a bit years ago. I will say in passing that there is
Officer - 0:21:37
contrast, if anybody remembers the historic days before that, when the aim every yearof that administration was to minimise the cost of this scheme, and sometimes by making
it less generous, we've, I believe, achieved one of the most generous and appropriately
generous systems of council tax support in the country, not least because whilst it's
to be living on a low income anywhere there are many reasons for why that's
even more difficult in a rural area not least amongst that the lack of public
transport the distances the longer distances to important facilities so
there are plenty of justifications apart from just decent equity why we should
have this type of system and I urge you to support it and I do so thanking very
much both those members of the public who urged us to adopt this type of
system with this type of approach but also particularly to the officers for
Councillor Patrick Coleman - 0:22:48
doing the detailed number work. Thank you chair. Thank you. Anyone else want to sayCouncillor Mike Evemy - 0:22:51
something before I say a few words on this? Tristan. Thank you chair. I just want to throw myCouncillor Tristan Wilkinson - 0:22:58
support behind this. I think in difficult times these are the sorts of schemesthat appear to be unaffordable and I think it's really important that this is
exactly the sort of thing that many of the people in this council volunteered
to support. This is why we're here, it's to support vulnerable people. We live in
a part of the world that has an amazing brand but it's a brand that masks some
of the hardships that many of our residents and community
colleagues and people that we live amongst face on a day -to -day
basis, so I think this is really important.
And given the financial challenges we have,
I think this should be one of the things that we fight really
hard to maintain.
Thank you, Tristan.
Councillor Mike Evemy - 0:23:48
Yeah, just following up on that and formally secondingthe recommendations.
Absolutely, I think we've seen where other councils have looked to cut back on this and
what that actually means if you reduce the level of support for people who are often
just about getting by.
And I think we can be very proud of this scheme, particularly that we continue to keep pace
so that the real terms value of the support
in terms of people's council taxes there,
that people on the very lowest incomes
don't have to pay any council tax at all.
So we don't start chasing people to pay
10 or 20 quid here or there like some authorities do.
And also that I think has benefits to not just to them,
but also to our officers.
And their time is used more productively
and that sort of thing.
And I think the other thing that we should be drawing attention to, given I think the current public debate about child poverty,
is that in this council, you know, we recognise more people have more than two, those people have more than two children.
We give them higher relief on their council tax for the same level of income if they have more children,
because we recognise the demands on them.
And children cost money.
they need to be fed, clothed, as well as obviously the overheads of the household
and the size of the household that you might need. So we are very proud I think
and I'm very proud that you know we provide that support for the larger
families that are in our district and we hope that the government will look to
remove the two -child benefit cap at the earliest opportunity hopefully in the
budget next month and that therefore those people in our district who are
currently affected by that, will get some relief from the financial pressures that they're
under. So I'm very much happy to second this scheme and it's, as it's been proposed by
Councillor Coleman and I'm going to come back to him to sum up, but I just want anybody
else who wants to say anything before we go back to Councillor Coleman to sum up. No,
back to you, Patching. Well, yes, Chair, nothing is quite so grounded
Councillor Patrick Coleman - 0:26:00
as summing up. I remembered that I just wanted to add a tiny drafting amendment to the recommendationrecommendations. They're shown as numbers one and two, but in my view they should be one, two and three because
the first recommendation is agree the increase to income bands is detailed within paragraph 3 .2 .3 .3 and Annex A of the report for the first of April
2026. Full stop. Then the second recommendation is delegate authority to the Deputy Chief Executive in Section 151, etc.
And the number two on the paper becomes number three.
I do apologise for not dealing with that before the meeting. And thank you very much for your words.
I think it's important to remember that it remains a disgrace in many people's
view, certainly I think all gathered, all the elected members here this evening,
including those from other parties perhaps, that it's a bit of a disgrace
that our child poverty rate has gone up instead of down in recent years.
Councillor Mike Evemy - 0:26:52
Thank you, thank you Patrick for pointing that out. So we've got therecommendations as listed and we're just going to separate out the delegate
authority bit to a separate recommendation but essentially not
changing any of the words so hopefully that's all okay and we'll now go to the
vote.
Councillor Patrick Coleman - 0:27:15
Lovely the screen tends to take a little bit of time to catch up that's sevenvotes in favour and against thank you very much everybody for your engagement
and support with that.
Patrick, if you can turn your microphone off.
Councillor Mike Evemy - 0:27:34
And then it's not looking at Nikki.11 Cotswold District Local Plan (2011-31) Regulation 18 Consultation
Brilliant, okay.
So we'll now go on to agenda item 11, page 69.
Obviously a very significant item on our agenda.
And I'm sure one that many members of the public,
although not here in the room,
will be potentially watching at home live,
or they will watch this subsequently.
So I really thank you for doing that and showing an interest those of you who are watching
this or watching it subsequently.
So where we're going to introduce this is I'm going to say a few words and then Juliet
is going to say a few more words and then we're going to open it up for discussion and
question.
We have our planning team of officers here to answer any questions that members may have
or add anything.
As I said, I will then give Councillor Bloomfield an opportunity to add anything or ask anything
that she wishes to make before we come back to agreeing the recommendations.
So I'll just kick off and say it is, I think, quite widely known now across the district,
given what we've been talking about in terms of the housing target, that the number of
homes that the government expects us to deliver or to plan for is now more than double what
it was prior to the change to the National Planning Policy Framework in
December. The consultation document that we're being asked to agree this
evening really shows that really really clearly and that means in the next 18
years we are as a council are being asked to plan for 18 ,650 homes,
1036 a year, up from less than 500 in our previous local plan.
The ramifications of that are in front of us and they are eye -watering.
As we know, over 80 % of our district is protected national landscape, which severely limits
where housing can be built.
Indeed, we are the district most constrained by national landscape in England and Wales,
particularly outside those people outside national parks.
And on top of that, we've got very significant infrastructure constraints.
As an example, in March, the planning committee approved a small development in Down Amptey
to deliver 13 social rented homes.
Work on the scheme can start, but the houses can't be occupied
until there's upgrade to sewerage infrastructure there
in Downhamptonie.
