Agenda and minutes

Following the recent passing of former District Councillor Peter Terrington and former Leader and Chairman of the Council, John Lee, members are invited to pay tribute and show their respect by observing a minute’s silence.

The Chairman opened the meeting by saying that she had very sad news. Two former District Councillors had passed away recently, Peter Terrington and John Lee. She paid tribute to them each in turn. Peter had been an independent member for Priory Ward from 2011 – 2015. He had served on the Overview & Scrutiny Committee and regularly attended the Coastal Forum. He was born in Wells and lived there with his wife, Jean until his death. There was deep sadness in Wells on learning of his death and he would be greatly missed by all who knew him.

The Chairman then spoke about former councillor, John Lee, who she had had the honour and privilege of working with. John had been both a former chairman of the Council and its Leader. His passing had been keenly felt by Council’s staff and across the political divide. He was a proud ambassador of Cromer town and its fishing communities and during his time as Leader had hosted the Antiques Roadshow on the Pier. She said despite, their political differences, she had the utmost respect for him. He was a man of great integrity as well as honest and direct. The role of Chairman of the Council meant so much to John. He was always immaculately turned out and so full of pride to represent his community. She concluded by saying that the Council’s thoughts and prayers were with the families of Peter and John during this difficult time.

The Chairman then asked Members to join her in observing a minutes’ silence.

There will be a short presentation by representatives from ‘Sir Norman Lamb’s Coalition of Young People’, which is the Chairman’s nominated charity for the civic year.

The Chairman said that it had been hard to choose a charity for her year in office. She had decided to focus on young people and mental health as this linked in with the new Youth Council and their main theme for the forthcoming year. She said it was so important to provide care and support for young people suffering with mental health issues, especially since Covid. Prior to the pandemic 1 in 6 young people struggled with their mental health, now it was 1 in 4. Her chosen charity for her civic year was the ‘Sir Norman Lamb Coalition of Young People’ and she invited Sir Norman’s wife, Mary to give a short presentation.

Mrs Lamb began by saying that Sir Norman Lamb apologised for not being able to attend in person to speak to members. He had provided her with a written statement which she read out. She outlined the experiences that many children faced when trying to access mental health support and on leaving Parliament, Sir Norman had established a mental health fund specifically dedicated to North Norfolk. A coalition of third sector organisations and community groups sat alongside this fund, working together and providing access to key resources and services. There were now over 50 member organisations in the coalition and feedback had been extremely positive. She concluded by saying that so far, the fund had donated £200k and a further £250k had been donated by partner organisations. They were extremely grateful to the Chairman for choosing the Coalition as her nominated charity for her civic year.

The Chairman thanked Mrs Lamb for her presentation. She said that at the request of the Youth Council, Cromer Pier would be lit up in blue on 10^th October to commemorate MIND’s ‘do it blue’ campaign for mental health awareness day.

To receive apologies for absence, if any.

Apologies were received from Cllrs M Batey, E Coleman, A Fitch-Tillett, M Hankins, P Heinrich, J Punchard, E Spagnola, J Toye and A Varley.

To confirm the minutes of the meeting of the Council held on 19 July 2023.

The minutes of the meeting held on 19 July 2023 were approved as a correct record.

Members are asked at this stage to declare any interests that they may have in any of the following items on the agenda.  The Code of Conduct for Members requires that declarations include the nature of the interest and whether it is a disclosable pecuniary interest (see attached guidance and flowchart)

Cllr Dr V Holliday declared a non-pecuniary interest in Agenda Item 18, as she was patient at Blakeney Surgery and supported the ‘Save Blakeney Surgery’ campaign.

Cllr P Fisher declared a non-pecuniary interest in Agenda Item 18, as he had been involved in a video for the ‘Save Blakeney Surgery’ campaign.

To determine any other items of business which the Chairman decides should be considered as a matter of urgency pursuant to Section 100B (4)(b) of the Local Government Act 1972.

None received.

To consider any questions or statements received from members of the public.

