Question from Cllr M Smith to the Portfolio Holder for Sustainable Growth and Economy
Members have been repeatedly told in this chamber that there is a housing crisis in this country. This, along with all the problems that the country and the world are facing have previously been blamed on the Conservative government. However, Gedling Borough Council has the means to assist with alleviating some of the housing problems within the Borough, by using S106 contributions from housebuilders.
£560,567 was allocated by the developer of the Strata Homes site in Linby nine years ago, application 2014/0959. This money needs spending by 2026, otherwise the money will be returned to the developer. Whilst I am aware that officers know there is a time limit on this money, why has this not been spent before and used to alleviate some of the acute housing needs faced by those in this Borough? We either have a housing crisis or we don’t. This council’s own website shows that in total there is £1,451,019 in the pot for affordable housing.
Officers have informed me that they are working on delivering affordable housing on sites in Netherfield and are looking to acquire properties for the same purpose. Those who purchased their home in Linby, nine years ago, would prefer to have seen this money spent locally to them, and certainly by now. Why the nine year delay and still nothing to show for the S106 contribution?
Question from Cllr Bestwick to the Portfolio Holder for Environmental Services (Operations)
What is the current number of pavement sweepers deployable across the Borough, are they all currently operational and does the Cabinet Member feel certain this will be adequate during the autumn?
Question from Cllr Maltby to the Portfolio Holder for Public Protection
In a bid to help reduce ASB, CCTV was promised to be installed in Muirfield Park, Bestwood, but then installation plans were cancelled. Can you advise why and how we can work together and with the residents to get it installed?
Question from Cllr Walker to the Portfolio Holder for Lifestyles, Health and Wellbeing
Can the Cabinet Member for Public Health assure me that Calverton Leisure Centre will remain open under Labour's 'Leisure Transformation' plans?
Question from Cllr Adams to the Portfolio Holder for Sustainable Growth and Economy
Can the cabinet member for Sustainable Growth and Economy please direct us to the planning application number, decision notice or if not available, the authoriser for the June 4th raising of the Pride Progress flag at Gedling Borough Council?
Question from Cllr S Smith to the Portfolio Holder for Environment Services (Operations)
Fly-tipping on Catts Lane, Stoke Bardolph, is a far too regular occurrence. Will the Cabinet Member finally commit her department to working alongside Cllr Adams, the Parish Council and me in ensuring Gedling Borough Council fund and install CCTV on Catts Lane to prosecute and deter those fly-tipping at this hotspot?
Question from Cllr Whiting to the Portfolio Holder for Sustainable Growth and Economy
The Public Space Protection Order aimed at anti-social car cruisers has improved the situation over the past two years, but there are still incidents of car meets and breaches of the Order. Will Gedling support the extension of the PSPO and ensure that everything is in place before the current Order expires in 2026?
Question from Cllr Whiting to the Leader of the Council
Is Gedling Borough Council currently using Artificial Intelligence for any functions of the Council, and what plans are there to use AI in the future?
Question from Cllr Meads to the Portfolio Holder for Sustainable Growth and Economy
The CIL public consultation was conducted in February this year, when will we be presented with the results and why has it taken so long?
Minutes:
A question was asked of the Portfolio Holder for Sustainable Growth and Economy by Councillor M Smith, as follows:
“Members have been repeatedly told in this chamber that there is a housing crisis in this country. This, along with all the problems that the country and the world are facing have previously been blamed on the Conservative government. However, Gedling Borough Council has the means to assist with alleviating some of the housing problems within the Borough, by using S106 contributions from housebuilders.
£560,567 was allocated by the developer of the Strata Homes site in Linby nine years ago, application 2014/0959. This money needs spending by 2026, otherwise the money will be returned to the developer. Whilst I am aware that officers know there is a time limit on this money, why has this not been spent before and used to alleviate some of the acute housing needs faced by those in this Borough? We either have a housing crisis, or we don’t. This council’s own website shows that in total there is £1,451,019 in the pot for affordable housing.
Officers have informed me that they are working on delivering affordable housing on sites in Netherfield and are looking to acquire properties for the same purpose. Those who purchased their home in Linby, nine years ago, would prefer to have seen this money spent locally to them, and certainly by now. Why the nine year delay and still nothing to show for the S106 contribution?”
