Agenda, decisions and draft minutes

The persons undermentioned were admitted into the presence of the Council and passed as Burgesses of Guild in respect of their respective Acts of Admission in the Guild Burgess Book:-

Isabel Craik, Retired Nurse, Aberdeen

Mirela Delibegovic, Pharmacologist/Biochemist, Aberdeen

Jacqui Innes, Youth Worker, Aberdeen

Kevin Leiper, Global Business Development Lead, Aberdeen

Leila Catherine Turner-Smith, Financial Analyst, Aberdeen

The Lord Provost advised that he had accepted an urgent notice of motion by Councillors Yuill and Allard (also to be in the name of Councillors Malik and Brooks) onto the agenda as a matter of urgency in terms of Section 50B(4)(b) of the Local Government (Scotland) Act 1973, as STV’s announcement came after the deadline for submitting notices of motion to this Council meeting and time was of the essence in responding to the threat to local independent TV news programming and approximately 60 jobs.

Furthermore, the Council noted that officers would provide a verbal update at the end of the meeting following on from, and in accordance with, the decision of the Urgent Business Committee of 19 September 2025.

Councillor Nicoll moved as a procedural motion, seconded by Councillor Tissera:-

That in terms of item 11.1 (School Estate Plan Annual Update 2025 - exempt appendix), the figures in existing projects reflecting the approved budgets and profiling in the General Revenue Capital Programme be put in the public domain and that the rest be considered in private. 

On a division, there voted:-

For the procedural motion   (21)  -  Councillors Ali, Blake, Bonsell, Boulton, Brooks, Crockett, Cross, Farquhar, Graham, Grant, Houghton, Kusznir, Lawrence, Macdonald, McLeod, Malik, Massey, Nicoll, Thomson, Tissera and Watson.

Against the procedural motion  (22)  -  Lord Provost; Depute Provost; and Councillors Al-Samarai, Allard, Alphonse, Hazel Cameron, Clark, Cooke, Copland, Cormie, Davidson, Fairfull, Greig, Henrickson, Hutchison, MacGregor, McLellan, McRae, Mennie, Radley, van Sweeden and Yuill.

The Council resolved:-

(i)             to reject the procedural motion; and

(ii)           in terms of Section 50A(4) of the Local Government (Scotland) Act 1973, to exclude the press and public from the meeting during consideration of items 11.1 and 11.2 (Contract Update - Verbal Update) so as to avoid disclosure of exempt information of the classes described in paragraphs 6, 8, 9 and 12 of Schedule 7A of the Act.

Councillor Cooke advised that he had a connection in relation to item 9.1 (Annual Performance Reports - 2024/25 for all Tier 1 ALEOs) as a Council appointed observer to the Board of Sport Aberdeen, however having applied the objective test he did not consider that he had an interest and would not be withdrawing from the meeting.

Councillors Cooke, Fairfull and Greig advised that they had a connection in relation to items 9.2 (Council Delivery Plan, Annual Review Report 2024-25) and 9.3 (2026-2056 HRA Business Plan) by reason of being Council appointed members of the Integration Joint Board, however having applied the objective test they did not consider that they had an interest and would not be withdrawing from the meeting.

Councillors Fairfull, Greig and Henrickson advised that they had a connection in relation to item 9.1 by reason of being Council appointed members of the Board of Aberdeen Performing Arts, however having applied the objective test they did not consider that they had an interest and would not be withdrawing from the meeting.

Councillor Kusznir advised that he had a connection in relation to item 7.1 (School Estate Plan Annual Update 2025) as he worked for a number of Catholic charities as a law firm partner, however having applied the objective test he did not consider that he had an interest and would not be withdrawing from the meeting.

Councillors Blake, Grant, Hutchison, Mennie and Watson advised that they had a connection in relation to item 7.1 as they had a child or children who attended schools referred to in the report, however having applied the objective test they did not consider that they had an interest and would not be withdrawing from the meeting.

Councillor Yuill advised that he had a connection in relation to items 9.1, 9.2 and 9.3 as the Council’s appointed member of the Board of NHS Grampian, however having applied the objective test he did not consider that he had an interest and would not be withdrawing from the meeting.

