250917 Council Minute (Final)
North Ayrshire Council · 5 November 2025
Back to North Ayrshire Council — 5 November 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 17 September 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, Marie Burns, Eleanor Collier, Joe Cullinane, Scott Davidson, Anthea Dickson, Stewart Ferguson, Todd Ferguson, Robert Foster, Scott Gallacher, Tony Gurney, Alan Hill, Mary Hume, Cameron Inglis, Margaret Johnson, Christina Larsen, Shaun Macaulay, Tom Marshall, Louise McLaughlan, Matthew McLean, Davina McTiernan, Jim Montgomerie, Ian Murdoch, Donald L. Reid, Chloé Robertson, Ronnie Stalker and John Sweeney. Present (Remote Electronic Participation) John Bell, Charles Currie, Amanda Kerr, Jean McClung In Attendance C. Hatton, Chief Executive; S. Anson, Executive Director (Education); C. Cameron, Director (Health and Social Care Partnership); D. Hammond, Executive Director (Communities and Housing); L. Kirk, Head of Service (Economic Development, Growth & Regeneration) (Place); M. Boyd, Head of Service (Finance); F. Walker, Head of Service (People and ICT); A. Craig, Head of Service (Democratic), R. Lynch, Senior Manager (Legal Services); M. McColm, Senior Manager (Communications), C. Stewart, Committee Services Officer, and H. Young, Senior Committee Services Officer (Democratic) (Corporate Services). Chair Provost Dickson in the Chair. Apologies Angela Stephen. 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. There were no declarations of the Party Whip.
Page 2
4. Previous Minutes The accuracy of the Minutes held on 25 June 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 16 June 2025 to 7 September 2025. Noted. 6. Leader’s Report Submitted report by the Leader of the Council for the period for 16 June 2025 to 7 September 2025. Noted. 7. Council Minute Volume Submitted for noting the Minutes of meetings of committees of the Council held in the period 1 May – 1 September 2025. Noted. 8. Community Planning Partnership Board: Minutes of Meeting held in June 2025 Submitted report by the Executive Director (Communities and Housing) on the overview of the meetings of the North Ayrshire Community Planning Partnership Board held on 5 June 2025. Noted. 9. Findings of a Hearing Conducted by the Standards Commission for Scotland Submitted report by the Head of Service (Democratic Services) on the findings of a Hearing conducted by the Standards Commission for Scotland Councillor Burns, seconded by Councillor Macaulay, moved the approval of the recommendations set out in the officer’s report. As an amendment Councillor Inglis, seconded by Councillor Gallacher, proposed the following: That Council:
Page 3
(1) notes the report; (2) records its disapproval of the conduct of Councillor Donald Reid as established by the Standards Commission at its hearing on 30th July 2025; and (3) instructs Craig Hatton, Chief Executive of North Ayrshire Council to write to Councillor Reid to request that in the light of the decision of the Standards Commission, he considers his positions as Chair of the Police Fire and Rescue Committee, Vice – Chair of the Audit & Scrutiny Committee and his positions on the Ayrshire Valuation Joint Board and SPT. Members asked questions of clarification of the movers of the amendments. On a point of order, Councillor Burns queried whether the questions being asked were for clarification. On a point of order by Councillor Inglis in terms of Standing Order 12.2, the Provost asked that Councillors be respectful of the speaker. There followed debate and summing up. On a division and roll call vote, there voted for the amendment, Councillors Burns, Collier, Davidson, Dickson, Gallacher, Gurney, Hill, Inglis, Johnson, Larsen, Macaulay, Marshall, McClung, McLean, McTiernan, Robertson and Stalker (17) and for the motion, Councillors Angus-McDonald, Bell, Cullinane, Currie, Foster, Hume, Kerr, McLaughlan, Montgomerie, D.L Reid and Sweeney (11) Councillor S. Ferguson, T. Ferguson and Murdoch abstaining and the amendment was declared carried. Accordingly, the Council agreed to (i) note the report; (ii) record its disapproval of the conduct of Councillor Donald Reid as established by the Standards Commission at its hearing on 30 July 2025; and (iii) instruct Craig Hatton Chief Executive of North Ayrshire Council to write to Councillor Reid to request that in the light of the decision of the Standards Commission, he considers his positions as Chair of the Police Fire and Rescue Committee, Vice – Chair of the Audit & Scrutiny Committee and his positions on the Ayrshire Valuation Joint Board and SPT. 10. Annual Review of Governance Documents The Council was invited to consider the following reports in terms of the annual review of the Council's suite of Governance documents which regulate the operation of Council, its committees and officers. 10.1 Standing Orders Relating to Meetings and Proceedings of the Council and Committees Submitted report by the Chief Executive on the Standing Orders Relating to Meetings and Proceedings of the Council and Committees.
Page 4
Councillor Gurney, seconded by Councillor Collier, moved approval of the revised Standing Orders for Meetings and Proceedings of Council and its Committees as set out in Appendix 1 to the report. As an amendment, Councillor Inglis, seconded by Councillor Gallacher, moved to amend Standing Order 26.2, to replace “three Members” with “two Members”. As a further amendment, Councillor McLean, seconded by Councillor S. Ferguson moved: to amend Standing Order 15.1 paragraph one to insert after “Chief Executive” the words “not later than end of day on the Wednesday 2 weeks preceding the meeting, with publication as soon as is practical” and at paragraph two to insert after “Chief Executive” the words “not later than end of business on the Wednesday 1 week preceding the meeting and will be moved on the day of the meeting” and to amend Standing Order 23.1 to insert between paragraphs 1-2 “A motion to suspend standing orders must include a title and one line reference to which decision is being revised” Members asked questions of clarification of the movers of the amendments. Following a question of clarification, Councillor McLean with the agreement of his seconder agreed to alter his amendment to the following: “A motion to suspend standing orders must include a title and one line reference to which decision is being revised”. In terms of Standing Order 16.5, and with the agreement of his seconder, Councillor Gurney agreed to amend his motion to include Councillor McLean’s amendment which became the substantive motion. There followed debate and summing up. On a division and roll call vote, there voted for the amendment, Councillors T. Ferguson, Gallacher, Inglis, Marshall and Stalker (5) and for the substantive motion, Councillors Angus-McDonald, Bell, Burns, Collier, Cullinane, Currie, Davidson, Dickson, S. Ferguson, Foster, Gurney, Hill, Hume, Johnson, Kerr, Larsen, Macaulay, McClung, McLean, McLaughlan, McTiernan, Montgomerie, Robertson and Sweeney (24), Councillors Murdoch and D.L Reid abstaining and the substantive motion, as amended, was declared carried. Accordingly, the Council agreed to approve, with immediate effect, the revised Standing Orders Relating to Meetings and Proceedings of the Council and Committees set out at Appendix 1 to the report, subject inclusion that a motion to suspend standing orders must include a title and one line reference to which decision is being revised.
