Agenda and minutes

Apologies for absence were received from the Deputy Mayor, Councillor Sallie Barker MBE, Councillors Amanda Creese, Angela Goodwin, Steven Lee, and Fiona White; and from Honorary Aldermen Catherine Cobley, Jayne Marks, Tony Phillips, and Lynda Strudwick.

To receive and note any disclosable pecuniary interests from councillors. In accordance with the local Code of Conduct, a councillor is required to disclose at the meeting any disclosable pecuniary interest (DPI) that they may have in respect of any matter for consideration on this agenda.  Any councillor with a DPI must not participate in any discussion or vote regarding that matter and they must also withdraw from the meeting immediately before consideration of the matter.

If that DPI has not been registered, the councillor must notify the Monitoring Officer of the details of the DPI within 28 days of the date of the meeting.

Councillors are further invited to disclose any non-pecuniary interest which may be relevant to any matter on this agenda, in the interests of transparency, and to confirm that it will not affect their objectivity in relation to that matter.

There were no disclosures of interest from councillors.

Susan Sale, Joint Executive Head of Legal and Democratic Services declared an interest in relation to Item 12 on the agenda (Appointment of Returning Officer and Electoral Registration Officer) and would leave the Chamber when the matter was considered.

Tom Horwood, Joint Chief Executive, declared an interest in relation to Item 16 on the agenda (Notice of Motion dated 29 September 2023 – Sharing of Senior Staff), on behalf of himself and other senior officer colleagues present, all of whom would leave the Chamber when the matter was considered.

To confirm the minutes of the extraordinary meeting of the Council held on 30 August 2023.

The minutes of the extraordinary meeting of the Council held on 30 August 2023 were approved as a correct record.  The Mayor signed the minutes.

To receive any communications or announcements from the Mayor.

The Mayor informed the Council that, on Sunday 24 September 2023, he had attended The Dean of Guildford’s farewell service and reception at the Guildford Cathedral to mark the retirement of the very Reverend Dianne Gwilliams.

The Mayor also informed the Council about his forthcoming Charity Dinner Night on Monday 30 October 2023 at the Shahin Indian Restaurant.

To receive any communications or announcements from the Leader of the Council.

Turnaround in planning performance
Following intensive efforts to improve our planning performance, the Leader was pleased to announce that The Minister of State for Housing and Planning would not designate the Council for its planning performance on non-major applications. The Leader thanked the Joint Executive Head of Planning Development and her team for all their hard work that had gone into achieving this. The Lead Councillor for Planning, Environment and Climate Change, Councillor George Potter also thanked the team for this impressive turnaround in performance, which was entirely down to their hard work and dedication and commented that there was still significant work to do to maintain and improve performance.

New round of funding through Crowdfund Guildford
The Leader announced that a new round of funding through Crowdfund Guildford opened this week. To support our communities, the Council was offering up to £5,000 for community led projects that helped Guildford thrive.  This funding was supported by the UK Share Prosperity Fund.

First Gold win in the RSPCA PawPrints Awards
The Leader congratulated the Licencing team for winning a Gold Animal Activity Licensing Award in the RSPCA PawPrints Awards. This award was a great reflection of the hard work of our officers, who ensured our standards remained high when it came to the welfare of animals in the borough.

Ash Road Bridge drop-in sessions
The Leader announced that over 400 people had visited the Ash Road Bridge drop-in sessions at the Ash Centre on 21 and 22 September. There had been a lot of interest in the new bridge and how the roads would look in future, as well as how the work was being carried out. Residents could find out more by searching for “Ash Road Bridge” on the Council’s website.

Electoral Registration - Annual Canvass
Last weekend our canvassers started following up on households that had not responded to our annual canvass emails and letters. The Leader noted that the quickest and easiest way for electors to update their details was online, but the paper forms could also be used.

