Agenda item

(A)   The following motion to be moved by Councillor Evans and seconded by Councillor Barron;-

“That procedural rule 3.4 be suspended to enable the following motion to be discussed and a vote taken”

1.”This Council notes the consultation by Northamptonshire County Council on who can receive community care services.

2.This Council expresses grave concern that the proposals to only invest and allow access to services to residents that are “Critical” and “Greater substantial” and believes it will;

        Leave local citizens with care needs at risk

        Leave vulnerable tenants in our housing with inadequate support

        Risk destabilising voluntary and community groups in the town which the Borough Council jointly fund to provide support services for these citizens currently by the decommissioning of services.

3.This Council instructs the Chief Executive to write to the County Council putting forward these concerns as the formal position of the Borough Council

4.This Council instructs the Leader of the Council to make representations in the strongest possible terms to the Tory Administration of the County Council.”

(B)The following motion to be moved by Councillor Glynane  ( a seconder to be confirmed );-

“This Council instructs officers to submit a planning application to remove Delapre Park bunding along London Road, from the pond to the park gates.

This Council instructs officers to review and investigate the possibility of implementing all other appropriate measures to prevent unauthorised vehicles entering Delapre Park.”   

(A)    At this juncture, Councillors Edwards, Hill, Lane, Malpas and Tavener declared a prejudicial interest in the following Notice of Motion as members of Northamptonshire County Council and left the meeting. 

         Councillors Church, Glynane, B Hoare, Patterson, Wire and Yates, also members of Northamptonshire County Council, declared a personal interest in the motion but considered it not prejudicial and therefore did not leave the Chamber.  In addition, Councillors Roy and Allen declared a personal interest

         Mr C Grethe, Mr Adams and Mr Fitzmorris then addresses the Council, all speaking in favour of the motion and urging the Council to give it support.  Points were made that it was the vulnerable and elderly in the community that would be affected and issues such as this should not be measured in terms of finance.  Reference was also made to the questionnaire that had been sent out as part of the consultation process and concerns expressed over the complexity of its content and the fact that this in itself was causing further distress and anxiety to those being required to complete it. 

         Councillor Roy then moved and Councillor Wire seconded that Procedural Rule 3.4 be suspended to enable the motion to be discussed. 

         The motion was carried.

         Councillor Roy then moved and Councillor Wire seconded,

“1.      This Council notes the consultation by Northamptonshire County Council on who can receive community care services.

2.      This Council expresses grave concern that the proposals to only invest and allow access to services to residents that are “critical” and “greater substantial” and believes it will:

Leave local citizens with care needs at risk

Leave vulnerable tenants in our housing with inadequate support

Risk destabilising voluntary and community groups in the Town which the Borough Council jointly fund to provide support services for these citizens currently by the decommissioning of services.

3.      This Council instructs the Chief Executive to write to the County Council putting forward these concerns as the formal position of the Borough Council. 

4.      This Council instructs the Leader of the Council to make representations in the strongest possible terms to the Tory administration of the County Council.”

The motion was duly debated, voted upon and carried unanimously.

(B)    Prior to the discussion of this motion the Deputy Mayor, Councillors Hill, B Hoare, Malpas, Robinson, Edwards, I Markham.McCutcheon and Boss, as members of the Planning Committee, declared a non-prejudicial interest in the motion and left the Chamber while it was discussed.

         Councillor Hadland was then duly proposed and seconded to reside as Chair for this item.

         Councillor Hadland then assumed the Chair.

         Mr Connell and Mr Scott then addressed the Council asking that the motion be supported and referring to the problems that had been encountered with the bunding.  Mr Scott commented that the bunding had in fact proved to be an attraction for even more illegal activity and had as a result made Delapre park a less safe and attractive place for the law abiding majority.  He appreciated that to remove the bunding there would be cost implications but this was the price that had to be paid for the error.

         Councillor Glynane then proposed and Councillor Allen seconded that Procedural Rule 3.4 be suspended to enable the motion to be debated. 

         The motion was carried.

         Councillor Glynane then proposed and Councillor Allen seconded the following motion:

         “This Council instructs officers to submit a planning application to remove Delapre Park bunding along London Road from the pond to the Park gates. 

         This Council instructs officers to review and investigate the possibility of implementing all other  appropriate measures to prevent unauthorised vehicles entering Delapre Park.”

         Councillor Palethorpe then moved and Councillor Caswell seconded an amendment to the motion as follows:

         “This Council instructs officers to submit a planning application, investigate the full cost of a scheme to remove Delapre Park bunding along London Road from the pond to the Park gates and identify possible funding sources.

         This Council instructs officers to review and investigate the possibility of implementing all other appropriate measures to prevent unauthorised vehicles entering Delapre Park.”

         Following some discussion and with the addition of the word “and” so that it read, “submit a planning application and investigate the full cost of a scheme” the amendment was accepted.

         The amendment was voted upon and carried.

         The motion as amended was then voted upon and carried.