Agenda item

(1)          To receive any questions by Members submitted in pursuance of Standing Order 8 (3).

 

Public Questions

 

(2)          To answer any questions from the public submitted under Standing Order 9 in accordance with the Procedure Note.

(1)  Standing Order 8 – Questions

 

The Mayor reported that no urgent questions had been submitted under Standing Order 8 (3).

 

(2)  Public Questions

 

Further to the new scheme for public questions at full Council meetings, the questions that had been accepted had been circulated to Members in advance. Each question was received as set out below, and the Mayor invited a response to each in turn:

 

(1)  Peter Crerar – Manor Park Ward – Council Tax Rise - In 2023, Keir Starmer said: “If there was a Labour government, you could take that council tax rise you just got and rip it up...” “Yes, you heard it right, not a penny more on your council tax”

 

The Labour government has allowed councils to raise council tax by up to 5% without a local referendum for the 2025-2026 financial year, including Rushmoor.

 

Does the Leader of the Council believe that Keir Starmer was making empty promises and is the leader of the council happy for the residents of Rushmoor to rip up their council tax bills as Keir Starmer suggested?

 

Cllr Gaynor Austin, Portfolio Holder for Finance and Resources advised that Council tax was important for providing the essential services on which residents rely, and although Rushmoor was responsible for collecting the Council Tax, the Council only kept around 12% of it.

 

The context of the quote from 2023 was about how a windfall tax on energy firms would have been used in that year to support people through cost-of-living pressures and not a commitment to scrap council tax forever.  This was not a policy that was implemented by the government at that time. Local council taxation increased as a response to austerity. 

 

In the latest announcement for local council funding, there was a longer-term funding commitment from government. However, Rushmoor Borough Council had only been allowed a 3% increase in its rate (not 5%) and would be limited to this again in 2026. The 5% increase was applicable to County Councils – 3% + 2% specifically for Adult Social Services. Rushmoor Borough Council’s allowable Council Tax increase for the 2025/26 financial year was 2% without referendum.

 

(2)  Vince Bramley – Rowhill Ward - Location of Howitzer - Could the Council update on plans for the Howitzer that was outside Aldershot train station roundabout. It was donated by the army many years ago but removed for much-needed restoration. I was informed last year that a possible new position was the roundabout by Burger King.  But funds are not available, and HCC would have to take over the works as it would be on the highway. May I suggest that a fitting and visible location for it would be next to the WW2 memorial beside the Princes Hall steps – where is the Howitzer and how much longer will it be missing?

 

Cllr Julie Hall, Portfolio Holder for Economy, Skills and Growth advised that the Council finished refurbishment of the Howitzer earlier this year and it was currently stored at one of the Council’s depots. The intention was to site the howitzer at Gun Hill. Unfortunately, Hampshire County Council were concerned that this may prejudice future improvements identified in the Local Cycling and Walking Strategy. Further work was required to try and resolve the issue, and it was intended to pursue the matter in January, and alternative locations would be considered. A location close to the WW2 memorial would be included in that exercise.

 

(3)  A resident of Cove and Southwood – Councillors Social Media - Should councillors be using their council social media accounts to promote their own businesses?

 

Cllr Sophie Porter, Deputy Leader of the Council, advised that councillors were subject to the Code of Conduct when using social media accounts which identified them as members, and promoting a business via such an account may be a breach of the Code. Where members needed guidance on the use of social media the advice of the Monitoring Officer should be sought. Where members or residents consider councillors may be breaching the Code, they should contact the Monitoring Officer.

 

(4)  Dean Llewhellyn, St Marks Ward - Grounds Maintenance - Lynchford Rd and Napier Gardens - Can you arrange better up-keep and maintenance of Lynchford Road verges, roundabouts and Napier Gardens car park?

 

Cllr Christine Guinness, Portfolio Holder for Pride in Place and Neighbourhood Services, advised that these areas were contractually maintained in accordance with standards of maintenance applied across the entire borough of Rushmoor, therefore, it was not feasible, practical or affordable to permanently enhance maintenance in one specific area. However, the Council did recently coordinate the Community Payback Team visiting the area for a general clear-up and some leaf removal.

 

(5)  Craig Sinclair – Cherrywood Ward - Elections 2026 - Will Rushmoor council be holding democratic elections in May 2026?

 

Cllr Sophie Porter, Deputy Leader of the Council and Portfolio Holder for Healthy Communities and Active Lives, advised that the Council were currently planning for local Rushmoor Borough Elections and Hampshire County Council Elections to take place on Thursday 7th May 2026.

 

However, it was announced today that the planned inaugural Mayoral Election for the Combined County Authority of Hampshire and the Solent, that was also to take place in the coming May, would now not take place until 2028.