Encouraging young people to register to vote
The Leader announced that the Electoral Services team had visited Guildford College and the University of Surrey to make sure students knew how to register to vote. The team were on hand to answer questions and explain that young people could register to vote from the age of 16.

Burpham Neighbourhood Area and Forum Consultation
There was still time for residents to have their say about the proposed boundary changes and forum until midday on 12 October 2023. More information could be found in the newsroom on the Council’s website.

Councillor David Bilbé asked the Leader whether the turnaround in planning performance related specifically to hiring, motivating and retaining more staff, and whether she could give an assurance to the Council that there was not a propensity to put forward applications for approval by officers as distinct from refusal on a more balanced basis.  In response, and on behalf of  ...  view the full minutes text for item CO52

To receive questions or statements from the public.

No members of the public had registered to speak or ask a question at the meeting.

To hear questions from councillors of which due notice has been given.

Councillors noted that, at the 25 July meeting, the Council noted that six additional questions had been received by the deadline for submission of questions for that meeting, but unfortunately, they had not been forwarded to the Leader/relevant Lead Councillors until the afternoon of the meeting.  Therefore, no written response to the questions could be prepared for inclusion on the Order Paper for that meeting, and Council was informed that a formal response from the Leader/relevant Lead Councillor to each of the questions would be circulated to all councillors after the meeting.  That response was sent, by email, to all councillors on 2 August 2023.

As there had been no opportunity for the questioners to ask a supplementary question, the Mayor had agreed to allow this at this meeting.

(a)  Councillor Richard Mills asked the Leader of the Council the following question:

“Will the Leader of the Council indicate whether she will urgently bring forward proposals for a restriction on the maximum height for new buildings in the town, in the light of: 

-         the continuing development pressures that have driven a steady increase in permitted building height in particular in the Town Centre

-         the evidence from recent years that the Council’s planning procedures have not proved sufficient to control these pressures in line with the wishes of residents, and

-         the evidence from the recent election campaign of wide support among residents from across the political spectrum for commitment to a maximum permitted building height, including from her executive portfolio holder for planning at election hustings?”.

The Leader’s Response:

“We recognise that the height of proposed new buildings (alongside other aspects of their design and form) can give rise to harm, including potentially in relation to:

·      important views to and from areas, including of significant landmarks, landscapes, and heritage assets;

·      the character of areas in which they are located;

·      the significance of proximate heritage assets and their settings;

·      other localised impacts such as overshadowing and impacts on microclimate.

We have a range of local policy and guidance that seeks to avoid or minimise any of these harms arising from new development, including the recently adopted Development Management Policies and Guildford Town Centre Views SPD.

Applicants must respond to our local policy and guidance as part of their planning applications by providing relevant detail reflecting how views, local character, and heritage aspects have been considered in the design of the proposal.

The Council also expects Accurate Visual Representations to be produced to assist in assessing the likely impact of development on the townscape/ landscape setting or nearby heritage asset. This includes for any visually prominent proposals or proposals for additional storeys in the town centre and other significant development proposals elsewhere in our borough with a special focus on major development in Conservation Areas and Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty.

Importantly, the Council also ensures expert independent professional inputs on significant development proposals via its Design Review Panel, often prior to applications being submitted.

With this information,  ...  view the full minutes text for item CO54

Councillors noted that the Council had agreed the 2023-24 budget in February 2023 with a £3.3m shortfall requiring further work to remove this gap, with the fallback position being the deployment of usable reserves.

The delayed audit of the 2020-21 accounts had identified errors relating to accounting for COVID grants and the Collection Fund, which took place in 2021. These were both sums which were due to be repaid to the Government in 2021-22 rather than sums which were available for use by the Council.

The impact of this was that the level of usable reserves was approximately £20m less than had been thought when the 2023-24 budget was set in February 2023.

The budget outturn position for 2022-23 had shown an overspend of £6.4m on the General Fund and this had therefore further reduced the sums available to the Council.