That's a small but important development, and we need more
of that sort of development
to tackle the housing affordability crisis
that we know we face.
But in that, we're beholden to an organisation
that in terms of water that's widely reported
to have quite severe challenges and we've got no certainty around when works will be
done.
And that scenario is played out across the district and is really a significant barrier
to building houses at scale.
But this is where we are as a council.
We're about to ask our residents to share their views on the options to how we meet
these huge disproportionate government targets.
And I just want to make clear, and I did in the reply
to the question earlier about housing targets,
that we are going to continue to make the case in reply
to the overview and scrutiny's points
that the targets need revisiting.
But they are the targets
that we are being told we have to work with.
And so I am going to be writing to the new Secretary
of State, Steve Reed, for Housing Communities
and local government to really tell him about the severe constraints that we
have in this district with geography and infrastructure and I want to thank
Overview and Scrutiny Committee for their recommendation that they made to
us. I think that validates and confirms the approach that we are taking on
behalf of our communities. We have made good progress with the updates to the
consultation in November.
And as I said before, it is essential that we do this.
And we had a full council debate back in July
when we agreed to do this.
And every single member of the council
who was present supported that.
But changes to housing targets mean
we don't have a five -year housing land supply anymore.
And that could mean that the land that is available becomes overwhelmed, forcing development
into unsuitable locations and potentially reduces land available for employment and
businesses.
We are now, because of that, vulnerable to speculative developments and the risk that
we then have to fight appeals, even if we refuse those applications, and that might
cost us and our taxpayers thousands, tens of thousands, even hundreds of thousands of
pounds.
And obviously there's a threat to the unique natural beauty and rural character of our
district.
And we know from previous experience that speculative development often of a size which
doesn't merit infrastructure upgrades just puts more pressure onto our roads, our schools
and our healthcare services.
while also it can have an effect on visitor economy as well. So updating the
local plan is vital. It's a chance to shape our future. We want communities to
help us decide where the development should go and what the infrastructure
needs to go alongside that. We want that to be here made decisions made here in
the district not in Whitehall and honestly if we don't act now what we
will see is those piecemeal applications gradually coming forward over the
subsequent years and we will have more housing without the infrastructure. So
this consultation is a key part of the process. I want to acknowledge and I'm
sure other colleagues on the cabinet will want to acknowledge that
residents, town of parish councils and wider stakeholders may well be very
concerned about what they read in these documents. But it is crucial to emphasise
that these numbers at the moment are indicative and high -level and they
include sites which already have planning permission as well as sites
that have been put forward to the council which could be potential for
housing. And the consultation is about testing ideas and hearing from residents
who know their communities best.
And some sites might be discounted,
other new ones may come forward.
And it's part of an important conversation
about how we manage the government demand
for a huge increase in the housing development.
And I appreciate that conversation
will be difficult at times,
because some of these changes or potential changes
will be very significant,
and particularly in some of our smaller settlements.
But the alternative isn't that we can't have housing.
The alternative is that the developers
and then the government dictating to us
where the housing should go
and basically developing our district without a plan
and without getting the infrastructure that we need.
So really just I'll finish off and then hand over to Juliet.
I just want to say it's absolutely vital that people get involved in the process
And have their say by responding to the consultation through the planning through the portal. Sorry that will be set up
And that there'll be more detail about that coming out
and the consultation
formerly opens on the 5th of November, but
I'm sure as members we all appreciate that this is going to be a difficult time for many of our residents
and you know we want to work with them to come up with a plan that can
shape the future of our district, provide social housing and affordable housing
for people that need it and we will continue to champion and challenge the
figures that we've been given by the government which yeah I just they're not
realistic but those are the figures that we've been asked to work with. So I'll
Councillor Juliet Layton - 0:36:38
hand over to Juliet. Thank you Mike. Yeah the figures are so unrealistic and trulyshocking but we have to do this as a council we have to have a local plan
because as Mike said the local plan and our planners think of how the development
will be how it will have connectivity with the settlements around it amongst
each other, that we get a good development, not a piecemeal scenario that developers can
do to us, or the government, if we don't do this, the government will do to us.
So I know that our planners are really concerned, and we've got to do this as sensibly as we
can.
But this is a very early stage of consultation where the Council shares its preferred development strategy,
which has been pulled together based on layers and layers of information available to us at the moment and invites feedback.
We've set out a number of development options, an assessment on how the Council could plan for the housing target imposed on us by the government.
And we've also revised papers in Annex A at page 99 at 2 .7,
which shows how if we made massive increases to density,
it's not actually going to help our numbers at all,
because there are so few places where that density
can make any impact.
And on those grounds, our preferred scenario is still
option five, under which we've provided a more detailed
breakdown of housing figures, which may be planned for under
the strategic approach. But as Mike alluded to, these numbers are indicative
and they're indicative because our sites assessments are still ongoing. Some of
the sites we've got may not, may have to be ruled out due to constraints for
flooding, landscape sensitivity, lack of infrastructure, etc. And also we've asked
there are some new sites to be submitted in this consultation.
Infrastructure, feasibility, water, roads may affect
deliverability.
So we have a starting point, and the final numbers will depend on
detailed sites assessments, infrastructure studies, feedback
from this consultation, and future planning decisions.
What we're asking you, everybody, is that all communities get involved and have their say.
It matters, and feedback will inform the final development strategy.
And we know that the residents are already keen to ask questions and give their feedback.
We're already getting, as members, we're getting plenty of emails.
We are very aware that we need to get those answers to people.
So the consultation responses are, as far as possible,
submitted online.
That will help massively in looking at what people want
to say to us.
We'll be showing far and wide the links to the portal that
we're currently building, and that will launch when the
consultation goes live on November the 5th.
I don't know whether that's ironic or not that we've got
bonfire night that night, but November the 5th is our live day.
There'll be plenty of opportunity to ask questions
and get clarification because we will be hosting four exhibitions.
That's one a week in November across the district.
We'd be in Morton, in Mickleton, in Fairford, and in
Syrinsester, and we will be telling you the dates and the
timings and the venues when they're confirmed.
