250625 Council Minute
North Ayrshire Council · 17 September 2025
Back to North Ayrshire Council — 17 September 2025 and its agenda
Text extracted from the council's PDF. Layout and reading order may differ from the original.
Page 1
North Ayrshire Council 25 June 2025 At a Meeting of North Ayrshire Council at 2.00 p.m. involving a combination of participation by remote electronic means and physical attendance within the Council Chambers, Irvine. Present (Physical Participation) Nairn Angus-McDonald, John Bell, Marie Burns, Eleanor Collier, Joe Cullinane, Scott Davidson, Anthea Dickson, Stewart Ferguson, Robert Foster, Scott Gallacher, Tony Gurney, Cameron Inglis, Amanda Kerr, Christina Larsen, Shaun Macaulay, Tom Marshall, Jean McClung, Louise McLaughlan, Matthew McLean, Davina McTiernan, Ian Murdoch, Donald Reid, Donald L. Reid and Angela Stephen. Present (Remote Electronic Participation) Charles Currie, Todd Ferguson, Margaret Johnson, Chloé Robertson and John Sweeney. In Attendance C. Hatton, Chief Executive; S. Anson, Executive Director (Education); C. Cameron, Director (Health and Social Care Partnership); R. Leith, Head of Service (Connected Communities) (Communities and Housing); L. Cree, Head of Service (Sustainability, Transport & Corporate Property) (Place); M. Boyd, Head of Service, D. Forbes, Senior Manager (Finance); F. Walker, Head of Service (People and ICT); A. Craig, Head of Service (Democratic), R. Lynch, Senior Manager (Legal Services); J. Hutcheson, Senior Communications Officer (Communications), C. Stewart and S. Wilson, Committee Services Officers, and H. Young, Senior Committee Services Officer (Democratic) (Corporate Services). Chair Provost Dickson in the Chair. Apologies Alan Hill, Mary Hume, Jim Montgomerie and Ronnie Stalker. 1. Provost's Remarks The Provost welcomed those present to the meeting and dealt with preliminary matters, including intimation that the meeting, which was taking place on a hybrid basis, was being recorded. 2. Apologies The Provost invited intimation of apologies for absence, which were recorded. 3. Declarations of Interest There were no declarations of interest in terms of Standing Order 11 and Section 5 of the Councillors' Code of Conduct.
Page 2
There were no declarations of the Party Whip. 4. Previous Minutes The accuracy of the Minutes of the Ordinary and Special Meetings held on 14 May 2025 were confirmed and the Minutes signed in accordance with Paragraph 7(1) of Schedule 7 of the Local Government (Scotland) Act 1973. 5. Provost’s Report Submitted report by the Provost for the period from 5 May – 15 June 2025. Noted. 6. Leader’s Report Submitted report by the Leader of the Council for the period for 5 May – 15 June 2025. The Leader of the Council highlighted a recent report to the Community Planning Partnership Board which reported an improvement in Child Poverty figures for the previous year. The Leader observed that while the improvement was positive, focus needed to be maintained on Child Poverty as a number one priority. Noted. 7. Council Minute Volume Submitted for noting the Minutes of meetings of committees of the Council held in the period 6 May – 4 June 2025. Noted. 8. Appointments to Outside Bodies The Council was invited to consider nominations received in respect of the North Ayrshire Leisure Limited Board and the Community Planning Partnership Safer North Ayrshire Partnership. Councillor D Reid, seconded by Councillor Cullinane, moved that Councillor McLaughlan be appointed to serve on the Board of North Ayrshire Leisure Limited. There being no other nomination, Councillor McLaughlan was duly appointed. Councillor D Reid, seconded by Councillor Cullinane, moved that Councillor Hume be appointed to serve as a named substitute on the Community Planning Partnership Safer North Ayrshire Partnership. There being no other nomination, Councillor Hume was duly appointed. Accordingly, the Council agreed to appoint (i) Councillor McLaughlan to serve on North Ayrshire Leisure Limited Board; and (ii) Councillor Hume to serve as a named substitute on the Community Planning Partnership Safer North Ayrshire Partnership.
Page 3
9. Ardrossan Campus Submitted report by the Executive Director (Place) on the progress with the delivery of the Ardrossan Campus project, the overall transformational regeneration outcomes to be delivered, the current financial position, and to set out the additional funding required as a result of market conditions in the construction industry to enable the delivery of the project in accordance with current programme timelines. Members asked questions and were provided with further information in relation to: • the impact the additional loan will have on the revenue budget next year; • the potential recurring gap in future years budget and how that gap will be filled; • the 2030 net zero ambitions of the Council; • assurances that the revised costs do not change again during the construction phase; • sufficient contingency to cover any future rising costs; • funding for further increases in the project; • projected final costs for construction of the campus, the enabling works for decontamination of the site and the revetment associated works; • the finalised full technical design; • the move in date of October 2027; and • the potential risks associated with securing a workforce to complete the project due to national competition for construction workers. The Monitoring Officer provided clarification that Standing Orders 15.4 relates to motions lodged by Elected members. Head of Service (Finance) undertook to provide the costs of the Campus and the enabling works of the site to all members. Councillor Gurney, seconded by Councillor Macaulay, moved the approval of the recommendations set out in the officer’s report. There being no amendment, the motion was declared carried. 10. North Ayrshire Council Unaudited Annual Accounts 2024/25 Submitted a report by the Head of Service (Finance) on the unaudited Annual Accounts for the year to 31 March 2025. Councillor Larsen, seconded by Councillor McTiernan, moved the approval of the recommendations set out in the officer’s report. There being no amendment, the motion was declared carried. Accordingly, the Council agreed to (a) approve the Annual Accounts for 2024/25, subject to audit; (b) note that Audit Scotland plan to complete their audit of the Accounts by mid-September 2025 and present their annual audit report to the Council’s Audit and Scrutiny Committee thereafter; and (c) authorise the Audit and Scrutiny Committee to consider, and approve for signature, the audited annual
Page 4
accounts within the required timeframe. 11. North Ayrshire Charitable Trusts: Unaudited Trustees’ Annual Report 2024/25 Submitted a report by the Head of Service (Finance) on the unaudited Trustees’ Annual Report for the year to 31 March 2025, for approval by the Council as trustees. The Trustees’ Annual Report and Financial Statements for all of North Ayrshire Council’s charitable trusts was attached at Appendix 1 to the report. Councillor Larsen, seconded by Councillor Collier, moved the approval of the recommendations set out in the officer’s report. There being no amendment, the motion was declared carried. Accordingly, the Council agreed, as trustees of the North Ayrshire Council Charitable Trusts, to approve the annual report for 2024/25, subject to audit. 12. Treasury Management and Investment Annual Report 2024/25 Submitted a report by the Head of Service (Finance) on the Treasury Management and Investment Annual Report and Prudential Indicators for 2024/25. The Treasury Management and Investment Annual Report 2024/25 for North Ayrshire Council was set out at Appendix 1 to the report. Councillor Larsen, seconded by Councillor McTiernan, moved the approval of the recommendations set out in the officer’s report. There being no amendment, the motion was declared carried. Accordingly, the Council agreed to note (a) the Treasury Management and Investment Annual Report for 2024/25 set out at Appendix 1 to the report; and (b) the Prudential and Treasury Indicators contained therein. 13. Congratulatory Motion In terms of Standing Order 15.3, submitted the undernoted motion, duly proposed and seconded, which sought to congratulate, commend or recognise an individual or group in relation to their achievement or activities within North Ayrshire: The current very successful Irvine and Dreghorn Band trace their roots to 1975, when local brass teachers with parents in North Ayrshire schools formed Irvine Youth Band. The band had many successes over the years. in 1982 the Irvine Youth and Dreghorn Youth bands merged to become Irvine and Dreghorn Band creating a huge band of around 45 members. Only a year later the band started to compete in Scottish competitions and by the end of that year had taken 1st place in the 4th Section at the Whitburn Invitational Contest. The average age of the competing band was only 17! Today (2025), the band still have players who competed in that very contest!