Page 5
11.2 Scheme of Administration Submitted report by the Chief Executive on the Council’s Scheme of Administration. The draft revised Scheme of Administration was set out in Appendix 1 to the report. Councillor Gurney, seconded by Councillor Hill, moved the approval of the revised Scheme of Administration set out in Appendix 1 to the report. There being no amendment, the motion was declared carried. Accordingly, the Council agreed to approve, with immediate effect, the Scheme of Administration, set out at Appendix 1 to the report. 11.3 Scheme of Delegation to Officers Submitted report by the Chief Executive on the Council’s Scheme of Delegation to Officers. The draft revised Scheme of Delegation to Officers was set out at Appendix 1 to the report. The Monitoring Officer advised that further revision was ongoing in light of recent correspondence sent to all Councils from the Accounts Commission. Councillor Gurney, seconded by Councillor Hill, moved 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 follows: (a) to approve, with immediate effect, the Scheme of Delegation to Officers, attached at Appendix 1; and (b) to note the existing Statutory Officers. 11.4 Other Key Governance Documents Submitted report by the Chief Executive on other key governance documents regulating the operation of the Council, its committees and officers. The Guidelines on Member/ Officer Relations, revised Standing Orders for Contracts and the updated Financial Regulations and Codes of Financial Practice were set out in Appendices 1-3 to the report, respectively. Councillor Gurney, seconded by Councillor Hill, moved 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 approve, with immediate effect, (i) the Guidelines on Member/Officer Relations, attached at Appendix 1 to the report; (ii) the Standing Orders for Contracts, attached at Appendix 2 to the report; and (iii) the Financial Regulations and Codes of Financial Practice, attached at Appendices 3a and 3b to the report, respectively.
Page 6
12. Committee Timetable Submitted report by the Chief Executive on a proposed timetable of meetings of the Council and its committees for the period from January – December 2026. The draft timetable was set out in the appendix to the report. The Council agreed as follows: (a) to approve the draft committee timetable set out at Appendix 1 to the report; and (b) to note that any ad hoc or Special Meetings would be intimated separately to Members. 13. Collaborative Working in Ayrshire Submitted report by the Chief Executive on the progress of collaborative working across Ayrshire and outline the recommended next steps. Councillor Burns, seconded by Councillor Macaulay, moved 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) note the progress to date; (b) approve the approach to further develop regional collaborative working opportunities across Ayrshire; and (c) receive future reports for consideration. 14. Questions In terms of Standing Order 14, submitted: (1) a question by Councillor Currie Cabinet Member for Health and Social Care in the following terms: “In their first media interview following their appointment, the new Cabinet Member said, “putting communities at the heart of things is the biggest priority”. Their first action in post was to second the proposal to cut beds at Montrose House. 97% of those who took part in the so-called consultation opposed these cuts. The IJB’s own paper showed that between 2020/21 and the current financial year, 48% of Arran residents who have entered long-term care settings have been required to move to a mainland care setting due to a lack of available beds on Arran. That was before these cuts. The Cabinet Member, this SNP administration, and the IJB, have all left island families worried that they will be separated by the sea if one of them requires care in the future.
Page 7
Why, in their first action, has the Cabinet Member broken their promise and treated our communities on Arran with such disdain?” Councillor Robertson thanked the Member for his question and responded in the following terms: “The paper and proposals presented to the IJB for consideration on 21st August were accompanied by a full and comprehensive options appraisal, an engagement report and equalities and island communities impact assessments. This was presented to the IJB for consideration following a previous report presented in June where further work was requested to be undertaken in relation to engagement and impact assessments. There had also been previous engagement with the IJB through the finance working group to share and develop the proposals. When acting as a member of the IJB, elected representatives and health board members have a duty to act in the best interests of the IJB. It is unusual for decisions at the IJB to lead to a vote to resolve, this was required for Montrose House, which demonstrates the difficult position faced by all members. In considering the recommendations presented to the IJB I took time to review all of the information provided to come to my own position and view. After much consideration I supported the officer’s recommendations, as my priority is to ensure we can in the future have safe, high quality and sustainable care services on the Island of Arran. There are benefits of the new model moving forward including: • Safe, sustainable care delivery – with reduced reliance on costly agency staffing • Compliance with safe staffing legislation • Continuity and consistency of care from core staff who can build meaningful relationships with knowledge of resident support needs • Access to respite provision both through the care home and the day services outreach model, all to better support our families and carers • The development, with the community, of an admissions policy, and • Opportunity to maximise the use of the rest of the Montrose House building, including opportunities for health and social care teams to be more closely located with the care home.” As a supplementary question, Councillor Currie referred to the Care at Home provision being increased to allow islanders to remain in their homes longer, and asked when the Health and Social Care Partnership would be in a position to allow this to happen given the current lack of success in employing staff? Councillor Robertson advised she did not have the information at present but would be happy to meet Councillor Currie to discuss the matter further. (2) a question by Councillor Stalker to the Cabinet Member for Communities, Housing and the Islands in the following terms:
Page 8
