Agenda item

To consider the attached Notices of Motion, submitted in accordance with Rule 4a.26 of the Council’s Constitution:

(a)  Proposed by Councillor Roger Noel: The motion proposes that the Council calls upon the Leader and Cabinet to instruct officers to explore initiatives to support the aspirations of the West Sussex Care Leaver service.

(b)  Proposed by Councillor Philip Circus: The motion proposes that the Council expresses its opposition to further expansion of Gatwick airport.

The following Motion was moved by Councillor Roger Noel, and seconded by Councillor Joy Dennis:

‘The Care Leavers service in West Sussex supports young people to exit care successfully as they move towards independence and operates under a clear legislative framework provided by the Children (Leaving Care) Act 2000 and the Children and Social Work Act 2017.

The most recent Children and Young People’s Scrutiny Committee held on the 13th September 2023, included a paper on ‘Leaving Care in West Sussex’ which was in direct response to the recent comments in the full inspection by Ofsted back in March 2023 with respect to meeting the needs of care leavers.

The Children and Social Work Act 2017 introduces corporate parenting principles which comprise seven needs that local authorities in England must have regard to. The West Sussex Care Leavers service and increasingly our partners, operate in line with these principles which centre around the promotion of physical and mental health and wellbeing of those children and young people; to encourage those children and young people to express their views and to take those views into account; to help children and young people gain access to and make the best use of services provided by the local authority and its relevant partners; to promote high aspirations and seek to secure the best outcomes for those children and young people; for those children and young people to be safe and have stability in their homelives, relationships and in education or work, and ultimately to prepare those children and young people for adulthood and independent living.

Whilst it is accepted that corporate parenting is not the statutory responsibility of the District Council, as District Councillors we should acknowledge that we are all corporate parents, particularly given that the West Sussex House Project Memorandum of Understanding was recently signed by all seven of the District and Boroughs Council partners, endorsing this view. But as Horsham District Councillors, we could be the first to go further and support the further aspirations of the West Sussex Care Leaver service through initiatives such as;

•       Providing a shopfront facing community base for our Care Leavers – providing a communal space to meet, laundry facility, life skills, WiFi and a place to meet Leaving Care Personal Advisors

•       Linking to the above objective, a space for the County Council’s Youth Emotional Support Service for meeting with children from across the county.

•       To offer free access to local gym/leisure centre/swimming pool to support young people’s health and wellbeing.

•       An apprenticeship or work based opportunity provided by the District for any Care Leaver who wanted to explore this as an alternative Employment Education and Training option.

This Council therefore calls upon the Leader and Cabinet to instruct officers to explore these initiatives, by engaging directly with the West Sussex Care Leavers Service, to proactively help the service move towards Good and onto Outstanding status through the implementation of these initiatives for the benefit of our young people leaving care.’

Councillor Roger Noel spoke in support of the motion, and highlighted the importance of supporting care leavers. He stated that there was a common duty to use available resources to maintain stability and continuity in the home lives of vulnerable young people. 

Members spoke in support of the motion and highlighted that support could extend to other young people across the District, and that service leavers were also vulnerable members of the community that may benefit from support. It was suggested that progress could be achieved through the voluntary sector and that access to mental health support was a crucial element. A request was made for further information from West Sussex County Council in relation to their service arrangements, as well as financial implications of support that could be provided by this Council.

Cabinet Members spoke in support of the motion, and suggested that a considered response, following discussions with officers, be brought before Members at a later date.

Following a vote, the motion was declared CARRIED.

The following Motion was moved by Councillor Philip Circus, and seconded by Councillor Liz Kitchen:

‘This Council, whilst acknowledging the very significant contribution made to the local economy and the Gatwick Diamond Area, expresses its opposition to further expansion of Gatwick airport. Such expansion, the Council believes, would be damaging to the interests of residents in respect of noise and pollution and the Council does not believe the existing infrastructure, particularly in terms of road and rail, is adequate for the needs of the airport.   There is, in our view, no realistic possibility that further expansion could be matched by the necessary investment that would be needed in terms of further infrastructure.

With a newly elected Council, we have resolved to confirm our long-standing position on this important issue.’

Councillor Circus spoke in support of the motion and highlighted the importance of the airport in relation to prosperity, however considered that further expansion may cause there to be a trade-off, against the public interest, with consideration to the climate emergency and concerns around infrastructure.

Councillor Blackburn proposed the following amendment, to reflect the Council’s commitment to climate action and nature recovery:

That “Such expansion, the Council believes, would be damaging to the interests of residents in respect of noise and pollution and the Council does not believe the existing infrastructure, particularly in terms of road and rail, is adequate for the needs of the airport.” be AMENDED to “Such expansion, the Council believes, would be damaging to the environment, including impacts on noise, pollution and biodiversity, as well as to our climate and carbon reduction aims and the Council does not believe the existing infrastructure, particularly in terms of road and rail, is adequate for the needs of the airport.”

Councillor Mike Croker seconded the amendment and spoke in support.

Following a vote, the motion was declared CARRIED.