Page 5
2012 saw the exciting development of a third-tier to the organisation There was always a small youth band which sat side by side to the Senior Band, but the formation of the ‘Brasslets’ saw the youngest learners and complete beginners brought on board. They have since competed at the Scottish Youth Brass Band Championships and continue to go from strength to strength. Band members give of their time and talents teaching the ‘Brasslets’. In July 2014 the band performed in two prestigious gigs. Firstly, to royalty at the opening of the walled garden at Dumfries House where the Queen, Prince Philip, Prince Charles and Camilla were all in attendance. Next, the band entertained the world’s top sportsmen and women, marching and performing at the Athlete’s Village as part of the Commonwealth Games in Glasgow. A community asset transfer from North Ayrshire Council of the Dunlop Hall in Dreghorn, saw them decorate their new home making it welcoming to all and a fantastic asset with its many practice rooms. The main hall is capable of holding 80 attendees at regular concerts. In 2022, the band added yet another tier to their band family. A community band! This saw them welcome back players from yesteryears. Some had continued playing socially, others picked up an instrument for the first time in many years. They meet each Monday evening in Dunlop Hall and thoroughly enjoy playing for personal satisfaction. In 2023, the competing band came 1st at the Scottish Championships (3rd Section) and went on to compete at the Brass Band Championships of Great Britain at Cheltenham in the September 2023. The band continue to play at a variety of local events, contests and concerts and hope to see more success in 2025 as they join the 1st section of the Scottish Brass Band Championships. North Ayrshire Council notes the short history and congratulates Irvine and Dreghorn Band members, past and present, on reaching their 50th anniversary year; wishing them well as they continue to keep brass band music flowing in North Ayrshire. There being no dissent, the congratulatory motion was declared carried. 14. Questions In terms of Standing Order 14, submitted: (1) a question by Councillor Cullinane to the Leader of the Council in the following terms: “Can the Council Leader explain why she believes it was acceptable to suspend standing orders last year to review the budget decision to cut school librarians, but believes it would be wrong to suspend standing orders to debate reviewing the SNP Administration’s decision to cut school crossing patrollers?”
Page 6
The Leader of the Council thanked the Member for his question and responded in the following terms: “Councillor Cullinane is aware there is a process for decision making that all elected members signed up to. I did say at the last Council meeting there is a reason why councils agree that standing orders have to be suspended to reopen decisions that have recently been taken. If we didn’t have that we could be constantly revisiting decisions and have them come back to meeting after meeting. That isn’t good governance and it doesn’t make for good decision making. That doesn’t mean we would never revisit a decision and I believe it was right to do so in the case of school libraries because there was the suggestion that an alternative approach or model might be possible. That’s why I used my vote to overturn standing orders on that occasion. I would say that that would still apply in the minority of cases.” As a supplementary question, Councillor Cullinane asked if the Leader of the Council was aware that the road traffic accident data from Police Scotland showed 21 road accidents in the last 5 years on the roads in which the crossing patrollers were being removed and is she was still of the opinion that saving £92,000 removing crossing patrollers was not a risk? The Leader of the Council responded by advising that Councillor Cullinane asked why she thought it was right to overturn standing orders in one situation and not in another and that was explained. The Leader of the Council advised the supplementary question does not directly relate to the question asked. (2) a question by Councillor Inglis to the Cabinet Member for Green Environment and Economy in the following terms: "Can the Cabinet provide a clear update on the lift renewal project at Saltcoats High Flats, including the confirmed timeline for completion, the total cost, and what steps are being taken to minimise disruption for elderly and disabled residents during the works?” Councillor Gurney thanked the Member for his question and responded in the following terms: “Following a procurement process, the Property Management and Investment Team are working alongside the appointed contractors, Classic Lifts, to have the communal lifts replaced in Lambie Court & O’Connor Court, Saltcoats. Classic Lifts have provided a site start date week commencing 04 August 2025 and all residents of the flats have been notified of this by letter. Each lift is anticipated to take approximately 12 weeks to be replaced with one lift per block being replaced at a time before moving to the other. This will mean that residents will continue to have access to one lift at all times however this may not serve the floor upon which they reside. On the basis of this timescale, it is anticipated that the programme of work should be completed by mid-February 2026.
Page 7
Owners within the block are required in this instance to make a financial contribution towards the cost of the work as the lifts are a common element of the building. Overall, the anticipated cost of the works is £568,780. Please note that the Council have been able to apply a discretionary VAT exemption for this work in order to reduce costs for owners. Property owners will not be issued with an invoice until works are physically complete and will have the option to contact the Finance team to set up a payment arrangement where it is appropriate to do so. Housing Services are working alongside PM&I to develop a package of support for residents to minimise any disruption during the course of the replacement programme. To date, staff have surveyed all residents across both blocks to identify any mobility issues which may create difficulties during this work and to determine what support may be provided. Individuals with specific needs have been identified and we in direct contact with them to address their concerns and mitigate impacts upon them. Measures currently under consideration by our Housing team include making support staff available on site at set times of the day during works and the possibility of decanting residents who have the most severe accessibility needs.” (3) a question by Councillor McLean to the Leader of the Council in the following terms: “Prior to the last meeting of North Ayrshire Council, the Transport Secretary Fiona Hyslop announced the creation of a £4.4 million Business Resilience fund with the South Uist Business Impact Group for communities affected by ferry disruption - has the leader of the council engaged, either directly with the government, or through other forums such as the Ardrossan Harbour Task Force or COSLA to either get Arran and Ardrossan included in this fund or for the creation of a similar fund for them?” The Leader of the Council thanked the Member for his question and responded in the following terms: “Following the announcement, Council Officers have been in regular contact with both Scottish Government and Highlands and Islands Enterprise to seek clarity on the fund and the prevailing opportunity for our island businesses and have been advised that SG is “working at pace to get everything set up for the fund and are hoping it will be live before summer recess.” As of 19 June 2025, no further details have emerged. The Council stands ready to work with the Scottish Government, HIE and affected local communities, businesses and employers to maximise the opportunities the fund will offer through these challenging times. Concerns regarding the resilience of Ardrossan businesses were also raised and discussed at the last Ardrossan TaskForce meeting.”