An updated MTFP position had been presented to the Council at its meeting on 25 July 2023, which had set out the key issues and the position in which the Council was now left. In summary, this was a remaining in-year deficit of £1.7m and a budget gap of £18.3m over the MTFP period to 2026-27.

The report had therefore concluded that the Council was facing a potential s114 report if actions were not agreed to bring this situation back in to balance. The deadline set for this was October 2023 and the progress to date was addressed within the report now before the Council.

The Interim s151 Officer had concluded that sufficient progress had been made to avoid the need for a s114 report to be issued at this point, but that significant work was still required to produce a balanced budget for 2024-25 and beyond.

The Council noted that the report had also been considered by the Executive at its meeting on 5 October 2023.  The Executive had endorsed the recommendations therein. 

TheLead Councillor for Finance & Property, Councillor Richard Lucas, proposed a motion to endorse the second issue of the Financial Recovery Plan, which was seconded by the Leader of the Council, Councillor Julia McShane.

During the debate, councillors raised a number of issues including:

·      Absence within the report of a schedule of all current spending for the rest of this year which would have given all members the opportunity of scrutinising spending that was still proposed and suggesting alternative or further savings.

·      Insufficient detail on savings generated, and overly optimistic estimate of car park revenue.

·      Concern regarding the withdrawal of grants to parish councils, and the proposal to charge parish councils for emptying rubbish bins.

·      Concern that there had been an unfulfilled commitment made in February 2023 to bring a revised budget before Council for scrutiny and adoption, instead of which the Council has only received a high-level update report for endorsement.

·      Concern over absence of councillor involvement in the decisions taken by the Financial Control Panel.

·      Lack of public consultation

·      Communications had reported  ...  view the full minutes text for item CO55

The Council considered a report which outlined the work undertaken by overview and scrutiny during the past municipal year and its future work programme as thus far developed. 

Decisions taken during the past municipal year under the ‘urgency’ provisions and the use of ‘call-in’ were also detailed within the report.  In 2022-23, six decisions had been taken under the urgency provisions of Access to Information Procedure Rules, call-in had been waived by the O&S Committee Chairman on three occasions and no Executive decisions had been called in.

The report had also been considered by the Overview and Scrutiny Committee at its meeting on 12 September 2023.  The Committee had commended the Annual Report to Council.

Upon the motion of the Chairman of the Overview & Scrutiny Committee, Councillor James Walsh, seconded by the Vice-Chairman of that Committee, Councillor Matt Furniss, the Council

RESOLVED:

(1)    That thereport be commended as the annual report of the Overview and Scrutiny Committee for 2022-23.

(2)   That the current rules relating to call in or urgency provisions remain unchanged, subject to clarification of existing procedures to provide that whenever the special urgency provisions are used to take urgent key decisions in accordance with Access to Information Procedure Rule 16, details of those decisions shall be reported by the Leader to the next ordinary meeting of the Council, rather than annually.

(3)    That Access to Information Procedure Rule 17.3 be amended as follows:

“17.3  Annual Reports from the Leader on Special Urgency Decisions

In any event, the Leader will submit annual reports to the next ordinary meeting of the Council on any the executive decisions taken in the circumstances set out in Procedure Rule 16 (special urgency) in the preceding year.  The report will include the number of decisions so taken and a summary of the matters in respect of which those decisions were taken.”

Reasons:

·      Article 8.2(d) of the Council’s Constitution required the Council’s Overview and Scrutiny Committee to report annually to Full Council on the work undertaken during the year, its future work programme, and amended working methods if appropriate. 

·      Overview and Scrutiny Procedure Rule 16(i), required the operation of the provisions relating to call-in and urgency to be monitored annually and a report submitted to Full Council with proposals for review if necessary.

Following receipt of the KPMG internal audit report on the effectiveness of the Corporate Governance and Standards Committee, which was considered by the Committee at its meeting on 24 March 2022, the Council noted that one of the recommendations was that the Committee should report at least annually to the Council on its activities and an assessment of its performance in discharging its responsibilities as defined in the Committee’s terms of reference.