Mr Musson has requested to ask a question on behalf of the Coltishall & Horstead B1150 Special Interest Group

Mr Musson read out the following statement:

The North Walsham West development will have a huge impact on the quality of life of people living in villages along the B1150 corridor towards Norwich.  This is broadly acknowledged and their concerns have received increasing media attention.

Local planning authorities are under a duty to cooperate with each other, and with other prescribed bodies, on strategic matters that cross administrative boundaries precisely because a decision in one council area can create shockwaves across a far wider area. 

It is widely acknowledged that the present Highway infrastructure is woefully inadequate to meet the needs of the North Walsham West Development Brief.  Strategic policy-making authorities should collaborate to identify the relevant strategic matters which they need to address in their plans. They should also engage with their local communities. 

As far as the people of Coltishall and Horstead are concerned, this has simply not happened. Our local Councillor raised the matter at a recent meeting with you. We submitted a Freedom of Information request in mid-July asking for evidence of any and all cross-boundary discussions about this development. The legal deadline passed without any answer from you. An internal review was requested and still no response has been received. We were then advised to raise the matter with the Information Commissioner, a sad indictment in itself.

I am here today to ask two questions:

1)    Have you or have you not complied with your legal obligations under the National Planning Framework to consult neighbouring bodies and communities about your plan?

2)    Why are you flouting the clearly laid out Freedom of Information deadlines in responding to this question?

If you are unable to answer these questions here and now, then we can only leave it to those neighbouring authorities and communities, our local and national media, and the Planning Inspectorate to conclude that you failed to meet your legal duties to collaborate and consult and that you have something to hide in the way you have pursued your development plan. The people affected by this plan deserve better than that. 

The Chairman invited Cllr A Brown, Portfolio Holder for Planning and Enforcement and Chairman of the Planning Policy & Built Heritage Working Party to respond. Cllr Brown began by apologising for the delay in responding to Mr Musson’s Freedom of Information (FoI) request. He said that 95% of such requests were responded to within the required timescale and he was disappointed to learn that this had not been the case for Mr Musson. He then explained that the North Walsham West development was a large scheme and that was why the decision was made to prepare a development brief, where the consortium involved in the development worked with elected members, planning officers and other stakeholders on producing a guide or brief to the development. He said that this was an ongoing process and not yet complete. The intention was to consult with the public once it was finalised. He went onto say that NNDC’s  ...  view the full minutes text for item 59.

To receive the Chairman’s communications, if any.

The Chairman and Vice-Chairman spoke about recent civic events that they had attended:

27^th July 2023 – Cromer Lawn Tennis & Squash Club, Pimms and BBQ

10^th September 2023 – Broadland District Council Harvest Festival Civic Service, St Edmund Church, Taverham

10^th September 2023 – Mayor of Dereham Civic Service, St Nicholas Parish Church, Dereham followed by afternoon tea and 40s music

11^th September 2023 – Opening of Battle of Britain week with the Lord Mayor and Sheriff of Norwich, City Hall, Norwich

11^th September 2023 – Royal British Legion Presidents reception, Birbeck Hall, Norwich

15^th September 2023 – Royal British Legion 83^rd Anniversary of Battle of Britain at Halsey House, Cromer

15^th September 2023 – Battle of Britain Commemoration, County Hall, Norwich

To receive any announcements from the Leader.

The Leader began by saying he hoped everyone had enjoyed the summer break. He said that there had been many wonderful events across the District throughout the summer months and he thanked the volunteers and community organisations that had supported them.

He thanked members and officers for contributing to the corporate peer challenge. He said that the final report would be published in the next 3 months and would set out four recommendations. He said that the review had been carried out by a very experienced team which had found that the Council had an ambitious corporate plan and a good track record of meeting targets. The Coastal Team had been singled out as being nationally significant. There were challenges ahead in maintaining this position in a challenging financial environment. He said he looked forward to working towards meeting the recommendations in the coming months.

The Leader said he was pleased to announce that the Council’s Annual Accounts for 2020/2021 had been signed off on 29^th September. He thanked the Finance team for their hard work. He was also pleased to inform members that the Council had been awarded the RSPCA’s Gold Pawprint award for its stray dog service.