Page 8
The Leader of the Council also advised that her concerns at the meeting were focussed on the potential purchase price of the harbour and ability to pull together the funding for that purpose, that would provide the best long term solution for the people of Ardrossan and Arran. As a supplementary question, Councillor McLean asked if all members could be kept up to date of any developments over summer recess? The Leader of the Council advised she would be happy to keep all members updated. (4) a question by Councillor Murdoch to the Cabinet Member for Communities, Housing and Islands in the following terms: “There is a fully constructed energy and storage facility built at Hunterston. There would appear to be no batteries in it yet and there is no sign of it being operational any time soon. Is the Cabinet Member and North Ayrshire Council concerned about this, do you know why it is not operational, and can you please provide a date when it will be operational?” Councillor Larsen, on behalf of Councillor Hill, thanked the Member for his question and responded in the following terms: “The site referred to was granted consent by Scottish Government Energy Consents Unit (ECU) in 2023. The site is not fully complete and remains under construction, being part of a wider development. The Council was a consultee to this development which has been lawfully commenced without a time limit being imposed by the ECU for completion. Officers will contact the site applicant to request an update for sharing with relevant ward members.” (5) a question by Councillor Gurney to the Cabinet Member for Communities, Housing and Islands in the following terms: "The owners of Seafield School in Ardrossan recently felled several dozen mature trees. Following the work the owners claimed that they had followed all necessary procedures. Scottish Forestry immediately imposed a Stop Order, forbidding any further work on the site. I personally witnessed this Stop Order being violated with the owners continuing work, ignoring the notices posted on the locked gates to the site. Would you please outline the Council’s involvement in this matter, including any permission sought or gained to complete this work?" Councillor Larsen, on behalf of Councillor Hill, thanked the Member for his question and responded in the following terms: “The landowner contacted the Council’s Planning Service by letter on 7 May 2025 advising of their intention to fell trees on the site. The letter referred to concerns from
Page 9
neighbours and inspection by a tree specialist. The trees referred to were not protected and therefore no consent was required from the Council. Following concerns raised regarding the tree felling, Planning officers visited the site with the Council’s Arboricultural Officer and it was noted that a number of trees that had been felled had visible signs of heart rot decay and fungal growth”. (6) a question by Councillor Kerr to the Leader of the Council in the following terms: “All elected members received a copy of the joint letter from the Garnock Valley Community Councils to the Council Leader which was scathing about her decision to shut down debate on the SNP’s administration's decision to cut school crossing patrollers. Given elected members were copied into the Community Councils letter, will the Council Leader publish her response to the letter and for it to be included in the minute of today’s meeting?” The Leader of the Council thanked the Member for her question and responded in the following terms: “I am happy for my response to be included in the minutes. I do want to say something about the language of Councillor Kerr’s question when referring to me. She talks about “her decision” to shut down debate. I am sure members in the chamber would be pleased to confirm that I don’t have the power to shut down any debate. I have one vote and one voice in this chamber just as she does.” (7) a question by Councillor Marshall to the Cabinet Member for Finance in the following terms: “In the Financial Year 24/25 how, much was spent by the Council Taxpayer on the utility bills of those employees working from home (WFH)?” Councillor Larsen thanked the Member for his question and responded in the following terms: “No cost was borne by the Council taxpayer on the utility bills of those employees working from home”. (8) a question by Councillor McLean to the Leader of the Council in the following terms: “With the Scottish Government now exploring purchase of Ardrossan Harbour, which has reportedly resulted in a current stalemate with allegedly slow moving processes from the responsible body, how likely is it that the current business case, which relies on Peel Port funding, will be scrapped or re-revised, leading to further delay in the harbour upgrade and the continued use of Troon Harbour for residents of Arran?” The Leader of the Council thanked the Member for his question and responded in the following terms:
Page 10
“At the last task force meeting, both parties agreed that negotiations for the Scottish Government to purchase the harbour are well underway but, of course, the outcome depends on agreement of a fair price to the public purse, as you would expect. It was also agreed that a routemap covering all options would have to be agreed as soon as possible to ensure there was no further delay regardless of the outcome of the negotiations. Significant progress was made on an updated Business Case prior to the Scottish Government’s announcement regarding investigating the purchase of the Harbour. The current draft Business Case may require to be refreshed or revised but much of the work carried out would still be pertinent including the socio-economic assessment undertaken with the Fraser of Allander Institute.” As a supplementary question, Councillor McLean asked if the Leader of the Council was confident that Ardrossan Harbour would be up and running before the Local Government Elections in 2027? The Leader of the Council responded by advising that there was always an approach in the Council that the issue of Ardrossan Harbour would not be politicised, that was the right approach and that all members want to see progression at Ardrossan Harbour as soon as possible. The Leader of the Council advised she would not comment on press releases from Peel Ports, as they are in the middle of negotiating a price with the Scottish Government and as part of their negotiations there would be upcoming press releases. The Leader of the Council advised she would continue to press the Scottish Government to get a decision as quickly as possible but understands that they have to do due diligence on the price they negotiate with Peel Ports and we all want to see it announced as quickly as possible. The Leader of the Council advised she would be in touch with all members with any developments regarding this. (9) a question by Councillor Murdoch to the Cabinet Member for Green Environment and Economy in the following terms: “At a meeting of Ardrossan Community Stakeholders Group held on 13th March 2025, it was reported that 17,500 litres of Heavy Fuel Oil that had been separated from soils and water during the remediation works, has been removed from the site for recycling and soil mass calculations, showed removal of 108 tonnes of Hydrocarbons from the soils, with an anticipated additional 110 tonnes to be removed on completion of all bioremediation (total mass removal of 220 tonnes). Will the Cabinet Member please provide members with a comprehensive list of all identified contaminants, hydrocarbons and amounts thereof found? How has the decontaminated soils and Heavy Fuel Oil been disposed of?