Everybody will know about that.
And it will be a chance then to come to those venues and ask our planning experts questions,
gain a greater understanding of the figures and the wider context.
We'll also be holding two forums for town and parish councils.
One will take place in Moreton on November the 5th and the second will take place in
Syrinsester on November the 10th.
And these events are by invitation only to town and parish councils, but afford the district's
and parish councillors to ask questions and hear more about the preferred options.
In the coming days, Mike will also be writing to every ward member,
where while the council won't be organising public meetings, myself, Mike and senior officers
are happy to attend public meetings that are organised formally by either ward members or
town and parish councils. Should we be overwhelmed with invites, which I think might well happen,
We'll have to prioritise meetings in those settlements that are most affected by potential
development, both proportionately and numerically.
The Council will also be visiting six forms and further education centres in the district
to engage young people affected by potential development, both proportionately and numerically.
Remember, these young people are the people who are going to be watching the buildings
being built probably when they're grown up, been through university or whatever and
apprentices and have got jobs. Things don't happen overnight so it's very
important that we get young people's views. There will also be
newsletters going through every letterbox in the district which will
include links to and more information on the consultation and there will of
be plenty of content on social media and the council's websites. We have a robust
and comprehensive plan to ensure that every resident in every community can
ask questions and feedback on this consultation and I urge you please do
participate and please do participate on the website rather than handwritten
written letters, which take a lot of processing. Thank you.
Councillor Mike Evemy - 0:42:55
Thank you, Juliette. I'm now going to open it up to members. I've seen Paul and thenAndrea first.
Councillor Paul Hodgkinson - 0:43:05
Yes. Thank you very much for taking us through this. And obviously, it's really importantwe have a local plan. But I think it's important also to just reiterate, Mike, what you said,
that the targets that have been set by this Labour government are absolutely
ridiculous for this district. The reason they're ridiculous is because again has
been highlighted so much of our district is Cotswold National landscape what used
to be called the AONB over 80 % which means that housing has to be squeezed
into a small portion of the district and we are in a very unique situation there
are only some districts around the country you know examples would be the
Peak District and the Lake District, for instance,
where so much of our area is protected.
So it limits everything so much,
and that's why I absolutely back you,
going back to the Labour Minister,
to tell him that this is not acceptable,
it is not reasonable, and to me it is completely unrealistic
as to what can be delivered.
But we do know that we need housing.
We absolutely need housing,
and in the Cotswold district, it's affordable housing we really need,
because the gap between the average house price and the average salary is enormous.
I think it's something like 14 times now.
It's anywhere outside of London, it's the biggest gap.
So we have to have housing, but it's got to be reasonable targets,
it's got to be much more affordable, and, and this is crucial,
you must have infrastructure first.
and the government has not been robust enough around this
to make sure that the infrastructure is in place legally
as a legal requirement before the housing goes in.
We know across this district, in places like Morton in Marsh,
in Borton on the Water, and in all parts of the district,
people are crying out for better infrastructure.
We must have that first, and then the development.
And my final point, and it's a question really,
I've already had messages and questions and phone calls
from some of the parishes I represent asking,
looking at the indicative figures that have come through
on housing, so for instance, and they were asking me,
where are the extra 130 homes being indicated
for that parish, where are they going to be?
So it'd be really good to hear from the officers
Just an answer to that really is should they be concerned,
should they be looking at every field and saying,
will it be that field?
Or, you know, what reassurances could the officers give?
And just give us a bit of communication around that,
which I think will help people kind of understand it better.
Thank you.
Councillor Mike Evemy - 0:45:54
Thank you, Paul, and for making those points.And I'm going to look to Matthew, who's going to give you
an answer to the last question that you raised,
Officer - 0:46:08
the question you raised. Hi, I'm Matthew Britton. I'm a principal planning policyofficer in the planning policy and infrastructure team, so deal with all
things in the local plan, particularly housing. Essentially the indicative
number for each settlement is based on various different sources of housing. So
there'll be some sites that already have planning permission, which we expect
to be delivered between 2025 and 2043 and we can count them towards that housing target.
There'll be some sites which we call them windfalls and so essentially
they're sites which we're not specifically and they're not allocated
in the local plan but we know that for example there'll be a barn conversion
here or an infill development there and we can estimate and with some accuracy
and how many windfalls are going to be delivered over the local plan period so
count those as well. There's also sites in our adopted local plan which are
already allocated for development and we can count those as well and they'll
continue on. And then there's some other sites where these are new sites
essentially where we're looking based on the current evidence, we'd be looking
to allocate some additional new sites as well. So these can be small, medium or
large sites and also there's these additional eight strategic sites or new
settlements as well. So that's where they come from. Thank you Matt. So just picking
Councillor Mike Evemy - 0:47:35
up on that point and adding to what Paul is saying and we're going to come back.So my understanding is that this consultation that you can see obviously
the document is here we're not talking about specific sites we're talking about
the scenarios and the strategy. The consultation that will follow next summer
what's called the Regulation 19 consultation will provide that detail
that Paul's residents are asking for in terms of which actual pieces of
land would be developed potentially if this plan goes ahead that's where we'll
Officer - 0:48:08
Officer - 0:48:10
get to next summer is that right? Yes that's correct and yeah the the reasonwe haven't gone into that detail at the moment is this there's still further
review of the studies that are going on, which might discount
some sites.
There's some, we're bringing a call for sites as part of this
upcoming local plan consultation that might bring some new sites
in.
So at the moment, we're just keeping it high level, focusing
on very broad numbers, which might change, but they're
sufficient at the moment to form the basis of which development
strategy we go with.
Councillor Mike Evemy - 0:48:46
Thank you, Matt. And I certainly echo this. I had similar questions at Siddington ParishCouncil the other night, Paul, to those which you've had, and hopefully explain to them
similarly that actually at this point we're not going down that route of identifying specific
sites, but we will get there. And obviously we need to get there, but there is more work
to be done and we're not ready to be able to publish specific sites at this point for
the reasons that Matt has explained. So I'm now going to go to Andrea.