He then spoke about the recent defeat by a cross-party group of peers in the House of Lords regarding an amendment to the Levelling up Bill in respect to nutrient neutrality. He said that this strengthened the Council’s commitment to the joint venture partnership that would achieve the desired outcomes more quickly than legislative changes would have done.

In conclusion, the Leader informed members of some upcoming events, including PositiviTea at Mundesley on 27^th September and the Job Fair at the Council offices on 28^th September.

The Group Leaders will inform Council of any changes to appointments on committees, sub-committees, working parties, panels and outside bodies.

The Leader announced the following appointments:

Member Champions:

Cllr A Varley – Youth Champion

Cllr L Withington – Dementia & Domestic Abuse Champion

Cllr L Shires – Mental Health Champion

Cllr J Toye – Armed Forces Champion

Cllr M Batey – Digital Champion

The following appointments were made to outside bodies:

Cllr A Varley – Visit the Broads

Cllr A Brown – Rail Group (substitute)

Cllr T Adams – Rural Sparse SIG (substitute)

To receive reports from Cabinet Members on their portfolios:

Cllr T Adams - Executive Support & Legal Services

Cllr H Blathwayt – Coast

Cllr A Brown – Planning & Enforcement

Cllr W Fredericks – Housing and People Services

Cllr P Heinrich – Sustainable Growth

Cllr C Ringer – IT, Environmental & Waste Services

Cllr L Shires – Finance, Estates & Assets

Cllr A Varley – Climate Change & Net Zero

Cllr L Withington – Community, Leisure & Outreach

Members are reminded that they may ask questions of the Cabinet Member on their reports and portfolio areas but should note that it is not a debate.

No member may ask more than one question plus a supplementary question, unless the time taken by members’ questions does not exceed 30 minutes in total, in which case, second questions will be taken in the order that they are received (Constitution, Chapter 2, part 2, section 12.2)

The Chairman reminded members that this item had a time limit of 30 minutes. She invited members to ask questions.

Cllr L Vickers asked the Leader, Cllr Adams, about recent rumours regarding the introduction of a tourist tax. She said she hoped he would dispel them as it could do great harm to a lucrative revenue stream for the District. The Leader replied that it was still in the early stages of consideration at the moment and no work had been undertaken yet. He added that there was no primary legislation in place to allow the District Council to introduce anything along these lines. If anything was introduced in the future it would be a small levy for bookings on Air BnB’s and holiday lets. A Business Improvement District was the only way to introduce change such as this and time would need to allocated to exploring this. He concluded by saying that many holiday lets were not paying towards local council services – via either council tax or business rates. Cllr Vickers thanked him for his comments and said she hoped the Administration would seek to work closely with opposition members if they decided to progress with this matter.

Cllr N Dixon asked the Leader, Cllr Adams, whether the feedback session by the LGA Peer Review team had prompted a review of some of the opinions and decisions regarding several key strategic points raised during meetings in the chamber seeking to strengthen the policies and work of the Council. Cllr Adams replied that he was very pleased with the work that was undertaken by the Peer Review team. The draft report would be shared with staff and members in the next 3 weeks and published on the website within 3 months. He reiterated that the main challenge was being able to continue to meet the targets in the same way that had been done previously. Cllr Dixon replied that the essence of the question was whether the Leader was considering a review of opinions and decisions. Cllr Adams said that the Overview & Scrutiny Committee would be involved in assessing the recommendations and any subsequent work that was needed to achieve them.

Cllr S Penfold asked Cllr A Brown, Portfolio Holder for Planning & Enforcement, whether the failure of the nutrient neutrality amendment to the Levelling Up bill in the House of Lords, would impact on the Council’s ability to unlock development sites in the District. Cllr Brown replied that the Levelling Up Bill was essentially a planning reform act and there was clearly cross-party concern that was reflected in the amendment falling. He said that the initial measures that Natural England introduced to control the impact of nutrients in water courses had been reviewed in May 2023 and Natural England had conceded that they were very clumsy. He explained that in March 2023, the Council had set up a Joint Venture partnership to invest in land to offer up mitigation credits to developers who could not provide the necessary measures  ...  view the full minutes text for item 63.