"Houses were demolished by NAC at Longbar, Dalry in 1999. The land has been left undeveloped, although the grass is regularly cut at the Council’s expense. Given the recent increase in private housebuilding activity in Kilbirnie, Glengarnock and Beith, would the Council consider selling the land at Longbar to help regenerate the area?” Councillor Hill thanked the Member for his question and responded in the following terms: “Housing Services are currently developing proposals to create Local Housing Plans for each North Ayrshire town/locality during 2026/27. These Plans will be developed through consultation and engagement with elected members and local communities and will include a detailed assessment of housing need in each town, for comparison against existing and planned future provision, and to identify any gaps to be addressed by both social and private housing supply. Linked to the Council’s land and property transformation programme, this work will help to determine whether the Longbar site should be retained by the Council for example for future social housing development through the Strategic Housing Development Plan (subject to funding availability) or re-marketed for other use with reference to our Council Plan priorities, Community Wealth Building Strategy and Local Development Plan. In the meantime, the site will continue to be maintained by Streetscene to an appropriate standard.” (3) a question by Todd Ferguson to the Cabinet Member for Education in the following terms: “Can the Cabinet Member for Education provide an update on the current provision of traditional Scottish music education in primary and secondary schools on the North Coast? “ Councillor Macaulay thanked the Member for his question and responded in the following terms: “The North Ayrshire Music Service’s upper string lessons incorporate traditional music education, with many string pupils showcasing traditional music in their SQA exams. We also actively support traditional music on the Isle of Arran through a partnership with North Ayrshire Libraries and We Make Music Libraries Scotland, offering fiddle and guitar workshops at the Arran Library. Our YMI (Youth Music Initiative) delivery to primary schools further promotes traditional Scottish music, using song, instrumentation, and classroom resources to engage students with the rich cultural heritage of Scotland.” As a supplementary question, Councillor Todd Ferguson asked if the Cabinet Member would facilitate a meeting with Largs Academy and local residents regarding the pipe and drum provision in the North Coast?
Page 9
Councillor Macaulay advised he was also very passionate about this topic and would be happy to facilitate a meeting. (4) a question by Councillor Foster to the Cabinet Member for Education in the following terms: “Can the Cabinet Member for Education provide details of what new approaches have been taken to strengthen early intervention and prevention, with a view to minimising the number of excluded pupils who are Care Experienced?” Councillor Macaulay thanked the Member for his question and responded in the following terms: “We are committed to supporting positive outcomes for all our children and young people with care experience. The Education Service Improvement Plan 2025-26, which was endorsed by Cabinet earlier this month, includes a number of workstreams that support the overall education experience of care-experienced children and young people. As an example of early delivery, we have developed an extensive professional learning offer for all staff in supporting dysregulated behaviour which can lead to violence and aggression, which remains the main reason for exclusion. The developing policy on Promoting Positive Relationships and Behaviour also includes clear guidance on Functional Behavioural Assessment, Positive Behaviour Planning and linked risk assessment. In addition, primary schools also now have a Targeted Support Teacher. This is a new role with a primary focus of supporting learners who we believe need specific assistance, including those who are care experienced. The post of virtual Head Teacher (Outreach Support Services and Care Experienced Learners) has recently been recruited and is committed to providing the best possible education outcomes to learners with additional support needs. This new post has been created to lead our Outreach Support Service, who support around 600 learners including those who are care experienced.” (5) a question by Councillor Stalker to the Cabinet Member for Communities, Housing and Islands in the following terms: "A block of flats was demolished by NAC at Baidland Avenue in Dalry during 2022. The site has been left in a derelict condition and serves no purpose. It is fenced off and the overgrown weeds are not maintained. Would the Council consider selling this land if it has no further use for it? Councillor Hill thanked the Member for his question and responded in the following terms: “The Council’s approved Estate Based Regeneration Programme included the Garnock Valley regeneration programme, which targeted the demolition of 48 low- demand properties within four streets throughout the Garnock Valley; eight of these
Page 10
properties were located on Baidland Avenue, Dalry, with demolition works completed in March 2023. As noted within the response to the previous question, options for the future use of the Baidland Avenue site are currently being assessed and will determine whether the land should be earmarked for future social housing development, retained as open space, or other Council purpose, or marketed for sale. In relation to the appearance of the site, options are currently being investigated to create a suitable maintenance access point and enable regular maintenance thereafter by the Council’s Streetscene team.” (6) a question by Councillor Todd Ferguson to the Cabinet Member for Communities, Housing and Islands in the following terms: “To provide an update on the steps the Council has taken in the last year to support veterans and their families under the Armed Forces Covenant?” Councillor Hill thanked the Member for his question and responded in the following terms: “Across the Council and Health & Social Care Partnership, a number of established supports are in place to further our obligations in respect of the Armed Forces Covenant. Over the past year, the HSCP continue to part fund the NHS Veterans First Point Ayrshire & Arran (V1P) service which specifically supports veterans and their families. To reduce isolation and improve wellbeing, weekly drop-in sessions are held at Veterans First Point offices in Irvine town centre, offering opportunities for social engagement and practical support. The service has also worked closely with North Ayrshire Council Housing and Riverside Scotland to ensure that veterans facing homelessness are provided with appropriate advice, assistance, and housing solutions. The services offered by V1P are accessible to all veterans living within Ayrshire. Veterans also benefit from prompt access to psychological and psychiatric assessment and treatment. The service is further enhanced by the role of the veteran peer support workers, who offer both individual support and group-based interventions. Notably, they deliver a peer-led support group for any veterans incarcerated at HMP Kilmarnock and operate a dedicated weekly recovery hub for veterans affected by addiction within the community. At a national level, the Clinical Lead of Veterans First Point Ayrshire & Arran sits on the Scottish Government’s Veterans Mental Health and Wellbeing Pathway Group. The objective of the group is to implement the Veterans Mental Health & Wellbeing Plan. A part of this plan is to develop a model of three regional hubs to deliver services across Scotland, and it is anticipated that Veterans First Point Ayrshire & Arran will assume a lead role in one of these hubs.