The Council considered the annual report for the municipal year 2022-23, having noted that it had been commended for adoption by the Corporate Governance and Standards Committee at its meeting held on 28 September 2023.

In commending it for adoption, the Committee had made a number of comments, and these had been included at the end of the Annual Report.

Upon the motion of the Chairman of the Corporate Governance and Standards Committee, Councillor Phil Bellamy, seconded by the Vice-Chairman of that Committee, Councillor Bob Hughes, the Council

RESOLVED: That the annual report of the Corporate Governance & Standards Committee for 2022-23, as set out in Appendix 1 to the report submitted to the Council, be adopted.

Reason:

To ensure that the Committee is accountable for its work to the full Council.

The Council noted that the meeting of the Joint Governance Committee scheduled for 9 October 2023 had been inquorate in respect of the Guildford Borough Council membership present.  The meeting had therefore been adjourned to a later date.

The Council therefore deferred consideration of this item accordingly.

Susan Sale, Joint Executive Head of Legal & Democratic Services, left the Chamber whilst this matter was considered.

Following the process for appointment of the Joint Chief Executive for Guildford and Waverley in 2021, both councils had appointed Tom Horwood to that post, and he had also been appointed as Guildford and Waverley’s Returning Officer and Electoral Registration Officer.  In December 2022, Waverley Borough Council appointed Robin Taylor as Waverley’s Returning Officer and Electoral Registration Officer.

In the light of Tom Horwood’s announcement of his proposed departure as Joint Chief Executive, it would be necessary to put in place arrangements for the appointment of Guildford’s Returning Officer and Electoral Registration Officer.

Upon the motion of the Lead Councillor for Regulatory and Democratic Services, Councillor Merel Rehorst-Smith, seconded by the Leader of the Council, Councillor Julia McShane, the Council

RESOLVED: That, with effect from 1 November 2023, Susan Sale, Joint Executive Head of Legal & Democratic Services, be appointed as the Returning Officer for local elections, the Acting Returning Officer for UK Parliamentary Elections, and the Electoral Registration Officer.

Reason:

The Council is required to have in place appropriate statutory officers, including the appointment of a Returning Officer for the administration of elections and an Electoral Registration Officer for the registration of electors.

Following the formal retirement of His Honour Judge Robert Fraser MVO as a Circuit Judge (and Resident Judge at Guildford Crown Court) at the end of June 2023, the Council was requested to consider the appointment of Her Honour Judge Patricia Lees, who was Judge Fraser’s successor as Resident Judge, as the Honorary Recorder for the Borough of Guildford, with immediate effect.

Upon the motion of the Lead Councillor for Regulatory and Democratic Services, Councillor Merel Rehorst-Smith, seconded by the Leader of the Council, Councillor Julia McShane, the Council

RESOLVED: That Her Honour Judge Patricia Lees, Resident Judge at Guildford Crown Court, be appointed as the Honorary Recorder for the Borough of Guildford.

Reason:

To maintain the historic appointment of an Honorary Recorder for the Borough.

To receive and note the attached minutes of the meetings of the Executive held on 20 July and 24 August 2023.

The Council received and noted the minutes of the meetings of the Executive held on 20 July, and 24 August 2023.

In accordance with Council Procedure Rule 11, Councillor David Bilbé to propose, and Councillor Bob Hughes to second the following motion:

“Guildford Borough Council is in an unprecedented situation with respect to financial management, service provision, staff morale and management stability. The people who will be totally affected by this significant set of circumstances are the tax paying public and those expecting support and information from the councillors whom they elected. Councillors cannot give clear confidence to voters without having accurate and cogent information. Councillors should be conversant with initiatives which affects their ability to give confident, consistent, and accurate messages to residents of respective wards.

