Agenda item

Motion 1 – Squaddie Box 

 

“Members - Council recognises the difficulties for ex Armed Forces personnel with no fixed address to accessing services and understand they can struggle to navigate complex transitions back into communities. The WLDC  Armed Forces Covenant housing position recognises that this cohort can face challenges linked to relationship breakdown, mental health issues and the broader difficulties that can arise during transition to civilian life. 

 

In those circumstances, services may technically be available, but engagement can still be fragile. Something as simple as having a stable and recognised correspondence address can make a meaningful difference to how individuals reconnect with services to gain help and support.

 

Members note the ‘Squaddie Box’ initiative (Home - Squaddie Box (CIC)which helps by providing a secure personal mailbox with 24-hour access where veterans are able to collect their correspondence privately and at a time that suits them, without needing to attend public offices. Other vulnerable cohorts could also potentially benefit from this with the opportunity to expand this to civilians being explored.  

 

Council resolves to ask the relevant committee to consider rolling out a pilot of this initiative to assess the benefits of such a scheme to vulnerable households in West Lindsey and consider whether it could be implemented to identify a need for this type of service across the District.  

 

I so move”

Councillor Karen Carless

 

 

Motion 2 - Driving Test Centre Provision

 

“Members - This Council notes that young people living in rural districts such as West Lindsey face significant barriers when accessing employment, education, and training due to limited public transport.

 

The Council further notes that the nearest practical driving test centres for residents are currently located in Lincolnand Scunthorpe. As a result, learner drivers from towns such as Gainsborough must pay for extended driving lessons simply to travel to and practise around these locations.

 

This significantly increases the cost of learning to drive and places many young people and low-income residents at a disadvantage. In rural communities, the ability to drive is often essential for accessing employment opportunities, apprenticeships, and further education.

 

This Council believes that improving access to driving test facilities would support social mobility, economic opportunity, and fairness for residents living in rural areas.

 

Therefore, this Council resolves to:

 

1. Write to the Driver and Vehicle Standards Agency requesting that it reviews the availability of driving test facilities within West Lindsey District.
2. Lobby the Department for Transport to consider establishing a driving test centre in Gainsborough or elsewhere within the district.
3. Work with local MPs, including the Member of Parliament for the area, to advocate for improved access to driving test provision for rural communities including exploring whether a temporary satellite or periodic driving test facility could be established locally to reduce travel costs for residents.

 

I so move”

Councillor Lesley Rollings

 

 

Motion 3 –  Amendment to Rule 9 (Questions at Full Council)

 

“This Council notes that:

• Under the current provisions of Rule 9 of the Council Procedure Rules, questions to Full Council must be submitted in advance within a specified notice period;
• This requirement can prevent councillors from raising urgent or time-sensitive matters that arise shortly before a meeting;
• Effective democratic scrutiny relies on the ability of elected members to respond promptly to emerging issues affecting their residents.

This Council believes that:

• Greater flexibility should be introduced to enable councillors to raise pressing concerns without unnecessary delay;
• Any such flexibility should be balanced with the need for orderly and well-managed meetings.

This Council resolves to:

1. Request that the Monitoring Officer facilitates a  review of Rule 9 of the Council Procedure Rules; to include

(a)  proposed amendments to allow questions to be submitted without prior notice on the day of a Full Council meeting, at the discretion of the Chairman;

(b)  Ensuring  that appropriate safeguards are included to maintain the efficient conduct of Council business;

2.    the outcome of the review and any proposed constitutional changes be presented  to a future meeting of Full Council within 3 months for consideration.

I so move”

Councillor Trevor Young

 

 

 

The Chairman advised the meeting that three motions, pursuant to Council Procedure 10 had been received, as set out in the agenda.

 

As the mover of the first motion, Councillor Carless was invited to read aloud her motion to the meeting, as follows:-

 

Motion 1 – Squaddie Box 

 

“Members - Council recognises the difficulties for ex Armed Forces personnel with no fixed address to accessing services and understand they can struggle to navigate complex transitions back into communities. The WLDC  Armed Forces Covenant housing position recognises that this cohort can face challenges linked to relationship breakdown, mental health issues and the broader difficulties that can arise during transition to civilian life. 

 

In those circumstances, services may technically be available, but engagement can still be fragile. Something as simple as having a stable and recognised correspondence address can make a meaningful difference to how individuals reconnect with services to gain help and support.

 

Members note the ‘Squaddie Box’ initiative (Home - Squaddie Box (CIC) which helps by providing a secure personal mailbox with 24-hour access where veterans are able to collect their correspondence privately and at a time that suits them, without needing to attend public offices. Other vulnerable cohorts could also potentially benefit from this with the opportunity to expand this to civilians being explored.  

 

Council resolves to ask the relevant committee to consider rolling out a pilot of this initiative to assess the benefits of such a scheme to vulnerable households in West Lindsey and consider whether it could be implemented to identify a need for this type of service across the District.  

 

I so move

Councillor Karen Carless”

 

Having been seconded, the Chairman thanked Councillor Carless and referred Members to procedure rule 10.4, highlighting that as the motion fell within the remit of another committee, it would stand referred without discussion, for consideration and determination by that Committee.

 

As the mover of the second motion, Councillor Rollings was invited to read aloud her motion to the meeting, as follows:-

 

Motion 2 – Driving Test Centre Provision

 

“Members - This Council notes that young people living in rural districts such as West Lindsey face significant barriers when accessing employment, education, and training due to limited public transport.