Page 11
From a housing perspective, the Council and the social landlords operating the North Ayrshire Housing Register (NAHR) give enhanced priority for housing to service personnel and their families. Where an applicant advises that they are a member of the armed forces or a service leaver, the NAHR landlords will signpost the household to the Veterans 1st Point Ayrshire and Arran service. Housing Benefit and Council Tax Reduction regulations allow for an element of disregard for payments from the Armed Forces where the pension paid is attributable to illness or injury received during service. North Ayrshire Council disregard 100% of any compensation, pension or payment deemed to be 'service attributable'. The Council also now applies the same disregards to income calculations when assessing Community Care Grants. North Ayrshire Council Education Service has been closely following the guidance from the Association of Directors of Education in Scotland (ADES) guidance to ensure that they fulfil the statutory duties regarding Armed Forces families and have an Education Lead and an Operational Lead for Armed Forces children and young people. There is a system in place to identify and record Armed Forces children and families. This information is used in schools to ensure consideration is duly given to meeting those young persons need given the challenges they may face. In addition, the various local Royal British Legions are supported on an ongoing basis by Information and Culture staff as they deliver community events, heritage based work and deliver activities in the local communities to raise awareness. This included involvement in the recent VE Day 80 commemorations as well as access to the VE Day 80 Funding that was available to support local communities commemorate the significant date in history. These measures demonstrate the Council’s continued commitment to the Armed Forces Covenant and to ensuring that veterans and their families are supported effectively across a range of health, social, education and housing needs.” As a supplementary question, Councillor Todd Ferguson asked if Councillor Hill would discuss the Valour Programme with the UK Government to ensure that North Ayrshire was considered a priority as a regional hub at the rollout? Councillor Hill advised that the Council would continue to do what it could to support veterans as they leave armed services in the future and if there were any initiatives that could be further investigated then officers would be happy to look at this. (7) a question by Councillor Montgomerie to the Leader of the Council in the following terms: “Does the administration support a cash-first approach to anti-poverty initiatives?”
Page 12
The Leader of the Council thanked the Member for his question and advised there was a general acceptance that the reduction in child poverty in Scotland compared to elsewhere was largely due to the Scottish Child Payment that puts money directly in the pockets of struggling families. The Leader of the Council advised that as a Council we were more restricted in what we could do but have been innovative in the past, for example supplementing bridging payments made to low income families and the energy fund payment cash supplements direct to families to help with fuel costs. As a supplementary question, Councillor Montgomerie referred to the use of second hand mattresses and asked if the Leader of the Council believed that this was treating those most at need in our communities with dignity, as upholding dignity shows equality and respect. In terms of Standing Order 6.8, the Provost agreed that the meeting be adjourned at 3.35 p.m. for a short in order to seek to resolve a technical issue with the Chambers’ microphones. The meeting reconvened at 3.50 p.m. with the same Members and officers present and in attendance. The Leader of the Council referred to Councillor Montgomerie’s characterisation of the project being inaccurate and advised that the Council had joined forces with Cunninghame Furniture Recycling to collect, sanitise and redistribute reuseable mattresses through the bulky waste reuse service. The project reduced the number of mattresses for disposal and North Ayrshire’s environmental footprint. The project had also created employment opportunities and offered a low cost credible alternative for residents hoping to furnish their homes on a budget. The Leader of the Council also advised the team were awarded a gold APSE award earlier this year and that mattresses were expensive and difficult to dispose of and the innovative partnership to sanitise and reuse them had been a great success. The mattresses were not forced on people and there was demand for them with other Councils also enquiring about this project. (8) a question by Councillor Marshall to the Cabinet Member for Education in the following terms: “Apparently the Scottish government uses 13 different measures for the size of the Poverty Attainment Gap - the gap between the richest and poorest groups of pupils. They include the number of pre-school children showing development concerns, levels of literacy and numeracy at primary school, qualifications and the destinations pupils go on to such as further education or apprenticeships ad nauseam. The recent Cabinet Report on Education measures the Gap between SIMD Quintile 1 and SIMD Quintiles 2-5. A Measure that minimises the Gap. However, a more realistic Measure is the Gap between SIMD Quintile1 and SIMD Quintile 5.