Response from Councillor R Allan:
The council's new local plan will meet government housing targets, delivering more homes, including affordable ones, faster.
When approving planning applications, the council requires developers to provide affordable housing on site. Only in rare cases where on site provision isn't possible does the council negotiate a financial contribution instead following its affordable housing supplementary planning document.
The strata homes section 106 agreement allows funds to be spent boroughwide. The delay in using strata homes contribution is because the council doesn't manage its own housing stock. While developers have paid sums instead of providing affordable homes, buying and managing just a few properties isn't practical or affordable without knowing future contributions.
With more funds now available, the council is exploring options to buy properties across the borough for social housing as allowed by section 106 agreements. This aligns with the upcoming housing strategy which will be consulted on after approval by the portfolio holder. All contributions will be spent by their deadlines. Thank you.
A question was asked of the Portfolio Holder for Environmental Services (operations) by Councillor Bestwick, as follows:
“What is the current number of pavement sweepers deployable across the Borough, are they all currently operational and does the Cabinet Member feel certain this will be adequate during the autumn?”
Response from Councillor Paling:
At the current time the Council has 4 mechanical sweepers as part of the Council fleet. There are 2 large sweepers for roads, and 2 smaller sweepers for pavements. All four are operational at the current time. The two smaller sweepers have recently been procured as part of the fleet replacement programme, and as such there should be less maintenance issues and off-road time with these vehicles this year. In terms of vehicles, we have better, maybe not adequate, but better capacity for leaf drop season.
However, we need to note that all schedules are subject to change, especially in emergency situations such as flooding where the street care team's response is about deploying sandbags, clearing drainage grids and post event cleanups, which was an area of strength in the recent BDO internal audit report presented to the audit committee on the 24th of June. I'm sorry that we can't do both, but hopefully we will not have the same flooding this year and our vehicles may be adequate for leaf drop.
In addition to the new vehicles, the new Assistant Director of Environment (Operations) joined the Council this week. As part of the roll out of the Council’s new in-cab/hand-held software system for frontline services, work is being undertaken in the Autumn to review street cleansing rounds and ensure they are accurately mapped as part of the implementation of the system which should improve efficiency of street cleansing. The system will enable us to identify and monitor hot spot areas which will need greater maintenance including heavy leaf fall areas to ensure adequate maintenance. This programme of work will be ongoing through the Autumn.
Finally, whilst we have the vehicles and equipment to deliver street cleansing, we need to ensure officer capacity so that all vehicles can be utilised appropriately. We have separated Street Care from Parks; to instead combine with our Waste team so we can ensure effective management across the two areas with stronger focus on absence management, use of agency and performance.
A question was asked of the Portfolio Holder for Public Protection by Councillor Maltby, as follows:
“In a bid to help reduce ASB, CCTV was promised to be installed in Muirfield Park, Bestwood, but then installation plans were cancelled. Can you advise why and how we can work together and with the residents to get it installed?”
Response from Councillor D Ellis:
I assume that Councillor Maltby has read the annual CCTV monitoring report that cabinet considered on the 10th of July. But just to remind members, CCTV is regulated by the surveillance commissioner through the national statutory code of practice and locally is developed in compliance with the council's policy which was adopted in March 2020. This policy is designed to ensure that council's operation of CCTV in all its forms complies with the law and the principles of good governance.
As part of this, the policy requires that any operational changes to the systems are approved by the senior responsible officer. This includes any additional CCTV cameras or removal of cameras. These decisions should be evidence-based and balance the needs of crime prevention and detection with amongst others; the protection of freedoms act 2012. CCTV is one of a range of approaches to crime and social behaviour and surveillance needs to be considered in that wider context.
A surveillance camera was initially proposed by the council for Muirfield Recreation Ground in May 2022. At that time, the number and type of instances on the site indicated that one may be justified and relevant permissions were sought. However, there are a number of technical complexities with this proposed installation which delayed work on it and during this time officers observed a reduction in the number of reported incidents. As a result of these changed circumstances, the project was deferred.
It was kept on the agenda and the incidents of crime, both on and around recreation ground, were regularly reviewed. These reviews concluded that installing a camera would be disproportionate and not in line with the Protection of Freedom Act 2012 and its associated codes of practice.