The Lord Provost and Councillor Blake advised that they had a connection in relation to item 9.1 as Council appointed members of the Board of Aberdeen Sports Village. Councillor Blake advised that she also had a connection as member of the Friends of Aberdeen Performing Arts. However, having applied the objective test, the Lord Provost and Councillor Blake did not consider that they had an interest and would not be withdrawing from the meeting.

Councillor Brooks advised that he had a connection in relation to item 7.1 as an elder and member of Christ Central church, however having applied the objective test he did not consider that he had an interest and would not be withdrawing from the meeting.

Councillor Malik advised that he had connection in relation to item 7.1 as he had a grandchild who attended a school referred to in the report. Councillor Malik also advised that he had a connection in relation to an unspecified matter as a Burgess of  ...  view the full minutes text for item 4.

(A)       The Council received a deputation from John Murray in relation to agenda item 7.1 - School Estate Plan Annual Update 2025.

Mr Murray advised that he was speaking on behalf of the Catholic Church. He reminded Members that he had addressed the Education and Children’s Services Committee on the same issue on 17 September 2024 and Full Council on 2 October 2024, and reiterated what he had said then - it was the view of the Catholic Church that Catholic education could only be successful in Aberdeen if it was a joint enterprise based on mutual trust and respect between the Council and the Church. The Catholic Church did not want to be at loggerheads with the Council, Mr Murray wanted to avoid the acrimony from last year and to focus on the compelling case for a Catholic secondary school in Aberdeen.

Mr Murray stated that he was here because the Partnership lost the vote at committee regarding a consultation on the possibility of a Catholic secondary school in Aberdeen. He believed the Partnership lost the vote because they lost the argument, as had been the case last year, and that all of the external members present voted against the Partnership having listened to both sides of the debate. Mr Murray stressed that he had not canvassed or lobbied the external members at any point.

Mr Murray emphasised that what was currently in place with regard to Catholic education in Aberdeen was very inadequate compared to the rest of Scotland and this was not just in relation to secondary education. He noted that there were three Catholic primary schools in Aberdeen, which was one for every 6,400 Catholic children in the city; if it was reduced to two schools it would be one for every 9,600 Catholic children. Mr Murray compared those statistics to Glasgow, Edinburgh and Dundee - Aberdeen had more school aged Catholic children than Dundee yet Dundee had two Catholic secondary schools and ten Catholic primary schools.

Mr Murray referred to the consultation that had taken place last year which yielded a high level of responses, with 82% of respondents in favour of a Catholic secondary school within the city - he believed that it was a remarkable conclusion for the Council to then reject that. He added that the consultation had excluded people from Aberdeenshire and stressed that they must be included and invited to join discussions with the Council and the Catholic Church.

Mr Murray highlighted the high level of cynicism in the community which was compounded by the Council repeatedly ignoring the views of its external members. He added that there was an erroneous belief that Catholic schools were just like any other school with the exception of the religious curriculum and underlined that the many thousands of non-Catholic families in Scotland who chose to send their children to Catholic schools were seeking a distinctive ethos and educational environment, not just a different religious education curriculum. Mr Murray concluded that the onus of  ...  view the full minutes text for item 5.

The Council had before it the minute of meeting of Aberdeen City Council of 20 August 2025

The Council resolved:-

to approve the minute.

The Council had before it the minute of the special meeting of Aberdeen City Council of 17 September 2025.

The Council resolved:-

to approve the minute.

With reference to Article 11 of the minute of meeting of the Education and Children’s Services Committee of 16 September 2025, the Council had before it a report by the Executive Director - Families and Communities, which had been referred to it by eight members of the Committee in accordance with Standing Order 34.1, and which presented the 2025 annual update to the School Estate Plan and provided information on progress with implementation of the Plan and highlighted new priorities which had emerged over the last year.