Page 13
Using that Measure can you exhibit graphs, similar to those appearing on page 43 of the recent Cabinet Report for the NAC Poverty Attainment Gap ,showing the proportion of students achieving grades A to C for SIMD Quintile1 and SIMD Quintile 5. for each of the Exam Results for National 5 and for Higher for each of the last 10 years?” Councillor Macaulay thanked the Member for his question and responded in the following terms: “The national attainment gap is measured using a comparison between learners living in SIMD Quintile 1 and those living in Quintile 5. This is because, at a national level, the proportion of learners who live in each quintile is approximately the same (at around 20% each). We use this data in North Ayrshire too; however, here almost 50% of our learners live in SIMD Quintile 1, with just under 10% living in Quintile 5. As a result, locally we compare the performance of Quintile 1 with Quintiles 2-5 because the size of both groups is broadly the same. The Standards and Quality Report (SQR), approved at Cabinet recently, displays this local poverty-related attainment gap. Our SQR also shows the gap between Quintile 1 and Quintile 5 within the table reporting on Stretch Aims, although the relatively low numbers in Quintile 5 require these statistics to be treated more cautiously Notwithstanding the above caveat on the number of learners within each quintile, the graphs below show the equivalent of those displayed in the Standards and Quality Report, but comparing Quintile 1 and Quintile 5, and specifically for the requested focus on National 5 and Higher graded qualifications. For reference, the national version of the graphs has also been provided. NATIONAL 5 (Grades A-C) (SCQF Level 5)
Page 14
To support the comparison of NAC and national performances, the tables below show the percentage of leavers achieving at least 1 National 5 qualification, with the green highlights to show where NAC performance was better than the equivalent national performance: NATIONAL 5 Quintile 1 at least 1 National 5 qualification (grades A-C) or better: 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 NAC Q1 77.6 % 72.9 % 76.0 % 79.8 % 74.6 % 77.0 % 81.1 % 78.6 % 77.0 % 71.8 % Scotland Q1 74.0 % 74.4 % 75.5 % 75.0 % 74.4 % 74.5 % 77.9 % 76.4 % 74.5 % 71.0 % Quintile 5 at least 1 National 5 qualification (grades A-C) or better: 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 NAC Q5 94.0 % 93.4 % 96.1 % 98.0 % 95.5 % 95.3 % 95.7 % 95.5 % 94.3 % 98.0 % Scotland Q5 94.9 % 94.7 % 94.8 % 95.0 % 94.6 % 95.3 % 96.1 % 95.5 % 94.7 % 94.6 %
Page 15
HIGHER (Grades A-C) (SCQF Level 6) To support the comparison of NAC and national performances, the tables below show the percentage of leavers achieving at least 1 Higher qualification, with the green highlights to show where NAC performance was better than the equivalent national performance. Quintile 1 at least 1 Higher qualification (grades A-C) or better: 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 NAC Q1 41.7 % 42.2 % 40.3 % 46.0 % 43.2 % 46.7 % 54.2 % 44.6 % 41.6 % 38.7 % Scotland Q1 41.2 % 42.7 % 43.0 % 44.4 % 43.5 % 46.6 % 49.5 % 44.1 % 41.5 % 40.2 %
Page 16
Quintile 5 at least 1 Higher qualification (grades A-C) or better: 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 NAC Q5 80.1 % 81.1 % 83.8 % 86.3 % 81.8 % 79.8 % 81.6 % 82.7 % 74.7 % 79.1 % Scotland Q5 80.3 % 81.2 % 80.6 % 81.8 % 79.3 % 82.7 % 83.9 % 81.1 % 78.3 % 78.6 % The complete published dataset at national and local levels relevant to this question can be found here: Supporting documents - Summary Statistics for Attainment and Initial Leaver Destinations, No. 7: 2025 edition - gov.scot As a supplementary question, Councillor Marshall referred to a previous First Minister’s aim to close the attainment gap completely by 2025, and asked what reassurances could be given that in the next 10 years the Poverty Attainment gap would disappear at all? Councillor Macaulay responded by advising given the information provided, North Ayrshire was performing well compared to the national picture. Quintiles 1 – 5 showed we were making an impact, however the biggest driver for attainment was the poverty levels. Councillor Macaulay advised we were making progress on Child Poverty in North Ayrshire which would contribute to improving the education attainment. (9) a question by Councillor Murdoch to the Cabinet Member for Green Environment and Economy in the following terms: “During debate on noting the paper regarding the additional funding for Ardrossan Campus, I asked if the revised budget would be £155,538,167, not £114.6 million as stated in the papers. This would mean an increase of £84,062,659, from the original budget of £71,000,475 can I ask which of these calculations is correct? An answer to this question was not available at this point, I received the following answer on 8th July 2025. “In response to your query, I can provide the undernoted information: • The total cost of the de-contamination, revetment and any other enabling works? £47.9m • The total cost of the new campus construction? £114.6m • The total combined cost of this project and everything connected to it? £162.5m • The borrowing rate for the combined figure? Not all of this combined figure will be subject to a borrowing requirement as we will seek to maximise income from other funding sources, including SUSTRANS and the Vacant and Derelict Land Fund, before undertaking prudential borrowing. Additionally, we do not borrow for specific projects or assets but rather as cash flow requires, utilising internal balances before resorting to PWLB borrowing. However,
Page 17
the costs to the General Fund for the provision of these assets would be based on the prevailing interest rate at the time of expenditure. The majority of the de-contamination, revetment and enabling works were undertaken during 2024-25 when the average cost of borrowing was 4.87%. The costs for the construction phase would be incurred during 2025-26 and 2026-27 and we are currently budgeting to achieve all required borrowing over these financial years at 5.3% or lower.” Can the Cabinet Member please inform this Council why the £162.5 million figure was not mentioned during the item at the June meeting?” Councillor Gurney thanked the Member for his question and responded in the following terms: “The report presented to Council on the 25 June provided an update on progress with the delivery of the Ardrossan Campus project along with the current financial position and 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. At the meeting, a question was asked regarding projected final costs for construction of the campus, the enabling works for decontamination of the site and the revetment works. The Head of Service (Finance) undertook to provide details of the costs to all members and subsequently did so on the 17 July.” As a supplementary question, Councillor Murdoch advised that without the enabling works, decontamination and revetment the construction of the campus could not have gone ahead and asked why the £162.5m figure was not mentioned during the noting of the report at the June meeting? Councillor Gurney responded by advising that he disagreed with the characterisation as all the figures were available through various Cabinet and Council papers. Councillor Gurney advised should any member require project breakdowns then he would be happy to provide the figures on a confidential basis. (10) a question by Councillor Foster to the Cabinet Member for Health and Social Care in the following terms: “Can the Cabinet Member for Health & Social Care provide details of our progress in keeping the promise, specifically relating to how many siblings in Care within NAC have been separated from their brothers or sisters over the past 12 months? How many instances of Care Experienced Children being physically restrained have been recorded over the past 12 months and what percentage of Care Experienced children have had access to independent advocacy as defined by The Scottish Independent Advocacy Alliance?” Councillor Robertson thanked the Member for his question and responded in the following terms:
Page 18
“The Corporate Parenting Action Plan captures all actions associated with The Promise. The action plan has been aligned with the 5 key foundations upon which The Promise is built - Care, Voice, Family, People and Scaffolding. In relation to the specific questions, I can provide the following update: • Over the 12 months to June 2025 a total of 42 children and young people who are part of sibling groups were received into care. 24 of those were placed with siblings, 8 were placed with not all but at least one of their siblings and 10 were placed separately from their siblings at the point of coming into care. • Over the 12 months to August 2025 there were a total of 39 incidents of physical restraint involving care experienced children within North Ayrshire’s children’s houses. There was a total of 4 incidents reported within schools in North Ayrshire over the same period. • Over the past 12 months, 240 children and young people have made the decision to access support from Hear4U. Hear4U in North Ayrshire is an independent advocacy service, delivered by Barnardo’s, and operates separately from statutory decision-making bodies. It provides one-to-one support for all care experienced children and young people aged 5 to 26. 100% of care experienced children have access to Advocacy, however accessing advocacy is entirely the choice of the child or young person, ensuring their right to decide whether and when they wish to engage with the service.” As a supplementary question, Councillor Foster asked if Councillor Robertson would meet with him and relevant Council Officers between now and the next Council meeting to discuss this further? Councillor Robertson advised she would be happy to meet with Councillor Foster and relevant Council Officers. (11) a question by Councillor Murdoch to the Cabinet Member for Green Environment and Economy in the following terms: “Can the Cabinet Member please provide separate costs of the decontamination and revetment of the land at the new Ardrossan Campus Site?” Councillor Gurney thanked the Member for his question and responded in the following terms: “From the total budget of £47.9 million to support advance works development of the whole Ardrossan Coastal Quarter site, a total of £3.9 million relates to land remediation and £18.1 million revetment costs which is part of an enabling works contract.” As a supplementary question, Councillor Murdoch asked what the £25.9m figure was used for, a breakdown of the £3.9m for the decontamination of the site and why the Cabinet Member refused to give a 100% guarantee that the site was 100% fully decontaminated?
