Agenda and minutes

The minutes of the meetings of the Council held on 7 March and 21 March 2022 were taken as read and signed by the Mayor as a correct record.

To receive apologies for absence.

Apologies for absence were received from Councillors Alan Bell, Michael Cooper, George Cornah, Anton Dani, Viven Edge, Martin Howard, Judith Skinner and the Chief Executive.

The Deputy Chief Executive reported there were no deputations or petitions.

The Deputy Chief Executive reported there were no deputations or petitions.

The Deputy Chief Executive reported there were no questions from Members of the Council.

The Deputy Chief Executive reported there were no questions from the public.

None

It was moved by Councillor Peter Watson, seconded by Councillor Tom Ashton and

Councillor Paul Skinner introduced a report by the Assistant Director – Corporate providing details on the further progress of the South and East Lincolnshire Councils Partnership since the last update in November 2021.

The report stated that the business case for the Partnership identified and established four stages for building the partnership, namely:

• Setting the Foundations
• Set Up
• Accelerate; and
• Embed

Progress on the Set Up stage of the Partnership was set out in the body of the report under the headings of:-

• Post Covid Recovery Plan
• One team approach and start of cultural alignment
• Cross Council political working discussions
• Common Governance framework/approach
• Common performance framework and service standards
• Agree Annual Delivery Plans

An outline Performance Framework was agreed in the last update report to Council which created a common suite of performance measures across the Partnership.  This would not replace performance reporting within sovereign authorities but was an addition to it with focus on Partnership performance.

Performance measures had now been added to the outline Framework, which was attached at appendix A of the report. This would enable regular reporting of progress of the Partnership in delivering its agreed priorities and the measures would also be used to help shape the future priorities over time.

The mechanism for delivering the strategic priorities of the Partnership were set out in Table 2 of the report.  It was noted that the partners identified would change from time to time based on the agenda for the priority partnership.

Informal briefings on topics of note/interest would be provided to Members, with formal reporting on the work of the Priority Partnerships being included in the twice yearly performance reports to Council.

None of the Priority Partnerships had decision making powers or specific budgets.  Any actions taken by the Partnership would need to be authorised in line with the sovereign Council’s constitutions and those of partner organisations.

Questions were raised on the list of links to missions in the levelling white paper as set out in the report, and whether they were realistic or achievable, and progress on the status with devolution.

Concerns were expressed regarding the pressure on Officers in the Senior Leadership Team who were now servicing three councils. In response it was stated that Officers were now able to focus one a single role, rather than having multiple roles for one Council, due to the resources made available from the partnership and being empowered to deliver.

In respect of performance measures, comment was made on the length of time telephone calls were waiting in the queue to speak to operators, which could result in a significant cost to those residents who could not afford it.

In summing up Councillor Skinner responded that a number of unforeseen additional Government schemes had impacted on the resources and response times for the Customer Services and Revenue and Benefits Teams.  The targets in the report would be achievable by working together as a partnership and with Officers who had the appropriate skills set to deliver projects.  ...  view the full minutes text for item 16.

Councillor Jonathan Noble presented a report by the Deputy Chief Executive Corporate Development seeking approval to utilise £729,000 of the Covid Budget Pressures Smoothing Reserve to offset income pressures being experienced during the year relating to Parking, Leisure, Markets and Investment Returns.

It was moved by Councillor Jonathan Noble, seconded by Councillor Paul Skinner and

Support for Ukraine

Councillor Jonathan Noble introduced a Motion on Notice seeking Council’s support for the people of Ukraine in the on-going conflict with Russia.

Members expressed their support for the motion commenting that it was important to defend freedoms and democracy and also to take practical action to help where it was possible to do so.  It was noted that the Council was involved with the resettlement scheme for Ukrainian citizens fleeing the atrocities, and as a symbol of support and solidarity logos had been applied to the refuse freighters showing clasped hands in the colours of the Ukrainian flag and the Union flag.

As a gesture of extending friendship towards the Ukrainian citizens, the Proposer and Seconder of the substantive motion agreed to add wording of:-

Officers and Cabinet be requested to explore twinning opportunities as appropriate with a Ukrainian port town or city and report back to Council.

It was moved by Councillor Jonathan Noble, seconded by Councillor Paul Skinner and

Civic Awards

Councillor Tom Ashton introduced a Motion on Notice to build on the success of the recent Boston Heroes Awards by holding the awards on an annual basis and expanding the categories to cover both individuals and groups who had improved the public realm, and to further encourage community volunteering going forward.

There was a consensus of support for the Motion however, the title of Boston Heroes was felt not to be appropriate as heroes were people who put their lives at risk, and the awards should be renamed to reflect the community work undertaken by nominees and the aims of improving community cohesion and engagement with the Council.

Concerns were also raised regarding the existing scheme of Service to the Community Awards and whether the proposal would be a duplication or run in parallel.

It was moved by Councillor Tom Ashton, seconded by Councillor Nigel Welton and