Page 11
Have all of the proposed sites been decontaminated and free from contaminants and hydrocarbons, and will he provide to members a copy of the letter or report on acceptance of compliance from the Leader of the Council and the Chief Executive?” Councillor Gurney thanked the Member for his question and responded in the following terms: “A total of 18,000 litres of fuel oil was removed from groundwater and from site to a licenced facility (in Paisley), 184 tonnes of hydrocarbons were removed from the soil via bioremediation allowing the soils to be reused on site and 18m3 of asbestos contaminated soils were removed from site to a licenced facility (in Lincoln). The details of the hydrocarbons and amounts thereof are included in the Phase 04 Verification Report Issue C. The final verification report has been prepared by a competent person as defined by Government guidance. The final verification report has been acknowledged by Environmental Health as the regulatory authority and commented on by SEPA in line with the in-ground remediation strategy. Hydrocarbon decontaminated soils have been treated in accordance with the remediation strategy and reused onsite. Heavy fuel oil was removed from site by a licenced contractor (Augean) and taken to their licensed disposal facility (in Paisley) in accordance with the remediation strategy. The disposal of materials is detailed in Appendix I: Waste Disposal & Consignment Notes of the Phase 04 Verification Report Issue C. The requirements of the scope of the remediation strategy have been achieved across the site. All site information regarding the compliance with the remediation strategy is provided in the Phase 04 Verification Report Issue C. The enabling works contractor is due to complete the enabling works contract in Summer 2025. Verification of the above ground enabling works is ongoing with Envirocentre and will be subject to review and where appropriate acknowledgement by Environmental Health. The remediation process has been followed in line with current legislation and guidance. The final verification report has been acknowledged by Environmental Health as the regulatory authority and commented on by SEPA in line with the remediation strategy. Copies of the final reports can be shared with Elected Members when SEPA has no further comments to offer.” As a supplementary question, Councillor Murdoch asked if the Cabinet Member would give a 100% guarantee that the whole site would be 100% decontaminated before construction of all buildings on this site? Councillor Gurney responded by advising that the decontamination standard employed was the highest standard available and was suitable for housing and not just other uses. Councillor Gurney advised that all sites contain some contamination, however the work was to the highest standard available and would be checked by the organisations referred to in the original answer. Councillor Gurney also advised building work would not start on the site until decontamination of the site had been
Page 12
signed off. (10) a question by Councillor Cullinane to the Cabinet Member for Education in the following terms: “To ask the Cabinet Member for Education how many applications for school transport were submitted through the flexiroute system in 2023/24 and 2024/25, how many applications were approved and how many were refused?” Councillor Macaulay thanked the Member for his question and responded in the following terms: “The Flexiroute system is operated by the Transport Hub in order to facilitate contracts/schedules with providers. The figures below represent applications sent to the Education Service for consideration. Applications via Flexiroute under exceptional circumstances* Total Approved Declined 2023-2024 July 2023-June 2024 149 120 29 2024-2025 July 2024 – June 2025 142 113 29 *Exceptional circumstances as laid out in policy a) Evidence of medical condition provided by doctor or medical consultant b) Evidence of additional support need c) Care experienced through residential, foster, formal kinship d) Temporary housing placement.” As a supplementary question, Councillor Cullinane asked the Cabinet Member to apologise for the accusation of causing anxiety at a previous Council meeting. Councillor Macaulay responded and advised his answer at the last Council meeting was in relation to social media posts from the labour group that suggested the SNP administration was full scale removing transport from ASN pupils, that was not the case and that did cause panic. Councillor Macaulay also advised there were some issues but when raised with Education the issues were rectified and those affected now have transport. (11) a question by Councillor Marshall to the Cabinet Member for Finance in the following terms: “In the Financial Year 24/25 what was the estimated gain or loss in productivity by operating the policy working from home (WFH)?” Councillor Larsen thanked the Member for his question and responded in the following terms:
Page 13
“North Ayrshire Council supports a flexible and skilled workforce by providing flexibility around how and where employees carry out their work, enabling them to maximise their productivity and performance. Through consultation with our Trade Union colleagues the Council identified four workstyles – each post within the Council being attributed to a workstyle: In Building, Mobile, Agile or Home. Managers play a vital role in ensuring their teams work effectively, regardless of location or workstyle. They achieve this by ensuring staff are clear on their required workload and monitor this through collaboration and engagement to achieve deadlines supported by regularly 121s. The Council recently conducted a survey on agile working and the results reflected that: • 80% of respondents felt that agile working increased the quality and/or productivity of work • 79% of people said that agile working improved their work life balance • 72% of people said that reduced travel time supported their health and wellbeing • 66% said that agile working reduced their travel costs • 62% said that agile working increased their job satisfaction • 48% of people who have caring responsibilities said that agile working helped improve their health and wellbeing.” As a supplementary question, Councillor Marshall advised his question had not been answered and asked if the Cabinet Member can provide the estimated gain or loss in productivity without referring to the workforce survey? Councillor Larsen responded by advising that managers play a vital role through managing their teams including having regular one-to-one meetings with their team members, regardless of where employees are based to ensure that deadlines are still met and the work was done. Councillor Larsen advised there are 12.5 FTE that work full time from home with the rest of employees working on an agile basis. Elected Members also have the ability to work on an agile basis and can join meetings on a hybrid basis. Councillor Larsen advised that we value and appreciate everything that staff do. She further commented on the increasing pressures and that staff work really hard to ensure services are delivered to the people of North Ayrshire and we thank them for that. (12) a question by Councillor McLean to the Cabinet Member for Education in the following terms: “In a previous council meeting I asked the member whether North Ayrshire Council’s policies and procedures regarding single sex spaces, including changing rooms and toilets - including those used by staff, children and young people - were compliant with the law. He assured me that all of our policies and procedures were compliant with the law and specifically rejected the suggestion that North Ayrshire Council may
Page 14
be contravening the law. In the light of the recent Supreme Court Ruling in favour of the biological definition of sex and gender, can the member please share with me if North Ayrshire Council has had to review or change any of its policies and procedures and if any resource has had to or will need to be spent to change or alter any existing facilities?” Councillor Macaulay thanked the Member for his question and responded in the following terms: “At the Council meeting of 14 May an amendment to a motion was agreed as follows: “Council acknowledges the recent ruling by the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom, issued on 16th of April 2025, and will ensure that all its policies, guidance and practice are in full compliance with the law including taking into account the EHRC guidance in the Court’s decision which is due to be issued in the coming Summer.” In adherence to this, Officers from PMI and Education are currently engaged in a scoping exercise to review all existing arrangements in our schools. An assessment of any costs that may be required can only be made once this exercise has completed and due consideration has been given to the range of the Council’s relevant legal duties.” As a supplementary question, Councillor McLean asked how the Cabinet Members confirm the veracity of responses to questions in the chambers before they make them? Councillor Macaulay responded by advising that Councillor McLean referred to a question he asked at the end of March but the ruling was made in mid-April and there were implications to that. The right course of action was to take time to look at what that means for North Ayrshire Council, so we are not in the position of giving inaccurate information in the Chamber. Councillor Macaulay advised it was a complex field that a number of Public Bodies were also finding their way through and that was the responsible approach. (13) a question by Councillor Angus-McDonald to the Leader of the Council in the following terms: “Having hidden behind standing orders to block a debate on their cuts to school crossing patrollers, does the SNP administration believe it would also be fair to block parents campaigning for their children’s safety from petitioning the council using the same six-month rule in standing orders?” The Leader of the Council thanked the Member for his question and responded in the following terms: “I take exception to Councillor Angus-McDonald’s language, I am not blocking anything. As I said earlier, we conduct our business in this council using a process