At the Cabinet meeting held on 4^th September, the following recommendations were made to Full Council:

Agenda item 9: Budget Monitoring Period 4 2023-2024

To recommend to Full Council:

1)    That a new capital budget of £0.050m is added to the capital programme to fund repair works to the Marrams Footpath, with funding coming from the Council’s Capital Receipts.

2)    That a new capital budget of £0.370m is added to the capital programme to demolish and rebuild the Public Conveniences at Albert Street, Holt with £0.120m to be funded from an insurance claim and £0.250m to be funded from the Council’s Capital Receipts.

3)    That a new capital budget of £1.040m is added to the capital programme in respect of the Local Authority Housing Fund.

4)    That the current Provision of Temporary Accommodation Budget is increased by £0.178m to £0.983m for 2023/24 following receipt of the Local Authority Housing Fund grant.

5)    That a capital budget of £1.458m be added to the capital programme for the Rural England Prosperity Fund expenditure and £0.266m be added to the capital programme for the UK Shared Prosperity Fund expenditure as shown in paragraph 4.7 and note that this will be funded by external funding.

6)    That a capital budget of £14.610m be added to the capital programme as shown in paragraph 4.8 and note that the project will be funded by external funding. 

The Overview & Scrutiny Committee considered the recommendations at their meeting on 13^th September. As this meeting took place after the Full Council agenda was published, the Chairman of the Committee will provide a verbal update on the Committee’s recommendations and comments at the meeting.

Agenda item 10: Debt Recovery Report 2022-2023

1. To approve the annual report giving details of the Council’s write-offs in accordance with the Council’s Debt Write-Off Policy and performance in relation to revenues collection.
2. To approve the suggested changes to the delegated authority as shown in appendix 2 for write offs.

The Overview & Scrutiny Committee considered the recommendations at their meeting on 13^th September. As this meeting took place after the Full Council agenda was published, the Chairman of the Committee will provide a verbal update on the Committee’s recommendations and comments at the meeting.

Agenda Item 11 - Cromer Phase 2 and Mundesley Coastal management Schemes

To recommend that Full Council:

1)    Confirm its continued support for the approach being taken in the delivery of the Mundesley and Cromer Phase 2 Coastal Management Schemes.

2)    Delegate the authority to Director of Place and Climate Change, in consultation with the Portfolio Holder, to approve quotations, tenders, funding applications, access agreements and contractual appointments/variations. This is so the schemes can continue to progress in a timely manner.

3)    Approve increases in the delegated financial authority for the Director of Place and Climate Change (up to £1 million), for the Assistant Director of Place and Climate Change (up to £500,000) and for the Project Manager (up to £100,000) for these two schemes only.

4)    Approve  ...  view the full agenda text for item 64.

1.     Cabinet Agenda item 9: Budget Monitoring Period 4 2023 – 2024

Cllr Shires, Portfolio Holder for Finance, introduced this item. She began by explaining that the report summarised the budget monitoring position for the revenue account, capital programme and reserves statement to the end of July 2023. The overall position at the end of July 2023 showed a £3,905,574 underspend on the revenue account, however, this was expected to deliver a full year overspend of £25,000. Referring to section 3.10, she said that the final variance on business rates would not be known until the end of the financial year. In conclusion, she spoke to the recommendations 2 – 7, which outlined additions to the capital budget, explaining the reasons behind each request. She said that she wanted to direct Fakenham members to pages 91, 92 and 95 which set out funding for several schemes linked to the town, adding that she hoped this reassured Local Members that the Administration was committed to supporting growth in Fakenham. She said that she would work with the Estates and Property Services teams to ensure that the funding allocated to the town was detailed in a clearer way in future.

