Motion 1 – The Council resolves to remove Cllr Trevor Young as Leader of the Council
Council at its meeting on 12th May 2025 resolved to appoint Cllr Trevor Young as Leader of Council for the civic year, Minute 6 refers.
Since that time, I believe that Cllr Young has lost significant support from the Liberal Democrat Administration, Article 6.3 (c) of our Constitution states, the Leader of the Council will:
“be the lead member for matters regarding the priorities and aims of the administration and its political manifesto”
As Cllr Young has unfortunately, I believe, lost the support of his Group, he can longer, in my view, fulfil this function of the Constitution. Therefore, in the interests of the Council and its need for clear and concise leadership, and in concordance with the spirit of the Constitution, acknowledging Council Procedure Rule 13 – the required 10 signatories have been received to seek Council support to rescind that decision.
As such Council resolves: -
1. to rescind the decision made at the AGM on 12th May 2025 to elect Cllr Trevor Young to office of Leader (minute 6 relates); and
2. by resolution of this Council, in accordance with Article 6.1 (c) remove Cllr Trevor Young from office of Leader.
I so move
Cllr Trevor Bridgwood
Motion 2 – The Council resolves to remove Cllr Lesley Rollings as Deputy Leader of the Council
Council at its meeting on 12th May 2025 resolved to appoint Cllr Lesley Rollings as Deputy Leader of Council for the civic year, Minute 7 refers.
Since that time, I believe that Cllr Rollings has unfortunately lost significant support from the Liberal Democrat Administration. Article 6.4 of the Constitution of West Lindsey District Council states that the Deputy Leader of Council is appointed to fulfil the functions of the Leader of the Council in their absence, thus, they too must be able to be the lead member for the administration’s priorities and aims. As Councillor Rollings, I believe, no longer commands the confidence of a significant number of the Liberal Democrat Administration, acknowledging Council Procedure Rule 13 – the required 10 signatories have been received to seek Council support to rescind that decision.
As such Council resolves: -
1. to rescind the decision made at the AGM on 12th May 2025 to elect Cllr Lesley Rollings to office of Deputy Leader (minute 7 relates); and
2. by resolution of this Council, in accordance with Article 6.1 (c) remove Cllr Lesley Rollings from office of Deputy Leader.
I so move
Cllr Trevor Bridgwood
Minutes:
The Chairman advised the meeting that two Motions had been submitted pursuant to Council Procedure Rule No.10 and these were set out in the agenda.
As the mover of both motions, Councillor Trevor Bridgwood was invited to read aloud his first motion to the meeting, as follows: -
Motion 1 – The Council resolves to remove Cllr Trevor Young as Leader of the Council
Council at its meeting on 12th May 2025 resolved to appoint Cllr Trevor Young as Leader of Council for the civic year, Minute 6 refers.
Since that time, I believe that Cllr Young has lost significant support from the Liberal Democrat Administration, Article 6.3 (c) of our Constitution states, the Leader of the Council will:
“be the lead member for matters regarding the priorities and aims of the administration and its political manifesto”
As Cllr Young has unfortunately, I believe, lost the support of his Group, he can no longer, in my view, fulfil this function of the Constitution. Therefore, in the interests of the Council and its need for clear and concise leadership, and in concordance with the spirit of the Constitution, acknowledging Council Procedure Rule 13 – the required 10 signatories have been received to seek Council support to rescind that decision.
As such Council resolves: -
1. to rescind the decision made at the AGM on 12th May 2025 to elect Cllr Trevor Young to office of Leader (minute 6 relates); and
2. by resolution of this Council, in accordance with Article 6.1 (c) remove Cllr Trevor Young from office of Leader.
I so move
Cllr Trevor Bridgwood”
With the motion duly seconded, in the first instance Councillor Young was given a right of response but he indicated he would reserve the right to speak until the conclusion of the debate.
Debate ensued, with the Deputy Leader being clear that in her view this was a personal agenda, requesting a Leader to step down when they had performed poorly, would be perfectly acceptable, however Councillor Rollings did not consider this to be the case in respect of the current Leader outlining some of the key achievements as mentioned in the answer to the public question. In her view the Scampton outcome would have been very different under a different administration.
It was suggested the motion showed a disregard to the communities who had wanted a change in Leadership, as demonstrated by the Local election results in 2023, a disregard for the work that could have been achieved with new priorities being set and it showed elected Members up.
She called for the motion mover to be transparent about his political affiliation, questioned the credibility of the newly formed Consensus Independent Group and suggested the Opposition Group had their own inner politics to resolve, with a recent change of Group Leader. She urged Members to reflect on the political parties they were in, their political aspirations and vote according to their consciences.
A supporter of the motion stated the motion was a constitutional one and nothing more and moved a procedural motion that the matter be put to the vote.
This being a constitutional motion, was refuted by those who supported the Leader, the motion sought to remove the leadership and the Liberal Democrat
administration within the council. There were again comments relating to political affiliation which led to the Chairman making a ruling that such comments were not relevant to the motion and would not be tolerated again.
Those speaking in support of Leader considered the motion divisive with the sole intention of causing upset and fractions with the Council, which had otherwise had a stable leadership. The Administration had demonstrable delivery and if the motion was supported it was suggested the Council would become unmanageable.
In opposing the Motion, a request for a recorded vote was made.
Other Members spoke in support of the Leader, referenced recent press communications and sought to correct those statements, suggesting that there had been no such hoarding of positions, as suggested and questioned if that was the case why the motion submitted made no such reference to such discontent.
A Member expressed his grave concern at the situation, and asked Members to think about the public perception, the Council in his view needed to be focused on LGR, delivering for the district and providing a strong voice in any negotiation. He called for renewed focus.