Most well-run businesses produce a brief summary of key variables which show the health or otherwise of the underlying enterprise. This is normally a key document for senior management. This proposal will provide informed information sufficient for councillors to have confidence in the processes and to assure the residents of their ward and Guildford generally that proper action is being taken in the context of circumstances.

Therefore, this Council resolves:

To prepare a regular monthly report in summary format (maximum 4 pages) of key performance indicators (KPIs) for circulation to all councillors containing at least the following information:

(i)                 a forecast of projected current deficit or surplus in the next 3-month period together with a rolling forecast for the next 12 months;

(ii)              details of service cost expenditure by service category comparing performance to both original and more importantly revised budget (as submitted to full Council today);

(iii)            a summary of cost saving proposals and consequences for service delivery;

(iv)            proposed asset disposals and yield enhancement performance progress

(v)              a schedule of expected non-current expenditure costs including capital project payments, debt repayments, costs of planning appeals (inter-alia); and

(vi)            any other significant matters which are considered to have an effect on financial outcome or management stability.”

In accordance with Council Procedure Rule 11, Councillor David Bilbé proposed, and Councillor Bob Hughes seconded the following motion:

“Guildford Borough Council is in an unprecedented situation with respect to financial management, service provision, staff morale and management stability. The people who will be totally affected by this significant set of circumstances are the tax paying public and those expecting support and information from the councillors whom they elected. Councillors cannot give clear confidence to voters without having accurate and cogent information. Councillors should be conversant with initiatives which affects their ability to give confident, consistent, and accurate messages to residents of respective wards.

Most well-run businesses produce a brief summary of key variables which show the health or otherwise of the underlying enterprise. This is normally a key document for senior management. This proposal will provide informed information sufficient for councillors to have confidence in the processes and to assure the residents of their ward and Guildford generally that proper action is being taken in the context of circumstances.

Therefore, this Council resolves:

To prepare a regular monthly report in summary format (maximum 4 pages) of key performance indicators (KPIs) for circulation to all councillors containing at least the following information:

(i)            a forecast of projected current deficit or surplus in the next 3-month period together with a rolling forecast for the next 12 months;

(ii)         details of service cost expenditure by service category comparing performance to both original and more importantly revised budget (as submitted to full Council today);

(iii)       a summary of cost saving proposals and consequences for service delivery;

(iv)       proposed asset disposals and yield enhancement performance progress

(v)         a schedule of expected non-current expenditure costs including capital project payments, debt repayments, costs of planning appeals (inter-alia); and

(vi)       any other significant matters which are considered to have an effect on financial outcome or management stability.”

Under Council Procedure Rule 15 (o), Councillor Bilbé as the mover of the original motion, indicated that, with the consent of his seconder and of the meeting, he wished to alter his motion as follows:

Alteration:

(1)         Before "Therefore, this Council resolves:" add the following words:

"Council notes that Key Performance Indicators are already reported to councillors and placed in the public domain through the quarterly Performance Monitoring Report to the Overview and Scrutiny Committee, and that this reporting and publication of Key Performance Indicators was first introduced in March 2021."

(2)         Amend the first sentence after "Therefore, this Council resolves:" to read:

"(1)  To produce regular monthly and quarterly reports of key financial information to be reported to the Joint Management Team, Executive, relevant committees and to all councillors, and to be made public on the Council’s website, including the following information:"

(3)         Within the proposed resolution, replace sections (i) to (vi) inclusive with the following sections:

"(i)   Budget expenditure by service, covering actual expenditure vs budget, and vs previous forecast.

(ii)    Explanation of any variances, the forecast for next period, and the  ...  view the full minutes text for item CO62

In accordance with Council Procedure Rule 11, Councillor Richard Mills to propose, and Councillor Honor Brooker to second the following motion:

“In the light of developments in the last few months it is now clear that for the next few years the Council faces continuing and severe financial constraints as well as major challenges in its Housing and Planning Departments.  This will inevitably place an exceptionally heavy burden on the Council’s most senior officers who under arrangements introduced by the last administration now have to carry out functions jointly for both Guildford and Waverley.