Councillor Andrea Pellegram - 0:49:20
Thank you, Chairman. Mike. I have to say I agree with you all. The housing numbers thatwe have to meet are impossible. And if we look at our preferred scenario, scenario five,
in order to actually meet these houses within our own district would require that they are
built at a density five times higher than currently.
Five times higher.
Just imagine the impact that will have on the landscape
and the quality of the cotswolds.
It will no longer seem to be the cotswolds.
And of course most of this will happen outside of the AONB.
It's going to be very concentrated,
character changing development
that I can't believe anybody would support,
nor can I believe that the development sector
will actually wish to build it, nor will we be able to sell that much housing over the
planned period to keep up with our housing numbers. So I think the whole thing is impossible.
And I know that officers are going to be going to our neighbours to try to get them to take
up some of our housing numbers, but most of them are facing the same difficulties we are.
So the only answer, if we were to actually not be granted a reduced number by the government,
would be to build at ridiculously high densities and I think everybody in the
Cotswolds would be against that. Before I finish I just want to thank the officers
because though this is only a 34 page report it is based on years and years of
hard work and tremendous thought and careful careful calculations and and
it's a very planning is a very thoughtful process and the officers are
working under incredible pressure.
They've just recently done extra work on this document just to
prepare it for today.
And they have to keep going at this pace until they reach the
end of the Regulation 19 while keeping an eye on risk and
reporting to us, the oversight board, which is the leader, the
such hard work and I just wanted to thank the officers because I think they
put in a lot of extra hours and just to make sure that we we stay on top of the
regulations and and produce a successful plan. Thank you. Thank you.
Councillor Mike Evemy - 0:51:51
Yeah absolutely. Thank you to the team. Yeah done an awful lot of work to get ushere today and obviously this is a hugely important document and
consultation that we're about to undertake.
Other members who want to say something?
Thank you, Mike.
Councillor Mike McKeown - 0:52:12
So first, speaking as the ward Councillor forKemble, I also wanted to express my deep
disappointment with the government who just
ignored our request for a more reasonable housing
target, and more importantly, for the
residents of Kemble who are pretty upset that, you
know, what the implications will be for
them of what the government's doing by ignoring the fact that, as you say, 80 % of the land
is not buildable on because it's in the national landscape and therefore it's being forced
into a relatively small area. So, Kemble will more than double in size, which has a huge
impact on it. So, the level of growth is simply not balanced or sustainable. So, Kia is concrete
in Kemble. Frankly, they're causing that problem. So if we really are forced, and it looks like
we are, but we'll try very hard not to take these targets from the government, getting
the supporting infrastructure, as we've said, is going to be absolutely critical. We need
enough classroom space for every child in the Kemble Primary School, enough doctors
and dentists for those new residents, enough sewage processing to keep the lovely River
clean and enough infrastructure for the village community.
We also need to make sure there's enough grid capacity,
not only for the new homes,
but for innovative zero emissions aviation businesses
that are based, two of them on Kemble or Cotswold Airport.
So they're bringing jobs in here and they won't
if we don't have the capacity.
And we know that's a problem.
My own experience as a co -founder of Community Energy
is we've got to wait 10 years for the grid capacity to be upgraded as it stands, which
simply isn't sustainable. It's holding us back. And let's remind ourselves that's more
than 10 years of underinvestment by the previous government that's causing these problems,
and that will impact what we have ahead of us. And of course, with more residents working
and travelling will need better roads and a better public transport. And specific to
Kemble we'll want to see that investment in the Kemble to Syrins sister
cycle path which will help with with more sustainable travel and more a
more pleasant environment. And then finally really with my cabinet hat on I
think you know I see the local plan is an opportunity to do things better. We
should be building new homes that with builders that are lower carbon to
construct lower carbon to live in using sustainable materials,
putting solar panels and heat pumps on them and making them
low cost to run and nice, warm, snug homes for these new
residents, our new young people moving into the area.
We also should be looking to innovate.
Particularly some of the larger developments could be ideal
locations for things like district heating networks and
exploring the potential for things like the fast growing AI
sector. So I know from some of my own work there are some of these smaller
local mini data centres could even provide free heat for nearby homes and
businesses turning that challenge of AI energy into opportunity for
sustainability and lower cost for the for the new homeowners. So while we might
be forced by government imposed targets we still have the power to shape those
developments in ways that are cleaner, fairer and smarter for the Cotswolds and
that's why I'm sure we with our excellent officers will do but it is a
real shame that here is concrete in Campbell. Thank you.
Councillor Mike Evemy - 0:55:53
Hopefully not but I do get the point and I just to emphasise that you know allthe targets are indicative and you know whilst there are numbers against
particular settlements and you've obviously articulated the one that you
represent. There are a couple that I represent that are in that list and I'm
conscious there are others around the table who represent some of those places
as well. Yeah essentially where we've been left and I'll come to you Councillor
Wilkinson in a minute is and I think it's very clear in the report and I
think it's one paragraph and I'm just trying to find it now where actually we
look at the scenario, scenario five, that we're being asked to recommend. And
essentially that's the largest, two one four, Juliet is telling me, it is
essentially the largest number that we can do with that is potentially
acceptable in terms in planning policy terms. But we're still four thousand
short so essentially what's in there is everything that's already permitted and
allocation for windfalls and sites that have come into our offices that aren't
flood lanes essentially and they're in there and we're still 4 ,000 short of the
number and the government potentially might want us to go 20 % higher because
we don't necessarily haven't delivered the target in the past so that that is
the nonsense of the numbers and in my understanding it's based on an algorithm
to do with that how high our house prices are so you know which it doesn't
make sense given actually yes yet we know our house prices are high but just
developers as Andrea I think pointed out won't sort of flood the market with
housing just to make houses cheaper that's not how the how development
market works they'll bring houses forward when they can sell them at the
price they want to sell them at which won't necessarily be to the pace that we
would like in our local plan. So that is the it's like the nonsense of the system.