With no further speakers, Councillor Young used his right to reply and in doing so expressed his disappoint in the situation not for him, but for the Council and its residents. He sought to address what he considered key matters in his closing statement bringing to Councils attention that the Liberal Democrat Group, were the only Group with manifesto, a set of fully costed deliverable priorities. No other Group had presented a shadow budget or alternative priorities. He outlined how the Group had engaged and built their priorities over the last 12 months, noting the achievements as referred to in the response to the public question and suggesting no other Group had a mandate to deliver.
In concluding he was of the view that a period of no leadership would significantly disadvantage residents when serving the public should be the key priority and would hamper negotiations relating to Local Government Reorganisation at a crucial time.
With the final comment going to the motion proposer, it was re-iterated the motion was simply a constitutional one.
A request for a recorded vote had been made earlier in the debate, with a second member supporting that request, the motion was put to a recorded vote, with votes being cast as follows: -
For: Councillors Barrett, Bennett, Bierley, Bridgwood, Brockway, Brown, Carless Duguid, Flear, Key, Lawrence, Lee, McGhee, Morris, Palmer, Pilgrim, Rodgers and Snee J, Snee M and Westley. (20)
Against: Councillors Darcel, Dobbie, Hague, Howitt-Cowan, Rollings, Velan, Young (7)
Abstentions: Councillors Boles, Bunney and Mullally (3)
With a total of 20 votes cast for the motion, 7 votes against, and 3 abstentions the motion was declared CARRIED and as such it was:
RESOLVED that: -
(a) the decision made at the AGM on 12th May 2025 to elect Cllr Trevor Young to office of Leader (minute 6 relates) be rescinded; and
(b) by resolution of this Council, in accordance with Article 6.1 (c) Cllr Trevor Young be removed from office of Leader.
Councillor Bridgwood was invited, by the Chairman, to put his second motion to the meeting as follows: -
“Motion 2 – The Council resolves to remove Cllr Lesley Rollings as Deputy Leader of the Council
Council at its meeting on 12th May 2025 resolved to appoint Cllr Lesley Rollings as Deputy Leader of Council for the civic year, Minute 7 refers.
Since that time, I believe that Cllr Rollings has unfortunately lost significant support from the Liberal Democrat Administration. Article 6.4 of the Constitution of West Lindsey District Council states that the Deputy Leader of Council is appointed to fulfil the functions of the Leader of the Council in their absence, thus, they too must be able to be the lead member for the administration’s priorities and aims. As Councillor Rollings, I believe, no longer commands the confidence of a significant number of the Liberal Democrat Administration, acknowledging Council Procedure Rule 13 – the required 10 signatories have been received to seek Council support to rescind that decision.
As such Council resolves: -
1. to rescind the decision made at the AGM on 12th May 2025 to elect Cllr Lesley Rollings to office of Deputy Leader (minute 7 relates); and
2. by resolution of this Council, in accordance with Article 6.1 (c) remove Cllr Lesley Rollings from office of Deputy Leader.
I so move
Cllr Trevor Bridgwood”
With the motion duly seconded, in the first instance Councillor Rollings was given a right of response, and in doing so questioned the motive and again called into question the politics of the motion submitter. With this having earlier been ruled not relevant to the motion, the Chairman re-iterated his stance to such comments and advised that the motion had been accepted as procedurally correct by the Proper Officer. The Chamber were again reminded to address the motion.
A supporter of the motion challenged the statements made and, in her view, as evidenced by the votes cast in previous motion, the Deputy Leader was no longer in a position to the fulfil the role as laid out in the Constitution and as such moved a procedural motion that the matter be put to the vote.
Again, those in support of the Deputy Leader questioned the motive behind the motion and considered it had been approached in a way to cause the most disruption.
The former Leader spoke favourably and at length of the hard work and tireless efforts he had seen from the Deputy Leader in undertaking her role, again stressing to the Chamber that no other group had produced a manifesto or had an alternative delivery plan, regardless of politics he called for hard work and dedication to be respected.
Following heated exchange with comments becoming personal, and some Members failing to follow the ruling of the Chairman, the Chairman invoked procedure rule 18.2.
The Chairman permitted debate to resume, subject to his ruling being obeyed going forward. With a motion to move to the vote having been made the Chairman sought and received a seconder.
Some members objected, indicating they had not been given opportunity to speak. The Chairman indicated he was willing to continue hearing speakers, subject to the debate remaining calm, but following continued disruption, and the need to invoke rule 18.2 for the seconded time, the procedural motion “to move to the vote” was put to the vote and CARRIED.
With Members resuming their seats, the Chaiman issued a reminder that further disruption would result in him moving a motion to have Members removed.
The Chairman indicated he would put the motion to the vote, resulting in a request for a recorded vote being made and supported by a second member. As such, the motion was put to a recorded vote, with votes being cast as follows: -
For: Councillors Barrett, Bennett, Bierley, Bridgwood, Brockway, Brown, Carless Duguid, Flear, Key, Lawrence, Lee, McGhee, Morris, Palmer, Pilgrim, Rodgers and Snee J, Snee M and Westley. (20)
Against: Councillors Darcel, Dobbie, Hague, Howitt-Cowan, Rollings, Velan, Young (7)
Abstentions: Councillors Boles, Bunney and Mullally (3)
With a total of 20 votes cast for the motion, 7 votes against, and 3 abstentions the motion was declared CARRIED and as such it was:
RESOLVED that: -
(a) the decision made at the AGM on 12th May 2025 to elect Cllr Lesley Rollings to office of Deputy Leader (minute 7 relates) be rescinded; and
(b) by resolution of this Council, in accordance with Article 6.1 (c) Cllr Lesley Rollings be removed from office of Deputy Leader.