Page 15
that we have all signed up to and this kind of language doesn’t help reasonable debate. We had a budget meeting, groups put forward their budget proposals, a vote was taken and the budget was passed. The important point for me in this context, is what information was available to members when the vote was taken and whether or not there was the opportunity for our communities and residents to feed into the process. Council agreed to have a pre budget engagement exercise. It was one of our most successful engagement exercises, not just in terms of numbers but in the detailed feedback and comments. It was commended by the Accounts Commission. The engagement exercise included a proposal to remove the school crossing service completely. Respondents were not in favour of doing that and we had suggestions that a review be carried out as some areas are busier than others and have different circumstances. More than half our primary schools do not have a school crossing patroller. Comments also asked that we look at other factors relating to road safety. We agreed that a review should be carried out using a nationally recognised assessment process. This resulted in a decision to retain 22 school crossing patrols. Since then we’ve agreed to reduce speed to 20mph on roads and we will be launching a comprehensive road safety awareness campaign. The consultation exercise was thorough and the responses detailed. No petitions were received prior to the budget meeting in relation to school crossing patrols, but I am satisfied that the budget engagement feedback was detailed and I’m sure that some of those people that signed the petitions would have had the opportunity to contribute to the engagement process, that information was helpful and influenced our subsequent discussions and decisions.” As a supplementary question, Councillor Angus-McDonald referred to the road assessments and asked the Council Leader who she thinks was right, the external assessment done by camera or the parents that stand there every day? The Leader of the Council responded by advising that she was confident in the assessment process carried out across the schools. She advised that if any individual schools wanted to discuss safety at their schools, Officers would be happy to do that. The Leader referred to a meeting to discuss safety issues at a school without a school crossing patroller in her ward which discussed inappropriate car parking by parents. As some of the budget engagement respondents pointed out, school crossing patrols are not the only issue in relation to road safety and more than half of North Ayrshire primary schools do not have school crossing patrols. The Leader of the Council advised she appreciated the work parents have done at Annick on the survey but cannot comment on that as there were a lot of factors taken into consideration for the survey. The Leader of the Council advised she was happy for officers to speak to parents at Annick Primary School to discuss any safety issues specific to their school.
Page 16
(14) a question by Councillor McLean to the Cabinet Member for Green Environment and Economy in the following terms: “To ask the member regarding North Ayrshire Council plans on what it will do with its black bin and any commercial waste after December 31st this year? I ask this question as some members of the current and previous administration have now tried to jump on the bandwagon, claiming to have ‘always opposed’ the use of Waste Incinerators, like the one being built in Oldhall. Some members have tried to claim to opponents that the SNP and Labour parties have banned them, which isn’t true; we have a moratorium, a pause. And the stated reason that the government gave for the pause on new licenses is that there was a rush to build waste incinerators to meet this year's deadline, and that there was a concern about overcapacity. There has also been concern raised that current capacity is not sufficient and that this may mean sending waste to England or even abroad. Does North Ayrshire Council plan to send its waste for incineration and is North Ayrshire exploring or signing ‘bridging contracts’ with third parties to deal with our waste in the new year?” Councillor Gurney thanked the Member for his question and responded in the following terms: “The landfill ban to take effect 31 December 2025 covers biodegradable municipal waste and will have no impact on the current arrangements in the Council for the disposal of these waste streams. Since 2020 the Council has had a long-term partnership contract in place for the processing of our non-recyclable household (black bin) and commercial waste by incineration, as part of the Clyde Valley Residual Waste Partnership. The partnership is with four other councils, East Dunbartonshire, East Renfrewshire, Renfrewshire and North Lanarkshire, who are the lead authority. Viridor, who is the waste processing contractor, removes recyclable materials from the waste at their pre-treatment facility in Bargeddie, North Lanarkshire, prior to recovering energy and heat from the remaining waste at an energy from waste incineration facility in Dunbar, East Lothian. Further information is available at: https://www.viridor.co.uk/about-us/our-communities/clyde-valley/. As the Clyde Valley Residual Waste Partnership contract runs until 2045, the Council does not have a requirement to sign any bridging contracts with 3rd parties to deal with our black bin and commercial waste in 2026, as this waste is managed by Viridor through the Clyde Valley contract.” As a supplementary question, Councillor McLean asked how the current contractual arrangements align with the policies around community wealth building, will North Ayrshire allow waste from incinerators to go into landfill as the ban doesn’t extend to that and if we would be exporting our own waste while importing others? Councillor Gurney responded by advising that most waste in North Ayrshire is recycled and that the remaining waste goes to the incinerator. Councillor Gurney further advised that he was not aware of any remaining waste that was not incinerated but he will be happy to check on this for Councillor McLean.
Page 17
(15) a question by Councillor McLaughlan to the Leader of the Council in the following terms: “Who does the Council Leader think is correct – the SNP candidate in last-years Kilwinning by-election who stated one of her priorities was road safety around schools, or the Council Leader herself who thinks that removing existing school crossing patrollers is a matter of fairness?” The Leader of the Council thanked the Member for her question and responded in the following terms: “I think we can all agree that road safety is a priority without having to go back to the words of a by-election candidate from last year. What is fair to me is having an approach to road safety that is robust, transparent and consistent. For me it’s also more than just about journeys to and from school. That’s why we agreed at the last cabinet meeting to a 20mph speed limit on a number of our roads and why we will be launching a road safety campaign for children and parents later this year. For journeys at all times of the day for all of our children in all aspects of road safety. In relation to school crossing patrols, I’ve said previously that more than half of our primary schools don’t have them because of previous decisions and we really need to have an agreed assessment system, which we now have in place, and more regular reviews will be carried out, hopefully every two years because circumstances do change. We now have an agreed, robust approach to road safety at our schools.” 12. Motions On a point of order, Councillor Angus-McDonald asked the Provost if she would exercise her discretion in accordance with Standing Order 10.5 to alter the order of business to consider Motion (5) first. The Provost agreed to to exercise her discretion accordingly. In terms of Standing Order 15, submitted: (5) a motion by Councillor Angus-McDonald, seconded by Councillor McLaughlan, in the following terms: In terms of Standing Order 23.1, Councillor Angus-McDonald, seconded by Councillor McLaughlan intimated that they wished to move a suspension of paragraphs 15.4, 25.1 and Appendix B of Standing Orders, to consider and determine a petition to retain school crossing provision and previously refused under the 6 month rule. Members asked questions of clarification of the movers of the motion. Councillor Burns, seconded by Councillor Macaulay, moved the direct negative to the motion to suspend Standing Orders. The Monitoring Officer provided clarification that Standing Orders 15.4, 25.1 and Appendix B of Standing Orders Relating to Meetings and Proceedings of the Council are required to be suspended to allow consideration of the substantive motion.