 

The Council further notes that the nearest practical driving test centres for residents are currently located in Lincolnand Scunthorpe. As a result, learner drivers from towns such as Gainsborough must pay for extended driving lessons simply to travel to and practise around these locations.

 

This significantly increases the cost of learning to drive and places many young people and low-income residents at a disadvantage. In rural communities, the ability to drive is often essential for accessing employment opportunities, apprenticeships, and further education.

 

This Council believes that improving access to driving test facilities would support social mobility, economic opportunity, and fairness for residents living in rural areas.

 

Therefore, this Council resolves to:

 

1. Write to the Driver and Vehicle Standards Agency requesting that it reviews the availability of driving test facilities within West Lindsey District.
2. Lobby the Department for Transport to consider establishing a driving test centre in Gainsborough or elsewhere within the district.
3. Work with local MPs, including the Member of Parliament for the area, to advocate for improved access to driving test provision for rural communities including exploring whether a temporary satellite or periodic driving test facility could be established locally to reduce travel costs for residents.

 

I so move

Councillor Lesley Rollings”

 

The Chairman thanked Councillor Rollings and sought a seconder for the motion. Having been seconded, the Chairman opened the floor for debate.

 

During the course of significant debate, Members were united in their recognition of the importance of access to driving lessons, and subsequently driving tests, particularly due to the rurality of the district. Differing opinions were expressed regarding how to address difficulties faced by young and learner drivers, be that a cost issue, access to instructors, or distance from a test centre.

 

The motion was welcomed for the debate it generated, however Members indicated a lack of support for the motion as proposed and seconded. The Leader of the Council offered her thoughts on how additional information could be sought, with a view to that information further informing subsequent action from Council if appropriate. She also offered to liaise with the Mayor of the Greater Lincolnshire Combined County Authority, and Sir Edward Leigh, MP, to gain their support. Suggestions for alternative ways forward were made, with advice from the Monitoring Officer being sought for clarity of how to proceed.

 

Following further debate, and advice from the Monitoring Officer, the following amendments to the motion were duly proposed and seconded: that sections two and three be removed, and that the word ‘facilities’ in section one be amended to ‘opportunities’.

 

With the amended motion confirmed, the Chairman took the vote and it was

 

RESOLVED that the Leader of the Council write to the Driver and Vehicle Standards Agency requesting that it review the availability of driving test opportunities within West Lindsey District.

 

As the mover of the final motion, Councillor Young was invited to read aloud his motion to the meeting, as follows:-

 

Motion 3 –  Amendment to Rule 9 (Questions at Full Council)

 

“This Council notes that:

• Under the current provisions of Rule 9 of the Council Procedure Rules, questions to Full Council must be submitted in advance within a specified notice period;
• This requirement can prevent councillors from raising urgent or time-sensitive matters that arise shortly before a meeting;
• Effective democratic scrutiny relies on the ability of elected members to respond promptly to emerging issues affecting their residents.

 

This Council believes that:

• Greater flexibility should be introduced to enable councillors to raise pressing concerns without unnecessary delay;
• Any such flexibility should be balanced with the need for orderly and well-managed meetings.

 

This Council resolves to:

1. Request that the Monitoring Officer facilitates a  review of Rule 9 of the Council Procedure Rules; to include

(a)  proposed amendments to allow questions to be submitted without prior notice on the day of a Full Council meeting, at the discretion of the Chairman;

(b)  Ensuring  that appropriate safeguards are included to maintain the efficient conduct of Council business;

2. the outcome of the review and any proposed constitutional changes be presented  to a future meeting of Full Council within 3 months for consideration.

 

I so move

Councillor Trevor Young”

 

The Chairman thanked Councillor Young and sought a seconder for the motion. Having been seconded, the Chairman opened the floor for debate.

 

During the course of debate, examples were drawn from neighbouring councils and comparisons made with executive models of governance whereby portfolio holders would be asked specific questions at the time of a meeting. There was support given to the mode of having questions submitted in advance, for the fact that there was sufficient time to prepare an answer, with the questions from earlier in the meeting stated as examples of questions which would not have been answerable on the night if not provided in advance.

 

With regard to the option for raising urgent issues on behalf of residents, it was suggested by Members that such matters would potentially not be suitable for discussion in a Full Council meeting, and if truly urgent, the best practice approach would be to raise the matter with relevant Officers in order for a solution to be found as soon as possible. Additionally, it was felt that should a matter be considered urgent, it would not be appropriate to delay response by waiting for a meeting of Full Council to address the matter.

 

Comments in favour of the motion pertained to engagement and accessibility for residents to ask questions of Council and receive an instant response, with the aim to be increasing transparency and accountability between residents and Councillors. Examples were provided of the covid-19 pandemic where information had changed rapidly, and the ability to ask and answer in an instant would have been beneficial. The importance of being open and engaging with young voters was also highlighted.

 

With no further speakers, the Chairman invited Councillor Young to give his closing remarks. Councillor Young acknowledged the comments from the floor, recognising the different approaches within differing governance models, however highlighted that the procedure rule had been in place for many years and his motion had been seeking for a review of the rule, rather than seeking a definitive change to it. He reiterated his reason for requesting a review take place, citing the need for open and transparent interactions with members of the public.

 

With debate coming to a close, and the motion having been seconded, the Chairman took the vote. By majority vote, the motion was lost.