This code of practice places a duty on systems owners to ensure that when cameras are deployed, officers carefully consider the balance between carrying out surveillance and safeguarding individual privacy and rights. And as such, officers were satisfied that that a camera would not be justified.
Officers also consulted with the local police inspector in April 2024, March 2025, and recently in July 2025 on the need for a camera. On all occasions, the local police agreed with the council officers that, taken into consideration the nature and incidents, that a permanent CCTV camera would be seen as an unreasonable and disproportionate intervention. The site will however be kept under review.
As members and residents would expect Mr Mayor you can be assured that the local labour member for Bestwood St Alban's ward actively engages with local residents and the parish council and very much ensures I'm personally aware of local concerns that come to her attention. The message has to be that the decision to introduce a new CCTV camera has to be evidence-based and that at present the evidence is not sufficient just to justify it. Residents should ensure that any antisocial behaviour, crimes, or similar incidents they're aware of are reported to provide the evidence base.
A question was asked of the Portfolio Holder for Lifestyles, Health and Wellbeing by Councillor Walker, as follows:
“Can the Cabinet Member for Public Health assure me that Calverton Leisure Centre will remain open under Labour's 'Leisure Transformation' plans?”
Response from Councillor Clarke:
As part of the leisure transformation programme, we will be looking at the ongoing business case for all our leisure sites, and this includes those governed under joint use agreements at Carlton Academy, Redhill Academy and Colonel Frank Seeley Academy. These are sites the Council does not own, so our ability to ensure ongoing maintenance and options for future development are very limited as a result.
All our sites are ageing in their nature, so ensuring a sustainable model for future delivery to safeguard leisure services across the borough for years to come is essential. We are therefore updating our Strategic Outcomes Planning Model Strategy with the most up to date community, financial, market and business data to understand the future business case for each of our leisure sites as we plan for the future. Once this review is complete, we will consider options for future provision, balancing business and community need.
At this stage Calverton Leisure Centre remains open for business as usual, and Council has agreed the operational budget to do this for 2025/26. Any future change to joint use agreements with Nottinghamshire County Council and Redhill Academy Trust will require consultation with the public.
A question was asked of the Portfolio Holder for Sustainable Growth and Economy by Councillor Adams, as follows:
“Can the cabinet member for Sustainable Growth and Economy please direct us to the planning application number, decision notice or if not available, the authoriser for the June 4th raising of the Pride Progress flag at Gedling Borough Council?”
Response from Councillor Robinson-Payne:
To answer your question Councillor Adams, the application number is 2025/0458, which I now believe has been approved by Gedling Borough Council.
A supplementary question was asked by Councillor Adams to ascertain whether the Cabinet member would confirm if they would be referring themselves to standards following a breach of planning regulations.
Response from Councillor Robinson-Payne:
As mayor, I made it clear at annual council in May that the theme of my year would be inclusivity. That means making a conscious effort to represent all the people who live in our borough, not just those who share our own personal views, but everyone. It includes standing up for residents who are too often marginalized or made to feel unwelcome, including members of the LGBTQ plus community.
Flying the Progress Pride flag at the Civic Centre was a deliberate and symbolic act as part of that commitment. The progress pride flag is an evolution of the original rainbow flag designed specific specifically to better reflect the full diversity of the LGBTQ plus community including trans people and people of colour and to acknowledge the ongoing struggle for equality. It ensures that all members of the community are recognized and included.
As someone who's been on the receiving end of homophobia throughout my life, and yes, even now while serving as your mayor of this borough, I can tell you that visible support from those in positions of responsibility matters. It sends a powerful message of solidarity and reassurance, especially to those who may not always feel safe or accepted. That said, I do recognize the technical requirement for planning permission to fly certain flags. To that end, I asked our officers to put in place the necessary permissions to fly the progress pride flag in future years.
This is about more than what's on a flag pole. It's about who we are as a community. One that chooses kindness, inclusion, and respect for all. That's a message I will always be proud to stand behind as the mayor of Gedling borough and an ordinary citizen just like everyone else. Thank you.
A question was asked of the Portfolio Holder for Environment Services (Operations) by Councillor S Smith, as follows:
“Fly-tipping on Catts Lane, Stoke Bardolph, is a far too regular occurrence. Will the Cabinet Member finally commit her department to working alongside Cllr Adams, the Parish Council and me in ensuring Gedling Borough Council fund and install CCTV on Catts Lane to prosecute and deter those fly-tipping at this hotspot?”