Page 18
The Monitoring Officer also provided clarification that if Standing Orders were suspended, Council would proceed to hear from the petitioners and a similar process to the Audit and Scrutiny Committee would be followed. On a division and roll call vote, there voted “not proceed” with suspension of Standing Orders, Councillors Burns, Collier, Davidson, Dickson, Gurney, Inglis, Johnson, Larsen, Macaulay, Marshall, McClung, McLean, McTiernan, Robertson and Stephen (15) and “to proceed” with suspension of Standing Orders, Councillors Angus-McDonald, Bell, Cullinane, Currie, S. Ferguson, T. Ferguson, Foster, Gallacher, Kerr, McLaughlan, Murdoch, D. Reid, D.L. Reid, and Sweeney (14). The Monitoring Officer provided clarification that the threshold of 17 members had not been met for Council to proceed with the suspension of Standing Orders. Accordingly, the Council agreed not to proceed with suspension of Standing Orders to allow consideration of the substantive motion and the item of business therefore concluded without hearing the petition. (1) a motion by Councillor Murdoch, seconded by Councillor D.L Reid in the following terms: “That North Ayrshire Council explore the potential to use solar powered lights, security cameras and any other beneficial, low maintenance, solar powered items, that would benefit our constituents and constituencies”. Members asked questions of clarification of the movers of the motion. As an amendment Councillor Gurney, seconded by Councillor Larsen, proposed the following: “That North Ayrshire Council continue to explore the potential to use solar powered lights, security cameras and any other beneficial, low maintenance, solar powered items, that would benefit our constituents and constituencies”. Members asked questions of clarification of the movers of the amendment. There followed debate and summing up. On a division and roll call vote, there voted for the amendment, Councillors Burns, Collier, Davidson, Dickson, Gurney, Johnson, Larsen, Macaulay, McClung, McTiernan, Robertson (11) and for the motion, Councillors Angus-McDonald, Bell, Cullinane, Currie, S. Ferguson, T. Ferguson, Foster, Gallacher, Inglis, Kerr, Marshall, McLean, McLaughlan, Murdoch, D. Reid, D.L. Reid, Stephen and Sweeney (18) and the motion was declared carried. Accordingly, the Council agreed as follows: “That North Ayrshire Council explore the potential to use solar powered lights, security cameras and any other beneficial, low maintenance, solar powered items, that would benefit our constituents and constituencies”.
Page 19
In terms of Standing Order 6.8, the Provost agreed that the meeting be adjourned at 4.08 p.m. for a short comfort break, reconvening at 4.17 p.m. with the same Members and officers present and in attendance, (2) a motion by Councillor Marshall, seconded by Councillor Inglis, in the following terms: “Zero based budgeting is an approach to budgeting that starts from the premise that no costs or activities should be factored into the plans for the next year's Budget just because they figured in the cost or activities for the previous Financial Year rather everything that is to be included in the Budget must be considered and justified. We move, noting the Financial restraints under which Public Authorities are operating in Scotland, and in seeking value for money for Council Tax Payers, that North Ayrshire Council now adopt Zero Based Budgeting in principal and for the Financial year 26/27 introduce this in a phased manner commencing with costs and activities that are discretionary”. Members asked questions of clarification of the movers of the motion. At the invitation of the Provost, the Chief Executive provided clarification on the LGBF indicators that show our corporate services are among the most efficient in Scotland, we do not have a surplus in resources in that respect. In terms of zero based budgeting, we do not have the capacity across the Council but utilise this approach to an extent already when we undertake service reviews. The Chief Executive advised the approach was used to save £800,000 from the Economic Development Service and on the overspends in Waste to build up the budget. As an amendment Councillor Larsen, seconded by Councillor Gurney, proposed the following: “Zero based budgeting is an approach to budgeting that starts from the premise that no costs or activities should be factored into the plans for the next year's Budget just because they figured in the cost or activities for the previous Financial Year rather everything that is to be included in the Budget must be considered and justified. We move, noting the Financial restraints under which Public Authorities are operating in Scotland, and in seeking value for money for Council Tax Payers, that officers be instructed to provide detailed information of discretionary spend, allowing members the opportunity to have more detailed discussions with Officers when working through the 26/27 budget process and approach Budget Day.” In terms of Standing Order 16.5, and with the agreement of his seconder, Councillor Marshall agreed to amend his motion in accordance with the amendment which became the substantive motion. There being no further amendment, the motion, as amended, was declared carried.
Page 20
Accordingly, the Council agreed as follows: “Zero based budgeting is an approach to budgeting that starts from the premise that no costs or activities should be factored into the plans for the next year's Budget just because they figured in the cost or activities for the previous Financial Year rather everything that is to be included in the Budget must be considered and justified. We move, noting the Financial restraints under which Public Authorities are operating in Scotland, and in seeking value for money for Council Tax Payers, that officers be instructed to provide detailed information of discretionary spend, allowing members the opportunity to have more detailed discussions with Officers when working through the 26/27 budget process and approach Budget Day.” (3) a motion by Councillor Inglis, seconded by Councillor Marshall, in the following terms: “Council notes: • That North Ayrshire Council has committed to achieving net-zero carbon emissions by 2030, a target that is more ambitious than the UK Government (2050) and the Scottish Government (2045). • That the pursuit of this target has already incurred significant costs and places pressure on frontline services such as roads and education. • That many core powers for emissions reduction lie with national government and industry, limiting the local authority’s direct impact. • That local resident — including elderly people, working families, and small business owners — are facing significant financial pressures and expect Council resources to prioritise essential services. Council believes: • That Council spending should focus on core priorities that deliver clear local benefits, rather than meeting externally driven targets. • That accountability and affordability must come before ambitious policy goals that may affect service delivery. • That public confidence depends on aligning Council action with local needs, not political agendas. Council therefore resolves: • To formally withdraw its commitment to achieving net-zero carbon emissions by 2030. • Subject to adhering to its obligations under the Climate Change (Scotland) Act and any existing contracts: o To cease all projects, programmes, or spending being undertaken primarily to meet the 2030 net-zero target. o To instruct that no further reports, strategies, or officer time be allocated to the delivery or planning of the 2030 net-zero target”. Members asked questions of clarification of the movers of the motion.