Page 19
Councillor Gurney responded by providing clarification that the Campus was not the same as the site, the site being much larger than the Campus itself. The remediation and revetment works apply to the whole site which would provide a base for further works in the future. Councillor Gurney also advised he would be happy to provide more details of the costs to Councillor Murdoch on a private basis, given that some of them are commercially confidential so could not be provided in a public meeting. Regarding the decontamination of the site, Councillor Gurney referred to what he had previously said having been slightly taken out of context, as he had advised that no land was completely free of contamination. He further advised that works on the site had been done to the highest level of decontamination measured. (12) a question by Councillor Hume to the Leader of the Council in the following terms: “Having cut the number of school crossing patrollers, the Council Leader promised a road safety campaign in response to her administration's cuts. Can the Leader tell us when that campaign will launch because surely social media memes saying, “Stay Alert” and “Phones Down, Eyes Up”, is not the much-vaunted road safety campaign the Leader used to justify her cuts to crossing patrollers?” The Leader of the Council thanked the Member for her question and responded in the following terms: “Given the importance of road safety for all of our communities, officers are currently reviewing our road safety strategy which is a key priority of the Safer North Ayrshire Strategy, developed with a range of partners from across the Community Planning Partnership. The result will be a refreshed strategy and action plan which will form the basis of all ongoing road safety campaigns. This will include work currently underway with our schools through road safety education. For example: • Junior Road Safety Officer training. • Leaflets for schools. • Reflectors for young primary school children. • Walk n Wheel (a Sustrans active travel to school project). • iCycle training. • Secondary school 6th years – young driver event. • Travel Smart - Active travel to school - takes place in May each year, 27 primary schools participated in May 2025. • Junior road safety officer training is scheduled for mid-September 2025 and includes how to cross the road safely. Other measures will include: • New road safety leaflets being designed by Communications which will be offered to all schools in October 2025. • Webinars on road safety education within primary schools, scheduled for November 2025 to tie in with national Road Safety Week.
Page 20
The strategy will also address joint working between education, communication and the road safety officer to ensure a consistent but locally tailored approach across all of our schools. The strategy will not just focus on schools as accidents can happen anywhere at any time. It will include a number of initiatives delivered and planned by the council to improve wider road safety. Some examples are set out below. The enforcement of the Pavement Parking Ban ensures pavements are clear for pedestrians, including those in wheelchairs, with visual impairments, or pushing prams, who would otherwise be forced onto the road. This is helping a lot of people in their everyday lives. Complementing this is the implementation of Temporary Traffic Regulation Orders to introduce 20 mph limits across North Ayrshire, again reducing the likelihood and severity of accidents. The Scottish Government has recently awarded North Ayrshire Council £320,158 from the Road Safety Improvement Fund (RSIF) for 2025/26. This fund will be used to implement a number of road safety measures at various locations in North Ayrshire. Measures include anti-skid improvements and road markings, installation of improved crossing points, installation of high friction surfacing, extension to Vehicle Restraint Systems, installation of 3 new speed tables, junction realignment, provision of 2 traffic island crossing points, installation of road studs and the provision of 2 new mobile Variable Message Signs. The Council also liaises with the Scottish Safety Camera Programme where there are concerns over road safety and, in 2024, a new fixed speed camera was installed at Stoneyholm Road, Kilbirnie. If any resident contacts the Council with concerns on speeding, the Council undertakes an evaluation of the speed, considers if any additional measures are needed, and highlights speeding concerns to Police Scotland for further enforcement action, if needed. The refresh of the strategy is underway, but the activities outlined above will continue to be developed and delivered in the meantime.” (13) a question by Councillor Murdoch to the Cabinet Member for Finance in the following terms: “In the light of the BBC’s recent report into Scottish Council’s debt levels, (North Ayrshire Council showed Scotland’s third biggest rise in debt in 2024/25 – which increased from £319,364,000 in 2024/25 to £429,364,000 in 2024/25: an increase of 34.4 %). Will the Cabinet Member inform Members of the breakdown of the debt? Specifically, who the debt is owed to, for what purpose was the debt incurred and when was it incurred, what was or is the nature of the debt, eg, PFI, PPP, SFT, PWLB or held by Venture Capital Organisations such as banks or insurance companies? Have any such projects ever been subject to refinancing or
Page 21