Such “Job Sharing” arrangements between two organisations, especially at such a senior level, are extremely rare. They tend to be onerous and inefficient for the staff concerned, and while they may temporarily obscure problems, they seldom resolve them.  Understandably therefore, most organisations prefer to have dedicated officials whose sole concern is for the enterprise for which they work.

It is now clear that, for Guildford at least, this partnership arrangement has not been effective, either in terms of costs or performance.   Indeed, in view of the poor financial performance of the Council in recent years, it could be argued that instead of saving money, by spreading managerial resources too thinly, it has actually become an extremely expensive experiment.  It now needs to be brought to an end as soon as practicable.

Therefore, this Council resolves:

(a)  after consultation with Waverley Borough Council, to end the current arrangement for sharing senior staff as quickly as possible.

(b)  to review “Job Sharing” contracts rapidly, so as to bring them under the sole managerial authority of GBC.

(c)   to ensure that all future senior appointments are dedicated appointments solely for the benefit of GBC.”

Tom Horwood, Joint Chief Executive, Susan Sale, Joint Executive Head of Legal & Democratic Services, and Richard Bates, Joint Interim Head of Finance and Section 151 Officer left the Chamber for the consideration of this matter.

In accordance with Council Procedure Rule 11, Councillor Richard Mills OBE proposed, and Councillor Honor Brooker seconded the following motion:

“In the light of developments in the last few months it is now clear that for the next few years the Council faces continuing and severe financial constraints as well as major challenges in its Housing and Planning Departments. This will inevitably place an exceptionally heavy burden on the Council’s most senior officers who under arrangements introduced by the last administration now have to carry out functions jointly for both Guildford and Waverley.

Such “Job Sharing” arrangements between two organisations, especially at such a senior level, are extremely rare. They tend to be onerous and inefficient for the staff concerned, and while they may temporarily obscure problems, they seldom resolve them.

Understandably therefore, most organisations prefer to have dedicated officials whose sole concern is for the enterprise for which they work.

It is now clear that, for Guildford at least, this partnership arrangement has not been effective, either in terms of costs or performance. Indeed, in view of the poor financial performance of the Council in recent years, it could be argued that instead of saving money, by spreading managerial resources too thinly, it has actually become an extremely expensive experiment. It now needs to be brought to an end as soon as practicable.

Therefore, this Council resolves:

(a)  after consultation with Waverley Borough Council, to end the current arrangement for sharing senior staff as quickly as possible.

(b)  to review “Job Sharing” contracts rapidly, so as to bring them under the sole managerial authority of GBC.

(c)   to ensure that all future senior appointments are dedicated appointments solely for the benefit of GBC.” 

During the debate on the motion, Councillor James Walsh gave notice of his intention to move an amendment to refer the motion to the Overview & Scrutiny Committee at its meeting in January 2024, which was seconded by Councillor Maddy Redpath.  Following further discussion, Councillor Walsh indicated that notwithstanding the outcome of the debate in this motion, he would be asking for a report on the collaboration to come to Overview & Scrutiny Committee which would, amongst other matters pick up on some of the points raised in this debate.  Councillor Walsh therefore withdrew his amendment.

Following the debate on the motion, the Council

RESOLVED: That the motion be not supported.

In accordance with Council Procedure Rule 11, Councillor Matt Furniss to propose, and Councillor Philip Brooker to second the following motion:

“This Council is extremely concerned to hear of yet more financial irregularities taking place, this time around a Council Housing Maintenance Contract.

Again, it follows a lack of financial controls and political oversight by this Council over the past four years which has led to the significant financial issues this Council now faces.

Therefore, this Council resolves:

(1)  That the Department for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities (DLUHC) be requested to send in a Best Value Commissioner no later than four weeks from today, to independently assess the Housing Contracts and management of the Housing Revenue Account at Guildford Borough Council.