Response from Councillor D Ellis:
Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I''ll answer this question as it relates more to my portfolio.
Councillor Smith will remember our previous discussions about this problem. We all recognize that fly tipping is a particular problem on the Stoke Lane/Cats Lane area of Stoke Bardolph and something which residents are rightly concerned about.
However, that doesn't mean that CCTV is the answer or is appropriate. I'm advised that a fixed camera would have a limited coverage and is unlikely to view specific areas where offenses occur. Such a camera would need to be visible and consequently risk displacing officers to monitor nearby locations and a single fixed camera will be of limited value. The topography of the area also means that the transmission pathways will be a challenge and incur additional cost.
The council responds to reports of fly tipping in the area and, as well as removing them, monitors the level and type of incident. Officers consider that the incidence of fly tipping in the area does not meet the test of significant harm, vulnerability or community impact that would warrant this level of intervention. Most CCTV cameras across the borough have multiple functions such as detecting antisocial behaviour and crime, whereas a camera in this location would serve a single environmental purpose which further reduces the justification for an installation.
Following years of austerity and cut to our resources, we are no longer able to sustain the neighbourhood warden service. With the larger budget that was there previously, the council was able to be more active, including using mobile covert cameras. This was used extensively around Cats Lane with a significant number of fixed penalty notices being issued. We are currently in the process of commissioning a private provider to act as enforcement partners on environmental crime, including fly tipping. Residents can be assured that the area is a known hotspot and will be on the agenda for enforcement activity in the future. Thank you.
A question was asked of the Portfolio Holder for Sustainable Growth and Economy by Councillor Whiting, as follows:
“The Public Space Protection Order aimed at anti-social car cruisers has improved the situation over the past two years, but there are still incidents of car meets and breaches of the Order. Will Gedling support the extension of the PSPO and ensure that everything is in place before the current Order expires in 2026?”
Response by Councillor D Ellis:
Thank you, Mr Mayor. Members will recall that the council introduced a PSPO to address nuisance from vehicles and people engaged in car cruising activities. The order was made after consideration of the evidence and consultation and lasts for 3 years until the 22nd of June 2026. There is scope within the order for an extension of a further three years if the circumstances at the time justify it.
Both the police and officers from the team believe that the PSPO has been an effective tool in combating the problem of car related ASB, although there are still incidents reported. Consequently, officers from the council's public protection and legal teams have already met to discuss the extension to PSPO and begun the review process and will report to cabinet in the coming months with proposals relating to the extension. Thank you.
A question was asked of the Leader of the Council by Councillor Whiting, as follows:
“Is Gedling Borough Council currently using Artificial Intelligence for any functions of the Council, and what plans are there to use AI in the future?”
Response by Councillor Clarke:
Artificial Intelligence (AI) is currently utilised in a limited capacity within Gedling Borough Council. The primary application of AI thus far has been in assisting with content creation for officers, such as summarising meetings and generating documents. It is important to note that AI is not used for any decision-making processes, and no personally identifiable or sensitive information is exposed to AI tools.
The council are currently working on an AI policy that is underpinned by guiding principles to ensure officers are using tools appropriately and compliantly.
Looking ahead, the Council intends to harness AI's potential to enhance efficiency and customer service where appropriate. Some anticipated applications include:
As software suppliers integrate AI functionalities into their products, the Council will evaluate these enhancements on a case-by-case basis. This evaluation will be conducted by the Business and Technical Design Authority board to ensure any AI adoption aligns with the Council's strategic goals and complies with our governance.
While the Council recognises the significant opportunities presented by AI, the safety and security of our data remain our top priorities. Any implementation of AI will be carefully considered to uphold these principles.
A question was asked of the Portfolio Holder for Sustainable Growth and Economy by Councillors Meads, as follows:
“The CIL public consultation was conducted in February this year, when will we be presented with the results and why has it taken so long?”
Response from Councillor R Allan:
Thank you. A report with feedback and recommendations for updating the community infrastructure levy project list will be reviewed by the cabinet member later this year as planned in the consultation documents. Officers are targeting the September meeting, and the forward plan has been updated to reflect this.