The report recommended:-

that the Education and Children’s Services Committee -

(a)           note the updates to the Action Plan provided at Appendix A of the report;

(b)           instruct the Chief Officer - Corporate Landlord to continue to implement the School Estate Action Plan in accordance with the updated Long Term Programme, presented within Appendix B of the report;

(c)           refer the capital and revenue cost implications of the updated Action Plan and Programme, as shown at Appendix C of the report, to the budget setting process for 2026/27;

(d)           instruct the Chief Officer - Corporate Landlord to carry out an options appraisal to determine any required interim arrangements for establishing the proposed new school at Bucksburn/Newhills, and to include the cost implications of any such arrangements in the budget setting process for 2026/27, with a view to the arrangements being included within the proposals for the forthcoming statutory public consultation on the new school;

(e)           instruct the Chief Officer - Corporate Landlord to undertake a feasibility study to investigate options for the establishment of a new primary school to serve Grandhome, including any required interim arrangements, and to report the findings of the feasibility study in an Outline Business Case, in line with the timescales outlined in the Long Term Programme at Appendix B of this report; and

(f)             instruct the Chief Officer - Corporate Landlord to further develop proposals and timescales for future ASG based asset reviews, and to build these in to future updates of the School Estate Plan.

Members asked a number of questions of officers and following an extended adjournment, Councillor Houghton moved as a procedural motion, seconded by Councillor Nicoll:-     

That the item be deferred to the next cycle of meetings.

On a division, there voted:-

For the procedural motion   (21)  -  Councillors Ali, Blake, Bonsell, Boulton, Brooks, Crockett, Cross, Farquhar, Graham, Grant, Houghton, Kusznir, Lawrence, Macdonald, McLeod, Malik, Massey, Nicoll, Thomson, Tissera and Watson.

Against the procedural motion  (22)  -  Lord Provost; Depute Provost; and Councillors Al-Samarai, Allard, Alphonse, Hazel Cameron, Clark, Cooke, Copland, Cormie, Davidson, Fairfull, Greig, Henrickson, Hutchison, MacGregor, McLellan, McRae, Mennie, Radley, van Sweeden and Yuill.

The Council resolved:-

to reject the procedural motion. 

Councillors Crockett, Houghton, Malik, Nicoll, Tissera and Watson expressed their dissent against the foregoing decision in terms of Standing Order 32.8

At this juncture, Councillor Boulton indicated that she had an addendum that she wanted to propose. The Lord Provost noted that it had not been submitted in accordance  ...  view the full minutes text for item 8.

The Council had before it the business planner as prepared by the Chief Officer - Governance.

The Council resolved:-

(i)           to delete item 5 (North East Population Health Alliance - End of Year Two Progress Report) as a service update had been issued; and

(ii)          otherwise to note the business planner.

The Council had before it a report by the Chief Officer - Finance which presented the Housing Revenue Account (HRA) Business Plan for approval and a short term Housing Asset Plan, which was aligned to the recently approved Local Housing Strategy, which informed the development of the Business Plan.

The report recommended:-

that the Council -

(a)          approve the HRA Business Plan at Appendix A to the report;

(b)          note the key challenges outlined in the Housing Asset Plan at Appendix B and agree the associated priority actions;

(c)          agree that the HRA Business Plan and Housing Asset Plan should be updated and reported in future to the Communities, Housing and Public Protection Committee on an annual basis with the update in 2026 moving to a 5 and 30 year model for both Plans; and

(d)          note the requirement for the Council to maintain HRA reserves for financial resilience and sustainability purposes.

During the course of questions, there was a disturbance in the public gallery which led to the Lord Provost warning Councillor Crockett with regard to the taking of photographs which was prohibited in terms of Standing Orders.

Councillor Malik moved as a procedural motion, seconded by Councillor Tissera:-

            That the Council suspend all Standing Orders to enable the removal of the Lord Provost as Convener for the remainder of the meeting.

On a division, there voted:-

For the procedural motion   (18)  -  Councillors Bonsell, Boulton, Brooks, Crockett, Cross, Farquhar, Graham, Grant, Houghton, Kusznir, Lawrence, McLeod, Malik, Massey, Nicoll, Thomson, Tissera and Watson.

Against the procedural motion  (22)  -  Lord Provost; Depute Provost; and Councillors Al-Samarai, Allard, Alphonse, Hazel Cameron, Clark, Cooke, Copland, Cormie, Davidson, Fairfull, Greig, Henrickson, Hutchison, MacGregor, McLellan, McRae, Mennie, Radley, van Sweeden and Yuill.