The Chairman invited members to speak:

Cllr N Dixon, Chairman of the Overview and Scrutiny Committee, said that two queries had been raised at the last meeting of the committee. The first related to the lack of mention in the Budget Monitoring report regarding risks linked to the delays to the External audit of the 2020/2021 and 2021/2022 Final Accounts and the impact on the accuracy of the reporting of the Council’s finances. The second query related to the need to borrow £10m to pay off £6.2m. He added that there was an undertaking to provide written replies but these had not been issued yet.

The Chief Executive said that similar points had been raised at the recent meeting of the Governance, Risk & Audit Committee. In respect of the outstanding audit / external audit completion, he had explained that Local Government Minister, Lee Rowley, had written to local authorities advising that due to a national issue relating to the sequency and capacity of external auditors across the local government sector as a whole, this was a widespread issue. He reminded Members that the Leader had advised Full Council earlier in the meeting that the accounts for 2021/21 had now been completed. The Chief Executive went onto say that the Director for Finance had attended a Department of Housing, Levelling Up and Communities (DHLUC) webinar which laid out the key dates for future outstanding audits to be completed by. Regarding the short-term borrowing of £10m to cover the repayment of covid grants, he said this was due to a cashflow issue due to the short notice from the Government to repay the funds. He explained that there were cashflow issues at the time due to the payment of parish precepts, which were £6.7m. For this reason, £10m was borrowed to cover the cashflow  ...  view the full minutes text for item 64.

The following recommendations were made to Full Council by the Governance, Risk & Audit Committee (GRAC) at the meeting held on 12 September 2023:

Agenda Item 9: GRAC Annual Report 2022- 2023

It was recommended that Council notes the report, affirms the work of the Governance, Risk & Audit Committee, and considers any concerns raised within the key issues section of the report.

Agenda item 12: Audit Committees and Independent Co-opted members

1.    To recommend to Full Council that 1 co-opted independent Member be appointed to the Governance Risk and Audit Committee [“GRAC”], for a 4 year period, subject any further, emerging advice

2.    Delegated authority be given to the Monitoring Officer, in consultation with the Chairman of GRAC, to undertake recruitment arrangements.

Please note that the report that was presented to the Committee is attached for context but that the Committee amended the original recommendations and the resolution above reflects these amendments.  

In the absence of the Chairman of the Governance, Risk & Audit Committee, the Vice-Chairman, Cllr J Boyle, introduced this item. Cllr Boyle began by saying that she was not on the previous committee, which this annual report covered, however, there were members present who were and who may be able to assist with any questions. She went onto speak about the second recommendation, regarding the appointment of a co-opted member to the Governance, Risk & Audit Committee (GRAC). She explained that the report had recommended the appointment of two independent members, following guidance from CIPFA. The committee had agreed that one person should be appointed initially, for a 4 year (rather than a 3 year) period, subject to any further, emerging advice.

Cllr C Cushing referred to page 147, section 2.3, where the final sentence was not completed. He understood that it should state ‘Group Leaders are requested to remind their members of the importance of finding a substitute if they are unable to attend a meeting’. It was agreed to amend this. He said that he was fully supportive of the appointment of an independent member to the committee. The reports could be complex and lengthy and it would be beneficial to have an external view on key issues.

It was proposed by Cllr J Boyle, seconded by Cllr R Macdonald and

RESOLVED to

1.    Note the Annual Report 2022-2023, affirm the work of the Governance, Risk & Audit Committee, and consider any concerns raised within the key issues section of the report.

2.     Audit Committees and Independent Co-opted members

The Committee made the following recommendation to Full Council at the meeting held on 13^th September:

Agenda Item 15: Overview and Scrutiny Committee Annual Report 2022 – 2023

That Full Council notes the report, affirms the work of the Overview & Scrutiny Committee and considers the following concerns raised within the key issues section of the report:

·         A high number of apologies and limited substitute availability needs to be addressed by Group Leaders.

·         Some requested information has not been provided in a timely or satisfactory manner and needs to be addressed by officers.

·         Delayed finance reports have had an ongoing impact on the work programme that needs to be addressed by officers.