 

(6)  Andrew McLeod – Cove and Southwood Ward - Grounds Maintenance - Condition of Road/Footpath Arrow Rd - When will attention be given to Arrow Road area of Farnborough?  North from the Costco roundabout is breaking up. 5 oak trees on the left side are dead or dying, flooding makes the foot path/cycle path impassable when heavy rainfall. Fly tipping takes place, hedge row out of control, previously, reported to local councillors and HCC Councillor, dead branches fall on verge and foot path.

 

Cllr Christine Guinness, Portfolio Holder for Pride in Place and Neighbourhood Services, advised that a number of the points raised in this question fell outside of the responsibility of this Council. The carriageway and footpath or cycle path surface and any highway flooding was the responsibility of Hampshire County Council (HCC). The trees along Arrow Road were all owned by the Ministry of Defence. Rushmoor’s Tree Officer had previously raised concerns about these trees to HCC, due to the risk of limbs/debris falling onto the adopted highway (which is their responsibility). Rushmoor cut the grass along the west side of Arrow Road, which is in accordance with the agency agreement with the County Council. The hedgerow along the east side of Arrow Road was situated within the adopted public highway and was therefore also the responsibility of the County Council, who were responsible for ensuring it did not encroach the public highway. Fly tips that occur along the highway could be reported to Rushmoor for investigation and removal.

 

(7)  Sally McGuinness – Cherrywood Ward - Prospect Estate Graffiti - The graffiti is increasing too much on the Prospect Estate. Can something be done about it other than cleaning it up, which is not being done? Something like a campaign to put posters up saying there is a greater penalty for anyone who is doing graffiti and that council tax is increasing to pay for the cleaning up, so that's less money to spend on the pens and paint.

 

Cllr Christine Guinness, Portfolio Holder for Pride in Place and Neighbourhood Services, advised that the Council was seeing an increase in graffiti across the Borough and had been redirecting resources in order to manage the issue. This week Council workers had removed a large quantity of graffiti in Moor Road and the surrounding area. The Council encouraged anyone with information about those graffitiing communities to make contact with the Place Protection Team.   

 

(8)  A resident of North Town Ward - Residents of Potters International - By now, many inhabitants of Potter’s hotel on the Farnborough Rd will have been granted leave to remain and released into the community. Can the council provide a breakdown of how many people this has been to date, their ethnicities, where they have been actually housed and by which authority and / or organisation? Can the council also provide any information also on the tents that have popped up opposite Potters, who’s inside them and what they are going to do about them?

 

Cllr Keith Dibble, Portfolio Holder for Housing and Planning, advised that the question raised a number of points that would be addressed in turn:

 

Asylum and immigration decisions - Decisions about asylum and immigration, including the granting of leave to remain, were made by the Home Office. The Council did not hold information about individuals’ immigration status, personal data or where they go when they leave the hotel.

 

Housing after leave to remain - When people were granted leave to remain, they were free to move to any part of the country. The Council had received only a small number of approaches to the housing team. Most people leaving Potters were moving to areas where they had relatives, friends, or established communities.

 

Tents opposite Potters – The Council’s teams were aware that there had been tents opposite Potters and had visited the site on many occasions and were engaging with any occupants. Where individuals were found to be homeless, advice and support was offered through outreach services. The Council’s teams would also refer to other agencies in appropriate cases. At this stage, the Council were aware that there was one tent remaining. Officers continue to monitor the situation carefully to safeguard individuals and maintain community safety.

 

(9)  Daz Brady – Rowhill Ward - Assurance on responsibly installed Flags - Given the positive relationship between Rushmoor Borough Council and local residents regarding the Union Jack flags displayed on lampposts—particularly those maintained by members of Rushmoor People First—can the Council confirm that this cooperative approach will continue? Specifically, can we be assured that where flags are responsibly installed and maintained by volunteers, and where they cause no safety issues, obstructions, or interference with road signs, the Council will continue allowing them to remain unchallenged? This arrangement has worked well for the community, and we would appreciate confirmation that it will be upheld.

 

Cllr Sophie Porter, Deputy Leader of the Council, advised that the Council realised that this was a very sensitive issue. Many residents had made strong representations to the Council both in support of flags and in opposition to flags. The Council had contacted the County Council, which owned lampposts on public highways, for a view and they had confirmed that as long as flags were not dangerous or obscuring signage then they would not be taking immediate steps to remove them. Since that time, the Council had not taken any further action on this matter. However, this matter was subject to a debate later on this evening’s agenda.

 

(10)  Leo Mellet - Rushmoor People First - Military Sites for Housing Migrants - Has there been any enquiries or discussions from or with any party regarding the use of any of Rushmoor/Aldershot's military sites for the housing of migrants? If so, and even if not, what is the council’s position on these sites being used in this way?

 

Cllr Keith Dibble, Portfolio Holder for Housing and Planning, advised that the Council were not aware of any enquiries or discussions on the use of military sites in Rushmoor to house migrants. The Council would need to consider the situation if and when it arose.