Page 21
On a point of order, Councillor Gurney asked and received clarification on our legal responsibilities to the Climate Change Scotland Act The Monitoring Officer provided clarification that Council would continue to comply will all statutory obligations. Councillor Inglis advised he would be happy to include in the motion that all statutory obligations and contracts would continue to be adhered to. As an amendment Councillor Gurney, seconded by Councillor Larsen, proposed the following: “Council notes: • That North Ayrshire Council has committed to achieving net-zero carbon emissions by 2030, a target that is more ambitious than the UK Government (2050) and the Scottish Government (2045) • That many core levers for emissions reduction lie with national government and industry, limiting the local authority’s direct impact • That local resident are facing significant financial pressures and expect Council resources to reflect Council Plan priorities • The Climate Change (Scotland) Act 2009 places a legal responsibility on relevant public bodies to adhere to the Climate Change Duties • That the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’ noted in their 2018 Special Report that the world had until 2030 to limit global warming to 1.5oC before irreversible damage occurred to the planet Council believes: • That Council spending should focus on core priorities that deliver clear local benefits • That accountability and affordability must be key factors when defining our ambitious policy goals • That the residents of North Ayrshire are directly affected by the climate emergency, with this risk growing if action is not taken now, and that it is therefore vital net-zero remains a Council Plan priority • That there is significant potential for our journey to net-zero to positively impact the well-being of our residents, to create local employment and to provide community wealth building opportunities • That projects such as the solar farms at Shewalton and Nethermains; improving the energy efficiency of our tenants’ homes and our Council buildings; and adapting to the changing climate through schemes like the flood prevention works on Cumbrae have tangible social, economic and environmental benefits Council therefore resolves: • To continue to meet its statutory obligations and to work toward net-zero as part of a just transition in a way that is fair and inclusive to all.
Page 22
Members asked questions of clarification of the movers of the amendment. There followed debate and summing up. On a point of order, Councillor Todd Ferguson advised that Councillor Currie should not take part in the vote as he was distracted during the debate. Councillor Currie confirmed that he would take not part in the vote. On a division and roll call vote, there voted for the amendment, Councillors Angus- McDonald, Bell, Burns, Collier, Cullinane, Davidson, Dickson, Foster, Gurney, Johnson, Kerr, Larsen, Macaulay, McClung, McLaughlan, McTiernan, D. Reid, Robertson and Sweeney (19) and for the motion, Councillors S. Ferguson, T. Ferguson, Gallacher, Inglis, Marshall, McLean and Stephen (7) Councillor Murdoch and D.L Reid abstaining and the amendment was declared carried. Accordingly, the Council agreed as follows: “Council notes: • That North Ayrshire Council has committed to achieving net-zero carbon emissions by 2030, a target that is more ambitious than the UK Government (2050) and the Scottish Government (2045) • That many core levers for emissions reduction lie with national government and industry, limiting the local authority’s direct impact • That local resident are facing significant financial pressures and expect Council resources to reflect Council Plan priorities • The Climate Change (Scotland) Act 2009 places a legal responsibility on relevant public bodies to adhere to the Climate Change Duties • That the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’ noted in their 2018 Special Report that the world had until 2030 to limit global warming to 1.5oC before irreversible damage occurred to the planet Council believes: • That Council spending should focus on core priorities that deliver clear local benefits • That accountability and affordability must be key factors when defining our ambitious policy goals • That the residents of North Ayrshire are directly affected by the climate emergency, with this risk growing if action is not taken now, and that it is therefore vital net-zero remains a Council Plan priority • That there is significant potential for our journey to net-zero to positively impact the well-being of our residents, to create local employment and to provide community wealth building opportunities • That projects such as the solar farms at Shewalton and Nethermains; improving the energy efficiency of our tenants’ homes and our Council buildings; and adapting to the changing climate through schemes like the
Page 23
flood prevention works on Cumbrae have tangible social, economic and environmental benefits Council therefore resolves: • To continue to meet its statutory obligations and to work toward net-zero as part of a just transition in a way that is fair and inclusive to all. Councillor Marshall left the meeting at this point. (4) a motion by Councillor Foster, seconded by Councillor Cullinane, in the following terms: This Council notes and affirms: • The vital role that independent advocacy plays in upholding the rights, amplifying the voices, and improving outcomes for Care Experienced people across Scotland, enabling individuals to express their views, understand their rights, and participate meaningfully in decisions that affect their lives. • The commitments made in The Promise to ensure that Care experienced children and adults must have the right and access to independent advocacy, at all stages of their experience of care and beyond and must ensure that advocacy is separate from statutory organisations and service providers. • Its duties under the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (UNCRC), particularly Article 12, which guarantees every child the right to express their views freely in all matters affecting them and to have those views given due weight. We acknowledge the role of independent advocacy in ensuring that child-friendly routes to justice are accessible and effective in practice. • That the current levels of independent advocacy for Care Experienced people across Scotland may leave many unable to access advocacy at the point of need. This is unacceptable and undermines efforts to uphold children's rights and deliver on The Promise. • Council should be funded and supported to ensure that every Care Experienced person should have access to advocacy if they need it, to be heard, to be respected, and to thrive. Council therefore moves: • To support the Who Cares? Scotland “Action on Advocacy” campaign, which calls for a statutory right to Independent Advocacy to be included within the Care and Young People (Scotland) Bill. • To instruct the Chief Executive to write to the Minister for Children, Young People and Keeping the Promise Natalie Don-Innes asking her to ensure that such a right is included in the Bill, supported by sufficient funding and a clear framework for delivery. • To commit to reviewing the current provision of independent advocacy for Care Experienced people within this local authority area, identifying any gaps in access or delivery, and working with community planning partners who are also Corporate Parents to strengthen local provision.
Page 24
• To continue to engage with Care Experienced people locally, ensuring their views and experiences shape how independent advocacy is delivered in our area and influence our work on the Promise. As an amendment Councillor Macaulay, seconded by Councillor Johnson, proposed the following: In section "Council therefore moves" remove the third bullet point starting "To commit to reviewing..." delete point and replace with "To note North Ayrshire currently provides independent advocacy services for Care Experienced children, young people, and adults, ensuring they have a voice in decisions that affect them across a range of settings, including social care, health, education, and transitions. A Strategic Plan for Independent Advocacy has been approved by IJB. This plan outlines a coordinated approach to advocacy support, with objectives to improve access, ensure quality, and uphold the rights of individuals receiving care and support. The Council remains committed to: Continuing to identify and address gaps in the access to or delivery of independent advocacy across the area. Working collaboratively with Community Planning Partners, including those with Corporate Parenting responsibilities, to strengthen and enhance local advocacy provision for Care Experienced individuals. This work supports North Ayrshire’s ongoing duty to uphold the rights, wellbeing, and participation of Care Experienced people in all aspects of their care and life decisions." In terms of Standing Order 16.5, and with the agreement of his seconder, Councillor Foster agreed to amend his motion in accordance with the amendment which became the substantive motion. There being no further amendment, the motion, as amended, was declared carried. Accordingly, the Council agreed as follows: This Council notes and affirms: • The vital role that independent advocacy plays in upholding the rights, amplifying the voices, and improving outcomes for Care Experienced people across Scotland, enabling individuals to express their views, understand their rights, and participate meaningfully in decisions that affect their lives. • The commitments made in The Promise to ensure that Care experienced children and adults must have the right and access to independent advocacy, at all stages of their experience of care and beyond and must ensure that advocacy is separate from statutory organisations and service providers.