What we're trying to do here, I'll bring it out to Councillor Wilkinson and to
reassure those people who we represent who may be watching this is we are
trying to take control as much as we can to deliver infrastructure as Paul said
first and when we have planned development we are able to negotiate and
deliver that and we can see that with the Stedings development in Cirencester
where we have seen infrastructure delivered to improve and benefit the town
in advance of the large volume house building which isn't what's happened in
Morton and Borton, Tertbury and Fairford. So on that note I'm going to go to
Councillor Tristan Wilkinson - 0:58:43
Councillor Wilkinson. Thank you chair I think some very strong important pointsmade by my colleagues I'm not going to reiterate those I think that the point I
want to make is a slightly different one and building on Andrea and your point
Mike about kind of the commercial viability because I think that's really important lens
through which we should be looking at this but also the cumulative effect of some of
these. So if you look at the map in my district where I am, so along the 417, it's close to
2000 properties, new dwellings that have basically got one road connecting them all. I can tell
you from personal experience that you know you go to Lechlade at sort of 7, between 7 .30
nine o 'clock in the morning, it's gridlocked. The sort of volumes we're
talking about now are just going to make the school run and people's journeys to
work. What work where? I'm not sure where that factors into this. But also the
local communities of Fairford and Lechlade. So over the past you know 15 or
so years a lot of the shops have actually closed down and have been
converted to houses. They're not going to come back as shops. So you know where are
these people going to go? Are they all going to travel into Sire and Sester to do
their shopping? What does that do to the carbon impact of the district? So I think outside
of the really strong points that have already been made, I think that the reality is that
fast forward 15 years time, there could be some really quite unattractive places to live
as a result of this policy for a number of factors. The last point is in Fairford we
have Farmer's School, which at the moment imports a huge amount of students from Swindon.
they come on busses, you see them every day coming in.
And we can start turning those people away,
or do local residents not get access to the local school?
So there are knock -on effects of these decisions,
which are far -reaching.
And I think Andrea's point is really, really important.
I think if I was a developer,
I'd be looking at the Fairford lecture laid,
that sort of whole area and going,
I'm just not sure the market is there
for the sorts of things that I want to build.
and no government in the planet is going to force developers
to build things that aren't going to be sold.
So, again, we need to think about this very carefully.
But I think you're right. We don't have a choice.
I think we should influence the things we can,
and we should make sure that whatever development
comes forward is done in a way that, you know,
our children and our grandchildren
would actually thank us for.
Councillor Mike Evemy - 1:01:11
Tristan, yeah, and absolutely.I mean I mentioned the Sturdings Development and you know there's a
primary school in in Siddington which has a school hall because at the moment
that's the temporary will become the temporary school for the Sturdings
Development but it's not needed yet so there's benefit to the community in
Siddington currently coming from a development which isn't yet isn't yet
built but that's a planned development not a speculative one which I mentioned
other towns have experienced like Fairford particularly without getting
any infrastructure benefit for them. Are there any other members?
Councillor Bloomfield is there anything you would like to say to us? Either as
the chair of ONS or I will give you latitude as the board member for
Camden Vale as well if you want to say anything.
Councillor Gina Blomefield - 1:02:06
Well thank you Mike and as the board councillor for Camden Vale I was verypleased to hear that Mickleton is going to get his own consultation so thank you
for that and Willa Z has got his own issues too. I appreciate we all
appreciate the difficulties that this Cotswold District Council finds itself
in and I'm sure it's not entirely my role here tonight but I do really
support trying to encourage all of us councillors to attend one of the
town and parish councillors to attend the two forums and I've done certainly
all I can with my counsellors and to really, because by them being better informed, they
can also inform and discuss things with the residents, not necessarily at their formal
meetings, but just being really understanding, because as I totally understand it, we don't
want a whole lot of, we want lots of people responding to the consultation, but in a positive
way.
The reality is where we stand, and we have got to live within that reality of trying
to cope with this government's requirements now.
So I'm fully supportive of that.
I'm very, very grateful to all the officers
who've been involved in it.
And a question I did ask at the O &S, it's, you know,
whilst CDC has not got an effective local plan,
there is a risk that some
of the speculative new developments could be built
over land, which may have been earmarked to be used for bypass,
schools, GP surgeries, which then be difficult to accommodate
because it has been built over the land.
And I just wanted to ask again, what can we do
to protect ourselves against that risk?
Thank you.
I'm looking.
Councillor Mike Evemy - 1:03:58
I'll go over to the planning officers in a minute.I mean, there was obviously a case that the committee,
planning committee just made a decision last week
to refuse an application that potentially could have mitigated against
potential future development around Moreton I think in terms of so that can
happen and obviously that's every refusal is appealable and so we may have
to argue that again in front of a planning inspector but I don't know if
I don't know we haven't got development management colleagues in the room this
evening but I don't know if Helen is the over director going to say anything in
Officer - 1:04:45
response directly to Councillor Bloomfield's question. Thank you. It is a risk where you have development thatcomes forward in advance of a plan and if there is infrastructure required that
is not protected through an allocation or an identification in the plan then
that is a risk. Through the planning process we will do what we can to
protect the need for infrastructure to seek contributions but if it in
particular for something large like say a bypass or a road if it's not actually
indicated in a plan and protected it is a risk until we have a local plan. Thank you.
Councillor Mike Evemy - 1:05:15
Councillor Gina Blomefield - 1:05:16
Thank you it's just all we can do to support you and support everybody elsebecause it's so important going forward this amount of new housing you know
we are, which has been mentioned by many people, the infrastructure is absolutely essential to go
alongside it and it would be awful if we lost the opportunity to do that in the places most suitable
Councillor Mike Evemy - 1:05:41
for it. Thank you. Thank you. Gina, are there any other members that want to say anything before Ijust go to Councillor Layton just to sort of summarise or add anything that she wishes to add
because I'm conscious that I've responded as we've been going along. So, Juliet, over to you.
Councillor Juliet Layton - 1:05:56
Well, I mean I think we're all on the same page here of what we need to do.I think I would just like to do an assurance.
Councillor McKeown mentioned about everybody having warm, safe houses.
You know, we're looking at climate change and ecological builds, etc.
We are doing that already.