·         Non-attendance of the PCC at short notice impacted the Committee’s crime and disorder update, and substitutes will therefore be requested in future.

As the meeting took place after the Full Council agenda was published, the Chairman will provide a verbal update outlining any further recommendations made at the meeting.

Cllr N Dixon, Chairman of the Overview & Scrutiny Committee, introduced this item. He said that the recommendations set out key issues that had been highlighted in the report and he drew these to members’ attention. He said that the Annual Report, which was compiled by the Scrutiny Officer, was unusual this year in that it was subject to some amendments. These amendments were supported by the majority of the committee. He said that he mentioned this because there had been ongoing matters and concerns which had taken substantial officer and member time to resolve, and consequently there was much corporate learning to be carried forward into the current year.

Cllr L Shires commented on one of the points highlighted in the recommendations. She said that the issue of delayed finance reports was down to reduced capacity in the Finance team and this was being addressed.

It was proposed by Cllr N Dixon, seconded by Cllr G Bull and

RESOLVED to

Note the report, affirm the work of the Overview & Scrutiny Committee and consider the following concerns raised within the key issues section of the report:

·         A high number of apologies and limited substitute availability needs to be addressed by Group Leaders.

·         Requested information has not been provided in a timely or satisfactory manner and needs to be addressed by officers.

·         Delayed finance reports have had an ongoing impact on the work programme that needs to be addressed by officers.

·         Non-attendance of the PCC at short notice impacted the Committee’s crime and disorder update, and substitutes will therefore be requested in future.

The leader, Cllr T Adams, introduced this item. He explained that it was a statutory requirement to review Members’ allowances at least every 4 years and that an independent panel must be convened to undertake this work.

It was proposed by Cllr T Adams, seconded by Cllr A Brown and

RESOLVED to

The Leader of the Council, Cllr Adams, introduced this item. He explained that Sloley Parish Council was unable to operate as it was currently inquorate and that the report set out steps to enable them to return to operation.

It was proposed by Cllr T Adams, seconded by Cllr P Fisher and

RESOLVED

To approve the temporary appointment of District and County Councillor Nigel Dixon, District Councillor Gerard Mancini-Boyle, and District Councillor Saul Penfold be appointed to Sloley Parish Council for a period up to six months.

That Jane Wisson be appointed Temporary Clerk to support the Parish Council until such time that a permanent appointment can be made.

Separately, that an Order be created with respect to delegation of authority which would allow the Chief Executive or the Monitoring Officer have the powers to implement temporary appointment orders in respect of any Parish Council which find itself in a position of being inquorate in the future.

None Received.

None received.

Please note that the time allotted for Opposition Business is 30 minutes (Constitution Chapter 2, Section 3.7(d))

The following item of Opposition Business has been proposed by Cllr Dr V Holliday, seconded by Cllr E Vardy:

Closure of Blakeney Surgery

Blakeney Surgery, which is a branch surgery of Holt Medical Practice, serves the parishes of Blakeney, Cley, Kelling, Langham, Morston, Wiveton, Salthouse, Stiffkey & Cockthorpe, in all a population of 1954.

Holt Medical Practice proposes to close this surgery. Currently, it serves as a reception hub and a prescription drop off and medication pick up. Face to face appointments were withdrawn prior to Covid and never reinstated despite requests from parishioners. 

The local and wider community strongly objects to the proposed closure. For example, a public meeting with the practice was hugely oversubscribed, almost 900 have signed a petition at time of writing, and an online survey by Duncan Baker MP had 434 responses of which 99% were opposed to the closure, The major reason for objection is the difficulty patients will face in accessing health care.

If the Surgery closes, for residents of Blakeney and surrounding villages the nearest health care is at High Kelling (a 14 mile round trip), or Melton Constable (a 20 mile round trip). Those without a car, 20% in Blakeney from 2011 census data, face a 3 ½ hour round trip by bus to High Kelling (including a half mile walk) or a 5 ½ hour round trip to Melton. The local volunteer car service is at capacity and there is no local taxi firm.