Absent from the division  (3)  -  Councillors Ali, Blake and Macdonald.

The Council resolved:-

to reject the procedural motion.

Following further questions to officers, an adjournment and recognising that the meeting was approaching the six hour mark, the Lord Provost invited Councillor Yuill to suggest the way forward in terms of the remaining business.

Councillor Yuill moved as a procedural motion, seconded by Councillor Allard:-

            That the Council -

·         refer item 9.1 (Annual Performance Reports - 2024/25 for all Tier 1 ALEOs) to the Finance and Resources Committee

·         defer item 9.2 (Council Delivery Plan, Annual Review Report 2024-25) to the next ordinary Council meeting

·         refer item 9.3 (2026-2056 HRA Business Plan) to the Communities, Housing and Public Protection Committee

·         refer item 10.1 (Notice of Motion by Councillor Kusznir) to the Communities, Housing and Public Protection Committee

·         refer item 10.2 (Notice of Motion by Councillor Macdonald) to the Finance and Resources Committee

·         refer item 10.3 (Notice of Motion by Councillor Watson) to the Communities, Housing and Public Protection Committee

On a division, there voted:-

For the procedural motion  (22)  -  Lord Provost; Depute Provost; and Councillors Al-Samarai, Allard, Alphonse, Hazel Cameron, Clark, Cooke, Copland, Cormie, Davidson, Fairfull, Greig, Henrickson, Hutchison, MacGregor, McLellan, McRae, Mennie, Radley, van Sweeden and Yuill.

Against the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 10.

The Council had before it a report by the Chief Officer - Governance which informed the Council in terms of s2(4) of Schedule 1 to the Licensing (Scotland) Act 2005 (“the 2005 Act”) of a vacancy in the membership of the Licensing Board and sought the appointment of a Member to fill the vacancy.

The report recommended:-

that the Council elect a Member to fill the vacancy on the Licensing Board.

The Council resolved:-

to elect Councillor Ciaran McRae to fill the vacancy on the Licensing Board.

That this Council:

1.             Recognises the importance of the North East and North of Scotland regional news services provided by STV North / Grampian TV over 60 years.

2.             Notes the undertakings given by STV, at the time it took over Grampian TV in 1997, that the separate North East and North of Scotland regional news programmes would be maintained.

3.             Deplores the announcement by STV that it intends to end its STV North news programming and the reported loss of 60 jobs associated with this.

4.             Notes that Aberdeen City Council's Employability Team, through Partnership Action for Continuing Employment (PACE), is ready to support individuals facing the loss of their jobs.

5.             Agrees that the Council will seek to work with others, including the National Union of Journalists, to make the case for the retention of STV North news programming and, in particular, instructs the Chief Executive to make representations to this effect to STV, Ofcom, the Scottish Government, and UK Government.

The Council had before it an urgent notice of motion by Councillors Yuill, Allard, Malik and Brooks in the following terms:-

“That this Council:

1.      Recognises the importance of the North East and North of Scotland regional news services provided by STV North / Grampian TV over 60 years.

2.      Notes the undertakings given by STV, at the time it took over Grampian TV in 1997, that the separate North East and North of Scotland regional news programmes would be maintained.

3.      Deplores the announcement by STV that it intends to end its STV North news programming and the reported loss of 60 jobs associated with this.

4.      Notes that Aberdeen City Council's Employability Team, through Partnership Action for Continuing Employment (PACE), is ready to support individuals facing the loss of their jobs.

5.      Agrees that the Council will seek to work with others, including the National Union of Journalists, to make the case for the retention of STV North news programming and, in particular, instructs the Chief Executive to make representations to this effect to STV, Ofcom, the Scottish Government, and UK Government.”

The Council resolved:-

to approve the urgent notice of motion.

In accordance with Article 3 of this minute, the following items were considered with the press and public excluded.

With reference to Article 8 of this minute, the Council had before it an exempt appendix relating to the report.

The Council resolved:-

to note the exempt appendix.

With reference to the minute of meeting of the Urgent Business Committee of 19 September 2025, the Council received a short verbal update from the Executive Director - Corporate Services which set out the latest position with regard to the contract.

The Council resolved:-

to note the update.