We have that in our policies and in our policies that are going to go with this Regulation
19 that they are even stronger. We do not need to have this volume of housing to
ensure that we get that either. We have got it. So there is sort of some small
consolation here and those policies have been looked at last year so
lots of consultation about that as well. I think we're putting out information
to residents about how they can make valuable consultations. So it's no good
just sort of putting in capitals, no don't do this. We actually have to
know why and for the good reasons and we are giving guidance about that. So I'd
like people to really think how they respond. They don't have to respond
to every single thing in the book but they need to respond
well and that will add huge weight to the consultation. Do we need to read
all our recommendations? I'm going to do that Juliette, so thank you for that.
Councillor Mike Evemy - 1:07:33
No and I think that just to think that last point because the purpose of theconsultation that we're about to start is that we get the input from people who
live there, the people who know these places best and with the best women in
Well, you know, we only live in one place, each of us,
and there are only 34 councillors,
and we all live in one place in the district.
And that isn't necessarily where some of the significant
proposed changes might be.
So I think it's really, really important
that we hear from our residents.
And as Juliette says, we hear, okay,
so if there were to be development in your village,
your town, even near you, what might that mean for you?
what might the impact might be, how could the impact be mitigated if it does go ahead?
Because that's the challenge for us and our officers is to prepare a plan that can get
through the inspection.
So it's as well as going through the process of this consultation, there'll be the consultation
next year, then there'll be a formal vote in the council to agree the plan, then it
goes to the inspector.
And the inspector, he or she can essentially question us and will question our officers
about the suitability of the plan.
And developers at that point can come in and say, oh, but they didn't put my site in.
And we have to have good reasons why their site isn't in the plan.
So it's really, really important that we make a robust plan as we can, building on the knowledge
of our residents in order to produce something which when we do get towards
the end of next year and we end up pushing a plan and agreeing a plan that
that plan can actually be agreed by an inspector because then it's only when we
get to that point that essentially our offices can we can in terms of
development management start refusing applications the tilted balance that
we've currently got will go away so it's really really important that people
engage in the consultation.
I'm conscious I've talked for longer than I meant to.
Juliet wants to come back in, yeah.
Councillor Juliet Layton - 1:09:43
Yeah, I do want to come back in because what you said waspeople, absolutely important, the people who are looking at
where they might be living in an area where we might be looking
at big numbers, but whatever happens with these numbers,
they're going to affect everybody in the district,
whether or not you're living in a, you know,
within two miles of a big development.
If you're sitting somewhere on the Fosse Way, which goes from top to bottom, and you
might be in a village, you're going to be affected by what happens in Mickleton or
in Morton.
You know, Broughton on the Water's going to get traffic as is Stoke.
We've got to consider everywhere.
So I think that's a valid consultation to have for everybody, not just the ones that
are looking at where they might have developments.
Councillor Mike Evemy - 1:10:34
Absolutely, and I think that was the point also well made by Tristan in terms of theimpact of consecutive developments potentially on say the 8417 road from Syrinsester to Lechelate.
So absolutely, it's a consultation we invite everybody to make their contributions.
So I'm now going to move us to the recommendations at the bottom of page 69.
I was going to formally propose those.
I mean, Juliette, will you have Peter second?
Yep.
Julius indicating that she's seconding. So we've got five recommendations which
are listed there. First one is to approve the document, the Regulation 18
Consultation Preferred Options document and to commence a six -week public
consultation from the 5th of November. To delegate authority to the Director of
in place, and a cabinet member for housing and planning, to agree on any minor amendments
to the document, to delegate authority to the director of communities in place in consultation
with the cabinet member of housing and planning to approve any technical documents for the
regulation 18 consultation, and to delegate authority to the director of communities in
place, similarly in consultation with the cabinet member for housing and planning, to
approve any additional technical documents for Regulation 18 consultation
and fifthly to approve the local development scheme and that is one of
the papers that's attached here as an annex to this document. So those so
moved and seconded can we go to the vote please on those.
Councillor Mike Evemy - 1:12:23
Thank you very much. That's unanimously supported and as all members obviously be aware, it'sa matter which is of great concern to all of us and to reassure anybody watching at
home that it's a major focus for us, not just for our offices but for us personally as members,
as ward members, as has been identified, but also for the Deputy Leader and I in our portfolio
roles in terms of working on this over coming months and even longer. So thank you everybody
for your contributions to that. We'll now move on to the final item this evening, which
12 Budget Strategy and Medium Term Financial Strategy Update
is Agenda Item 12, which is the 26 -27 Budget Strategy and Medium -Term Financial Strategy
Update I'm going to hand over to Councillor Coleman. I'm sure I've been assisted by the deputy chief executive on this item
Thank you very much chair, thank you very much to officers who've
Councillor Patrick Coleman - 1:13:31
Particularly David, but his and his team who prepared this reportIt's not all bad news. That's my first thought
Secondly, it's sometimes a good idea to start from the back and work forward
So if we turn to the last annex, which is on page 199, it's a capital programme.
We don't have a particularly varied capital programme these days, but we do have a significant
sum for financing new waste vehicles, Yubico vehicles.
Colleagues I know are already aware and taking part in the complicated and really interesting
process of working out what sort of vehicles at what time to be maintained where, using
what fuel and a few other factors to take into account and I've been really
encouraged by the chance I've had to take part in the early stages of that
don't think it's fair to say I've done anything constructive but it was a
really interesting process. We turn back quickly to Annex D which is the summary
on one page and you can see strangely though that when you see red it's good
news these days it means savings however when you see budget cap at the bottom
you see that if all goes badly our budget gap is going to be quite a
challenge to fill however I think colleagues are aware and I certainly
this is how I see it that we take professional advice and it's very good
advice I've been very impressed with pixels work our consultants I think
is fair description but then we add some caution and pessimism I'm sure
pessimism is not the professional word but what I think this gets us to is that
what we're generally looking at is the worst -case scenarios and all the
challenges are already being addressed however coming back to how badly the
government treats us we find on page annex C on page 195 and if the longer
your green line is to the left, the better off you're going to do out of Fair Funding 2 .0,
the government scheme. This is how it looks so far. And if you've got the more to the right you are,
the worse you're going to do. And there we are, right up near the worst affected, Cotswold,
with quite a significant challenge. Now it's not a huge surprise because we are, compared to many
areas, relatively prosperous. Not as prosperous as some of those unitary councils in what used to be
and we'll come to them in a minute. But we're being clear about the
challenges, we're being clear about the impact of fair funding 2 .0 and fair
funding 2 .0 is actually Annex B not Annex A as shown at the beginning.