renegotiation, and if so, what were or are the outcomes of the exercise in terms of both amounts still owed and contract end dates, what proportion of the debt is interest? What is the 2024/25 per capita debt for the constituents of North Ayrshire and where can the public view or access the figures, including historic data?” Councillor Larsen thanked the Member for his question and responded in the following terms: “Borrowing is undertaken to help fund investment in the Council’s Capital Programme across both the General Fund and Housing. This has and will continue to benefit North Ayrshire through delivery of key infrastructure that supports Council priorities. Recent examples being the completion of Moorpark and Montgomerie Park primary schools. In terms of governance, the 10-year Capital Investment programme is approved annually by the Council along with the Treasury Management and Investment Strategy. It is a requirement that capital plans are prudent, affordable and sustainable. At the 31st March 2025, the gross principal debt position of the Council was £429 million. This is inclusive of fixed and variable debt at an average interest rate of 4.89%. This includes £373 million borrowed through the Public Works Loans Board (PWLB), £21 million from Other local authorities and agencies and £35 million historic Lenders Option Borrowers Option (LOBO) loans. From the current debt portfolio, the Council continues to work with our Treasury Management advisers to identify financially beneficial opportunities to repay the LOBO loans. These are loans where the lender has the option to propose an increase in the interest rate at set call dates. During the year two of these loans totalling £15 million were called and the Council opted to repay the loans and again in May 2025, another £5.6 million loan was called, with the Council again opting to repay the loan. For 2024/25 the per capita debt position for North Ayrshire is £3,215. In terms of Scottish local authority ranking this is 16th highest from the 32 local authorities. It should be recognised however that this measure does not allow for a like for like comparison, as 6 local authorities do not operate a Housing Revenue Account, therefore debt levels would be proportionately less for these Councils. Affordability of borrowing is measured by the percentage of financing costs relative to the net revenue stream of the General Fund. In 2024/25 this was 3.3%. Capital expenditure impacts on the revenue budget through financing charges so it is essential the Council ensures the financing costs remain affordable and do not constitute an excessive proportion of the revenue resources available. From a General Fund perspective, the Scottish Local Authority average in 2023/24 was 5.8%, therefore demonstrating a prudent borrowing position for North Ayrshire. This information is reflected in the Council’s Annual Treasury Management and Investment report 2024/25 which was approved at Council on 25 June 2025.” As a supplementary question, Councillor Murdoch asked the Cabinet Member how long the Council could continue to operate and function under these pressures?
Page 22
Councillor Larsen responded by advising that the Treasury Management advisors continually monitor this, although with the Section 95 Officer. The PPP and PFI contracts were not billed through the Capital Budget and were not associated with the debt. Councillor Larsen advised the borrowing equates to around 3.3% of our financing costs which was significantly less than the Local Authorities national guidelines which was average of 5.8%. (14) a question by Councillor Montgomerie to the Cabinet Member for Green Environment and Economy in the following terms: “Can the Cabinet Member explain why the railing and footpath around the Saltcoats Harbour Tower has not been fixed yet?” Councillor Gurney thanked the Member for his question and responded in the following terms: “The Saltcoats Harbour Tower was among a number of assets damaged by Storm Eowyn. The Roads Engineering Services team have been prioritising the repairs resulting from the storm, the force of which caused significant damage to infrastructure. The design and procurement for the Turret repair has already been completed. A contractor has been appointed for other works including the footpath and railing to commence 22 September 2025. There will be additional signage and a notice board installed at a later date.” As a supplementary question, Councillor Montgomerie asked if the railings and footpath that had fallen into the water would be removed and when this would happen? Councillor Gurney advised he would get back to Councillor Montgomerie with this information. (15) a question by Councillor Currie to the Leader of the Council in the following terms: “As co-chair of the Ardrossan task force, can the Council Leader update us on progress to bring Ardrossan Harbour into public ownership?” The Leader of the Council thanked the Member for his question and responded in the following terms: “A letter to the Ardrossan Task Force Members was received from the Cabinet Secretary Transport on 1 September 2025. This provided an update on the port purchase position and negotiations following the last meeting of the Task Force in April 2025. This was shared by the Chief Executive with Elected Members on 2 September 2025.”
Page 23
As a supplementary question, Councillor Currie asked if the Leader of the Council had confidence that Caledonian Maritime Assets Limited (CMAL) would bring the negotiations with Peel Ports to a satisfactory conclusion within an acceptable timeframe, or if representations should be made to the Scottish Government to hand over the negotiations to a body more experienced in this type of negotiation? The Leader of the Council responded by advising the letter was good news and the heads of terms was a good position to be in, that we had come a long way and it would be inappropriate to change the negotiation team now. 15. Motions In terms of Standing Order 15, submitted: (1) a motion by Councillor Inglis, seconded by Councillor Gallacher, in the following terms: Council considers that: • Constituents expect North Ayrshire councillors from different political parties and ideologies to work together to better their lives, towns and villages in the area. • A budget working group would allow councillors to come together to help form North Ayrshire Council's 26/27 budget • Furthermore, a budget working group through a collaborative approach could also help avoid Council revisiting recent budget decisions and focus on future budgets. Therefore, Council agrees: • To create a budget working group and • That the group: • Will be made up of two members of each political group and the three independent members; • Include relevant senior officers to provide financial and strategic advice; • Begin meeting during October 2025; • Consider budget pressures, service priorities, savings proposals and opportunities for investment; • Facilitate open discussion and early engagement ahead of formal budget setting. Members asked questions of clarification of the movers of the motion. As an amendment Councillor Cullinane, seconded by Councillor Foster, proposed the direct negative. There followed debate and summing up.