Over 40% of Blakeney residents are over 65 and over a quarter of these live alone. Over a tenth of residents say their day-to-day activities are limited a lot, and 6% say they are in bad health (all from 2011 census data). How will these residents cope with a three, four- or five-hour bus journey with multiple changes? It is not just older residents. How could a young mother manage with two children in a pushchair?

Travel is similar or worse for residents in nearby villages. For Morston, which is 3 minutes by bus from Blakeney, it would be more than a 2 ½ hr round trip with four changes to High Kelling and it is not even possible to get to Melton. 

Closure will have an impact on health inequalities. Section 149 (Public Sector Equality Duty) of the Equality Act 2010 states that a public authority must, in the exercise of its functions, have due regard to the need to eliminate discrimination, advance equality of opportunity, remove or minimise disadvantages and take steps to meet the needs of persons who share a relevant protected characteristic, such as age and disability.

The National Health Service Act of 2006 states in Section 13G that “The Board must, in the exercise of its functions, have regard to the need to reduce inequalities between patients with respect to their ability to access health services.”

Closure of Blakeney Surgery would also go  ...  view the full agenda text for item 70.

The following item of Opposition Business has been proposed by Cllr Dr V Holliday, seconded by Cllr E Vardy:

Closure of Blakeney Surgery

Blakeney Surgery, which is a branch surgery of Holt Medical Practice, serves the parishes of Blakeney, Cley, Kelling, Langham, Morston, Wiveton, Salthouse, Stiffkey & Cockthorpe, in all a population of 1954.

Holt Medical Practice proposes to close this surgery. Currently, it serves as a reception hub and a prescription drop off and medication pick up. Face to face appointments were withdrawn prior to Covid and never reinstated despite requests from parishioners. 

The local and wider community strongly objects to the proposed closure. For example, a public meeting with the practice was hugely oversubscribed, almost 900 have signed a petition at time of writing, and an online survey by Duncan Baker MP had 434 responses of which 99% were opposed to the closure, The major reason for objection is the difficulty patients will face in accessing health care.

If the Surgery closes, for residents of Blakeney and surrounding villages the nearest health care is at High Kelling (a 14 mile round trip), or Melton Constable (a 20 mile round trip). Those without a car, 20% in Blakeney from 2011 census data, face a 3 ½ hour round trip by bus to High Kelling (including a half mile walk) or a 5 ½ hour round trip to Melton. The local volunteer car service is at capacity and there is no local taxi firm.

Over 40% of Blakeney residents are over 65 and over a quarter of these live alone. Over a tenth of residents say their day-to-day activities are limited a lot, and 6% say they are in bad health (all from 2011 census data). How will these residents cope with a three, four- or five-hour bus journey with multiple changes? It is not just older residents. How could a young mother manage with two children in a pushchair?

Travel is similar or worse for residents in nearby villages. For Morston, which is 3 minutes by bus from Blakeney, it would be more than a 2 ½ hr round trip with four changes to High Kelling and it is not even possible to get to Melton. 

Closure will have an impact on health inequalities. Section 149 (Public Sector Equality Duty) of the Equality Act 2010 states that a public authority must, in the exercise of its functions, have due regard to the need to eliminate discrimination, advance equality of opportunity, remove or minimise disadvantages and take steps to meet the needs of persons who share a relevant protected characteristic, such as age and disability.

The National Health Service Act of 2006 states in Section 13G that “The Board must, in the exercise of its functions, have regard to the need to reduce inequalities between patients with respect to their ability to access health services.”

Closure of Blakeney Surgery would also go against four of the key principles of the NHS Constitution for England, namely:

1.     The NHS provides a  ...  view the full minutes text for item 70.

None Received.

To pass the following resolution – if necessary:

“That under Section 100A(4) of the Local Government Act 1972 the press and public be excluded from the meeting for the following item(s) of business on the grounds that they involve the likely disclosure of exempt information as defined in paragraph(s) _ of Part 1 of Schedule 12A (as amended) to the Act.”