Unfortunately this was printed before we spotted the mistake. And there we have
67, not 67 paragraphs some of those are headings, but it's quite a complicated
thing, affects the county councils even more than us I suspect and certainly the
the upper level of local government, and a lot of it is accepted as being overdue.
It was put off for many reasons. We knew it was coming and we never thought it was going to be
particularly good news for us. But we turn back to Annex A, shown as Annex B, the exception of
financial support provided by local authorities. I'm really glad this has been included.
If somebody told me even five years ago that there would be this many authorities that got themselves
was in terrible trouble and it's not always just bad luck, I would have been astonished.
I don't know which ones to pick out but I will pick out Windsor and Maidenhead.
Colleagues would be aware that Windsor and Maidenhead is not a particularly poor area
of the country, in fact rather the reverse, but it had a policy very similar, it still
has a policy very similar to our predecessors on this council's previous policy, which was
to freeze and cut the council tax whenever they could.
In those days, this was affordable
because we got an incredibly large new homes bonus.
We don't get that anymore.
In Windsor and Maidenhead's case,
they were going to close the gap
by selling the golf course they owned.
I don't know how that's going,
but they needed 41 million this year,
and it looks like they need 62 million,
or perhaps that's prior years.
Just not, we don't want to be in this list,
and we're not going to be in this list.
So coming back to the metres report,
and having done those low lights,
as well as highlights.
You can see that we've made good progress in this year.
I should have mentioned the capital funding that we've done very well at capital receipts.
Not huge capital receipts, but substantial, significant.
And now we come to the revenue issue.
You'll be pleased to see in paragraph 215, there is no immediate risk of us applying
for exceptional financial support and being found in the naughty boys and girls table
that I referred to just before in the exceptional financial support table. But
the budget gap must be closed and I think probably every member of this
council nowadays fully shares that approach so that's encouraging it means
that we're probably be united in most of the decisions we have to take ever the
optimist. So I suspect that that's probably enough the reviews are being
taken undertaken of the reserves and balances strategy I've mentioned the
work being done on the big capital expenditure coming up to replace as is
necessary the waste vehicles. It's quite interesting the summary in paragraph 126
given the scale of the financial challenge we're facing primary focus
resident focused transformation and smarter internal working projects. There's
an interesting list there which includes digitalization and use of AI for
efficiencies. So that's encouraging. Fortunately we have an AI expert on the
cabinet already. You'll guess it's not me. And finally I think I'll mention
business rates because the business rates system it was incredibly
complicated to understand and in the past that complexity's been beaten by
working together across the seven Gloucestershire councils. I think all seven
and possibly only six.
We had to kick one of them out for a while,
but I think they might be back in.
David can explain, sorry.
Our chief finance officer probably explained in a minute
when he puts right things I've said wrong.
Point being, they work together in the business rates pool,
but because of the changes being made to business rates,
it looks like the business rates pool
may no longer be the best way forward.
And perhaps I could invite the chief finance officer to,
at this late hour, give us a couple of minutes
on the business rates,
but he can say what he likes really. I'm happy to move the recommendations and
again grateful to the professionalism and patience of our officers in
producing this work. Thank you. Thank you Patrick. With that I'm going to go to the
Councillor Mike Evemy - 1:20:33
Deputy Chief Executive, Chief Finance Officer David Stanley. Thank you Chair.David Stanley, Deputy CEO - 1:20:38
Just on the business rates pool, we are probably in what will be the final yearof the business rates pool that has kept a significant amount of funding within
the county area. I don't know what it is off the top of my head the last time I
checked was it's probably around 40 to 50 million since it was established in
2013 -14. The government have asked all local authorities currently in a pool to
indicate by the 24th of November whether they still want to be in a pool or not.
We have asked as a council and a society district council
treasurer's for an extension to that deadline
because that deadline happens to be four days before
the chancellor announces the budget.
There may be items in that budget that could impact
on the due diligence that you would expect
the chief financial officers to undertake
as to whether the risk and reward is balanced on that.
So we're waiting to hear back from government
where they intend to extend slightly that deadline
so that we have got information from the,
any change that's made to business trades in the budget.
In terms of the rest of the report,
you've had a good overview from Councillor Coleman.
The position is set out on the basis of
no significant change to the funding
that was outlined in the February 2025 MTFS.
That's not because no work has been done on it,
but we are still two months and one day from when the consultation on fair funding closed.
That closed on the 15th of August. We are yet to receive a response from the Government
to all the consultation responses that went in. That response is due imminently in the form of a policy statement
that will be announced prior to the Budget and that will give us a better understanding of what the funding position
will be under fair funding.
Included within the report is a table that includes the funding
that PIXEL have interpreted would come our way under
fair funding 2 .0.
There are three models that are being developed,
one by PIXEL, one by LG Futures, and one by the Institute of
Fiscal Studies that are different.
So they have similar but not the same outcomes in terms
of funding and because of that there isn't that robustness I suppose in those estimates
that I can rely on to include in an update in this report. So further work will be done
but you'll notice from that particular table in the report the PIXEL interpretation of
fair funding 2 .0 provides a flatter funding position in years 2 and 3 i .e. 27, 28, 28,
28 -29 than the MTFS has currently assumed. So there's some very, very cautious optimism
in terms of the future funding position, but clearly with the budget gap that was identified
in previous MTFS's that is still in existence in this report, there's a significant amount
of additional work to do to close that gap in terms of identifying budget and efficiency
savings, income generation, as well as potential gains from the funding
Councillor Mike Evemy - 1:24:05
position outlined. Thank you David. Do we have any other members of cabinet whowant to say anything before I get my view or put a little bit extra in?