Page 24
On a division and roll call vote, there voted for the amendment, Councillors Angus- McDonald, Bell, Cullinane, Currie, Foster, Hume, Kerr, McLaughlan, Montgomerie and Sweeney (10) and for the motion, Councillors Burns, Collier, Davidson, Dickson, S. Ferguson, T. Ferguson, Gallacher, Gurney, Hill, Inglis, Johnson, Larsen, Macaulay, Marshall, McClung, McLean, McTiernan, Murdoch, Robertson and Stalker (20) Councillor D.L Reid abstaining and the motion was declared carried. Accordingly, the Council agreed as follows: Council considers that: • Constituents expect North Ayrshire councillors from different political parties and ideologies to work together to better their lives, towns and villages in the area. • A budget working group would allow councillors to come together to help form North Ayrshire Council's 26/27 budget • Furthermore, a budget working group through a collaborative approach could also help avoid Council revisiting recent budget decisions and focus on future budgets. Therefore, Council agrees: • To create a budget working group and • That the group: • Will be made up of two members of each political group and the three independent members; • Include relevant senior officers to provide financial and strategic advice; • Begin meeting during October 2025; • Consider budget pressures, service priorities, savings proposals and opportunities for investment; • Facilitate open discussion and early engagement ahead of formal budget setting. (2) a motion by Councillor Inglis, seconded by Councillor Stalker in the following terms: Mixed Tenure Repairs & Maintenance Grant Fund Motion • Notes the growing financial pressures faced by private owners in Council- factored blocks, particularly in relation to the affordability of major common repairs and maintenance such as lift replacements, roofing and essential building works. • Recognises that while the Council’s Scheme of Assistance and repayment arrangements are available, these measures do not always provide timely or sufficient support for owners facing large and unavoidable repair costs. • Agrees to the principle of establishing a Mixed Tenure Repairs & Maintenance Grant Fund with an initial budget of £500,000, to be financed as follows:
Page 25
• £250,000 from Energy Smart • £250,000 from Transformation Funds • Agrees that the Fund will be subject to strict eligibility criteria to ensure it supports works in Council factored private properties that is focused on repairs and maintenance that: • is essential to ensure homes are wind and watertight; • meets statutory or regulatory compliance standards; and/or • supports accessibility and building security improvements. • Requests that officers bring forward a detailed scheme for administering the Fund, including eligibility criteria, assessment arrangements, relevant integrated impact assessments demonstrating that any adverse impacts can be appropriately mitigated and officer resourcing implications, for approval at a future meeting. As an amendment Councillor Hill, seconded by Councillor Collier, proposed the following: “North Ayrshire Council instructs officers to accelerate a review of the Council’s Scheme of Assistance. The scope of that review should extend to consideration of the evidence base for any further interventions including the potential for a means- tested support fund for common repairs in Council factored blocks and how this might be funded and operated should a case be demonstrated. This will also allow a little time to investigate a business case and allow for other implications to be more fully considered, including gathering data on factoring charges, the take-up of repayment plans, any particular areas of concern in progressing repairs and maintenance, funding options, benchmarking of any other authority approaches in this area, as well as all legal and ECRIA and other considerations. This work will be reported to a future Policy Advisory Panel for further engagement and following feedback from members will form the basis of a report to Full Council.” Members asked questions of clarification of the movers of the amendment. In terms of Standing Order 16.5, and with the agreement of his seconder, Councillor Inglis 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:
Page 26
“North Ayrshire Council instructs officers to accelerate a review of the Council’s Scheme of Assistance. The scope of that review should extend to consideration of the evidence base for any further interventions including the potential for a means- tested support fund for common repairs in Council factored blocks and how this might be funded and operated should a case be demonstrated. This will also allow a little time to investigate a business case and allow for other implications to be more fully considered, including gathering data on factoring charges, the take-up of repayment plans, any particular areas of concern in progressing repairs and maintenance, funding options, benchmarking of any other authority approaches in this area, as well as all legal and ECRIA and other considerations. This work will be reported to a future Policy Advisory Panel for further engagement and following feedback from members will form the basis of a report to Full Council.” (3) a motion by Councillor Montgomerie, seconded by Councillor Angus-McDonald, in the following terms: “Members acknowledge the dynamic nature of the common housing register, with an applicants’ relative position on the list subject to daily change based on many factors such as new applications joining the register, the latest allocations and the outcome of accessibility assessments. Council also recognises that the allocation policy is a group-plus-points one and that subject to interest in areas and house types, the number of points that an applicant requires to be made an offer fluctuates from town to town, street to street, and property to property. Whilst acknowledging the above, the Council supports the principle of being more transparent with applicants over their housing prospects and agrees to explore ways in which we can share more information about allocations with housing applicants. Council therefore requests officers to bring a report back to Council outlining options that will enable residents to access more transparent information about housing allocations within their choices.” Members asked questions of clarification of the movers of the motion. On a point of order, Councillor McLean in terms of Standing Order 15.5, sought clarification on whether specific budget allocation for the costs associated with the proposal should be made. At the invitation of the Provost, the Chief Executive provided clarification that work was already underway in a particular form and that while we would not be able to provide specifics on where someone was on the housing register, an indication would be able to be provided through the development of the housing dashboard. The Executive Director (Communities and Housing) provided clarification that the Council runs a dynamic register as applicant priorities change on a daily basis due to new allocations made, reassessment of existing applications and new applications received. The Housing register was shared and operated in conjunction with four
Page 27
other registered social landlords, therefore the nature of the register and number of variables meant that it was not possible to predict accurately when an offer may be made. The Executive Director (Communities and Housing) also advised the service worked with applicants regularly to help them maximise an offer, had annual reviews and met with applicants every 12 months. The Monitoring Officer provided clarification that as work was already underway in this area specific further budget allocation was not required. As an amendment Councillor Hill, seconded by Councillor Collier, proposed the direct negative. There followed debate and summing up. On a division and roll call vote, there voted for the amendment, Councillors Burns, Collier, Davidson, Dickson, T. Ferguson, Gallacher, Gurney, Hill, Johnson, Larsen, Macaulay, McClung, McTiernan and Robertson (14) and for the motion, Councillors Angus-McDonald, Bell, Cullinane, Currie, S. Ferguson, Foster, Hume, Kerr, McLean, McLaughlan, Montgomerie, Stalker and Sweeney (13) Councillor Inglis, Marshall, Murdoch and D.L Reid abstaining and the and the amendment was declared carried. Accordingly, the Council agreed not to proceed with the motion. The meeting ended at 5:00 p.m.