Page 25
• Its duties under the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (UNCRC), particularly Article 12, which guarantees every child the right to express their views freely in all matters affecting them and to have those views given due weight. We acknowledge the role of independent advocacy in ensuring that child-friendly routes to justice are accessible and effective in practice. • That the current levels of independent advocacy for Care Experienced people across Scotland may leave many unable to access advocacy at the point of need. This is unacceptable and undermines efforts to uphold children's rights and deliver on The Promise. • Council should be funded and supported to ensure that every Care Experienced person should have access to advocacy if they need it, to be heard, to be respected, and to thrive. Council therefore moves: • To support the Who Cares? Scotland “Action on Advocacy” campaign, which calls for a statutory right to Independent Advocacy to be included within the Care and Young People (Scotland) Bill. • To instruct the Chief Executive to write to the Minister for Children, Young People and Keeping the Promise Natalie Don-Innes asking her to ensure that such a right is included in the Bill, supported by sufficient funding and a clear framework for delivery. • To continue to engage with Care Experienced people locally, ensuring their views and experiences shape how independent advocacy is delivered in our area and influence our work on the Promise. • To note North Ayrshire currently provides independent advocacy services for Care Experienced children, young people, and adults, ensuring they have a voice in decisions that affect them across a range of settings, including social care, health, education, and transitions. A Strategic Plan for Independent Advocacy has been approved by IJB. This plan outlines a coordinated approach to advocacy support, with objectives to improve access, ensure quality, and uphold the rights of individuals receiving care and support. The Council remains committed to: • Continuing to identify and address gaps in the access to or delivery of independent advocacy across the area. • Working collaboratively with Community Planning Partners, including those with Corporate Parenting responsibilities, to strengthen and enhance local advocacy provision for Care Experienced individuals. This work supports North Ayrshire’s ongoing duty to uphold the rights, wellbeing, and participation of Care Experienced people in all aspects of their care and life decisions."
Page 26
(6) a motion by Councillor Cullinane, seconded by Councillor Sweeney, in the following terms: In terms of Standing Order 23.1, Councillor Cullinane, seconded by Councillor Sweeney intimated that they wished to move a suspension of Standing Orders 15.4 and 25.1 to reconsider a decision taken at the Budget Meeting on 26 February 2025 to remove school crossing patrollers. Councillor Burns, seconded by Councillor Macaulay, moved the direct negative to the motion to suspend Standing Orders. On a division and roll call vote, there voted “not proceed” with suspension of Standing Orders, Councillors Burns, Collier, Davidson, Dickson, Gurney, Inglis, Johnson, Larsen, Macaulay, McClung, McTiernan, Robertson and Stephen (13) and “to proceed” with suspension of Standing Orders, Councillors Angus-McDonald, Bell, Cullinane, Currie, S. Ferguson, T. Ferguson, Foster, Gallacher, Kerr, McLean, McLaughlan, Murdoch, D. Reid, D.L. Reid, and Sweeney (15). The Monitoring Officer provided clarification that the threshold of 17 members had not been met for Council to proceed with the suspension of Standing Orders. Accordingly, the Council agreed not to proceed with suspension of Standing Orders to allow consideration of the motion. (7) a motion by Councillor McLean, seconded by Councillor S. Ferguson, in the following terms: “That this Council reaffirms its commitment to genuine localism and community sovereignty and acknowledges the long-standing failure of centralised locality planning to protect the distinct identity, services, and economic prospects of smaller villages across North Ayrshire. Council recognises the deep erosion of civic infrastructure in communities such as Dreghorn and Springside - where local schools, libraries, and assets have been at risk of removal or amalgamation into larger administrative zones - leaving residents with fewer services, less say, and no meaningful control over their own futures. Council supports the principles outlined in the ‘Building a Local Scotland’ campaign and agrees that the current locality model disempowers smaller communities by subsuming them into bureaucratic arrangements dominated by larger neighbours. Accordingly, Council agrees as follows: • To instruct officers to bring forward a report including the financial implications of any recommendations to a future meeting of the Council outlining: o How this authority can create and empower structures beneath the current locality level with meaningful decision-making powers and input over local regeneration, planning influence, and budgets.
Page 27
o A full audit of what powers and levers of control are currently denied to villages like Dreghorn and Springside - and how these might be restored or devolved. o New mechanisms for allowing villages to lead on local high street renewal, economic development, cultural and community programming, employment schemes, and asset ownership. o Opportunities for villages to develop unique economic and civic identities, with support to pursue distinct regeneration strategies. o A review of relevant statutory frameworks - including the Islands (Scotland) Act 2018, and the Community Empowerment (Scotland) Act 2015 - to ensure full alignment with national expectations on bottom-up governance. The developing Local Governance Review should also be taken into account as part of the review. o A new programme for developing village-level community plans, treated as if they were statutory requirements akin to the Islands (Scotland) Act 2018- ensuring every village has a voice in setting its own priorities and direction. • To allocate funding of £50,000 from the Change and Service Redesign Fund for initial scoping work to be undertaken to inform the future report. Council affirms that no community - however small - should be absorbed, silenced, or sidelined. Power must return to the people, starting with the villages that are at risk to lose the most. Members asked questions of clarification of the movers of the motion. Councillor Murdoch left the meeting at this point. As an amendment Councillor Macaulay, seconded by Councillor Burns moved the direct negative. There followed debate. On a division and roll call vote, there voted for the amendment, Councillors Angus- McDonald, Bell, Burns, Collier, Cullinane, Currie, Davidson, Dickson, Foster, Gurney, Johnson, Kerr, Larsen, Macaulay, McClung, McLaughlan, McTiernan, D. Reid, D.L. Reid, Robertson and Sweeney (21) and for the motion, Councillors S. Ferguson, T. Ferguson, Gallacher, Inglis, McLean and Stephen (6) and the amendment was declared carried. Accordingly, the Council agreed not to proceed with the motion. The meeting ended at 5:35 p.m.