It's not quite that late an hour, it's 25 past 7, but obviously when you have a big
item like the last one it's sort of, yeah, once you've got through to it so you've
dealt with it.
So, yeah, I will just, I think to add to what David and Patrick
have said, you know, for me it's really the seeing from the
government really what this means in the next couple
of months.
So, you know, clearly what David has just told us is that he
can't really change his assumptions based on one set of
figures from PIXEL, which look better for us, those ones on
page 160, table two, than we would have had hitherto.
But we will get, as usual, we'll get the financial
settlement from the government, as well as the budget
at the end of November, the statement, to remind members
that we are now expecting, when we get our financial
provisional settlement before Christmas,
a three -year settlement, which we haven't had
in the time that I've been a member of this council
and in the six years that I did the job
that Patrick is now doing.
we never had more than a one -year settlement. So that will help obviously
as we then look to and David and the team work on the papers coming forward
for our decisions in February, we will be able to project forward hoping much more
robustly into what may be the final years of this council and obviously we
have the uncertainty of local government reorganisation but just to remind
members I think we may have discussed this at a previous meeting that we need to
continue to plan beyond the date of the potential abolition of this council
because it may not happen and we will have a obviously we have a
responsibility to continue to provide services until that responsibility is
taken from us until we have that certainty on that and you know we may
have a decision this time by this time next year but we may not equally so
obviously that's why what we're seeing now is we're going out to a further year
to 2930 in the papers that David has prepared for us but yeah I think it will
be interesting on the fair funding clearly there's a lot of lot of
discussion in local government circles about this some people disappointed it's
not giving them more than they thought they were going to get.
And some of us looking at numbers going, oh my goodness,
but we've known it was coming for some time.
And, you know, if it's more the 7 % cash flow reduction next year
and then flat from there, that's clearly not as negative
as we might have seen.
But clearly whatever happens, we almost certainly going
to see reductions in funding from the government.
is a question I think of scale in what we get and obviously as we plan for the
final two years I think you know one of the things I would remind members and I
think probably with the exception of Councillors Wilkinson and Pellegram who
weren't here at the time we passed a motion that this council in November
2023 which set the parameters that David and the team have been working towards
in terms of our financial prudence and I think that's set us in pretty good
and the fact that we are expecting to generate budget surplus again this year
and it was over half a million pounds to add to the similar amount last year just
gives us a little bit more that more cushion as we go into potentially the
last years of the council with reducing revenue from the budget from the
government in terms of our grants. I think that's probably all I wanted to
say and to second the recommendations essentially what we're agreeing to I
is the strategy that's outlined in the report which David is following from
that decision by council and obviously his own professional experience. So I'll
just go back, no one has got anything they want to say to Patrick to
summarise if you want to or if you don't we'll just move to the vote.
Councillor Patrick Coleman - 1:28:27
Councillor Mike Evemy - 1:28:29
Happy to move to the vote chair. All right, that's all right. I haven't seenCouncillor Blumfeld behind you, Gina, get you to say something before and then potentially
Councillor Coleman might either sum up.
Councillor Gina Blomefield - 1:28:46
Well, thank you, Mike. And I don't want to delay anybody longer. I just wanted to saythat we have many members of the ONS who have a great interest in the finances of the Council.
So there was a really good grilling given then and I'm sure Councillor Coleman and David Stanley
appreciated that. The budget funding gap was a great concern.
It was appreciated. This is being monitored closely by the RCFO and
Councillor Coleman. Clearly there are difficulties in forecasting.
With the reduction of funding, the uncertainty in interest rates and inflation,
which are all affected by national or world events and there's nothing that we
can do. It's beyond this councils control but I'm we were supportive of the
approach and saying we didn't actually have a recommendation because of that
but we do you we're fully behind understanding that we have got to make
sure that our budget works so anything that can be done to do that so thank you.
Councillor Mike Evemy - 1:29:51
Thank you Gina.He doesn't need a response from Patrick.
So he didn't say he wanted to submit.
I suggested we go to the vote.
So I just suggest we do that now.
Green to catch up with the system.
Councillor Mike Evemy - 1:30:14
So yeah, that's seven votes in favour.Thank you everybody on that one.
13 Next Meeting Date
And the final item is just to note that the next meeting of the cabinet is scheduled for
the 20th of November, 2025 at 6 p .m.
So we will gather all again then.
Thank you very much for your input and attendance.
In particular, thank you to the officers who are still with us to the end of the meeting.
Thank you very much to everybody.
- Minutes , 04/09/2025 Cabinet, opens in new tab
- 2025 10 16 Decision summary sheet for Cabinet, opens in new tab
- Cabinet response to Scrutiny recommendation on Local Plan Reg 18, opens in new tab
- CDC Safeguarding Policy 2025 Cabinet Report, opens in new tab
- CDC Safeguarding Policy July 2025, opens in new tab
- CDC EIA for Safeguarding Policy 2025, opens in new tab
- CDC Council Tax Support Scheme 2026_2027 report, opens in new tab
- Annex A Financial Modelling, opens in new tab
- Annex B EIA for CDC CTS 2026, opens in new tab
- Cabinet Report Local Plan Review Preferred Options and LDS, opens in new tab
- Annex A Cotswold District Council Local Plan Review Regulation 18 Consultation Preferred Options (November 2025), opens in new tab
- Annex B Cotswold District Local Development Scheme (October 2025), opens in new tab
- Consultation Document - Final Version published as a supplement, opens in new tab
- 2026-27 Budget Strategy and MTFS Update Report v3 FINAL 2025 10 07, opens in new tab
- Annex A - Exceptional Financial Support FINAL, opens in new tab
- Annex B - Fair Funding 2.0 Consultation FINAL, opens in new tab
- Annex C - Fair Funding 2.0 indicative impact FINAL, opens in new tab
- Annex D - Medium Term Financial Strategy 2026-27 UPDATE October 2025 FINAL, opens in new tab
- Annex E - Capital Programme 2026-27 to 2029-30 FINAL, opens in new tab
There are currently no votes to display