(2)  That all documentation be transparently published for the public to be able to see the extent of the challenges faced by the Council”.

In accordance with Council Procedure Rule 11, Councillor Matt Furniss proposed, and Councillor Philip Brooker seconded the following motion:

“This Council is extremely concerned to hear of yet more financial irregularities taking place, this time around a Council Housing Maintenance Contract.

Again, it follows a lack of financial controls and political oversight by this Council over the past four years which has led to the significant financial issues this Council now faces.

Therefore, this Council resolves:

(1) That the Department for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities (DLUHC) be requested to send in a Best Value Commissioner no later than four weeks from today, to independently assess the Housing Contracts and management of the Housing Revenue Account at Guildford Borough Council.

(2) That all documentation be transparently published for the public to be able to see the extent of the challenges faced by the Council”.

During the debate on the motion, Councillor George Potter gave notice of his intention to move a procedural motion to exclude the public from the meeting as there was a likelihood that there would be disclosure of exempt information which might prejudice the ongoing investigation into the allegations regarding housing maintenance contracts, which was seconded by Councillor Richard Lucas.  Following the advice of the Monitoring Officer, that nothing said in the debate so far had caused concern regarding such disclosure, Councillor Potter withdrew his procedural motion.

Following the debate, the Council

RESOLVED: That the motion be not supported.

In accordance with Council Procedure Rule 11, Councillor Philip Brooker to propose, and Councillor Bilal Akhtar to second the following motion:

“Guildford Borough Council is experiencing significant financial issues with respect to being able to set a balanced budget for years 2024 – 2025 and beyond, with the realistic prospect that a section 114 notice (insolvency) may have to be issued next year. This situation appears to have primarily been brought about through the erosion of reserves since 2019.

Further, there have been recent disturbing disclosures within the Housing Revenue Account (HRA).  These disclosures indicate that a contractor has overrun his contract value by several million pounds. Councillors have only been made aware of this vast overspending in mid-September 2023. It has to be said that such astronomic differences between contract value and authorised payments would have been well documented with detailed reasons given in virtually any other commercial organisation. However, within Guildford Borough Council, it seems to have taken senior officers and controlling portfolio holders by surprise, indicating a total breakdown in all types of financial control and management.

The current Leader of the Council was in office as Leader for part of the coalition administration and was also the portfolio holder for Housing for the whole of the period covering the excess payments being made within the HRA; she is deeply associated with these debacles.

Therefore, this Council expresses no confidence in the current Leader of the Council and Portfolio Holder for Housing, and requires her immediate resignation.”

In accordance with Council Procedure Rule 11, Councillor Philip Brooker proposed, and Councillor Bilal Akhtar seconded the following motion: 

“Guildford Borough Council is experiencing significant financial issues with respect to being able to set a balanced budget for years 2024 – 2025 and beyond, with the realistic prospect that a section 114 notice (insolvency) may have to be issued next year. This situation appears to have primarily been brought about through the erosion of reserves since 2019.

Further, there have been recent disturbing disclosures within the Housing Revenue Account (HRA). These disclosures indicate that a contractor has overrun his contract value by several million pounds. Councillors have only been made aware of this vast overspending in mid-September 2023. It has to be said that such astronomic differences between contract value and authorised payments would have been well documented with detailed reasons given in virtually any other commercial organisation. However, within Guildford Borough Council, it seems to have taken senior officers and controlling portfolio holders by surprise, indicating a total breakdown in all types of financial control and management.

The current Leader of the Council was in office as Leader for part of the coalition administration and was also the portfolio holder for Housing for the whole of the period covering the excess payments being made within the HRA; she is deeply associated with these debacles.

Therefore, this Council expresses no confidence in the current Leader of the Council and Portfolio Holder for Housing, and requires her immediate resignation.”

Following the debate, the Council

RESOLVED: That the motion be not supported.