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:-

Reverend Keith Blackwood, Minister of Religion, Aberdeen

          Christina Clunes, Retired Care Assistant, Aberdeen

          Dr Iain Duthie, Church Pastor/Minister of Religion, Aberdeen

          Gloria Kochman, Retired University and College Lecturer, Aberdeen

          Craig Pike, Lawyer-Advocate, Aberdeen

          Helen Will, Retired Remittance Manager/Dance Teacher, Aberdeen

Councillor Yuill advised that he had a connection in relation to items 9.1 (Council Delivery Plan, Annual Review Report), 9.2 (North East Population Health Alliance: End of Year One Progress Report), 9.3 (Budget Protocol: Phase 2 Consultation & Budget Update) and 9.8 (Annual Procurement Report) 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.

Councillor Kusznir advised that he had connections in relation to item 9.7 (Governance Review of Trusts) as a result of the law firm he worked for acting as legal agent for a Trust referred to in the report; and as a Council appointed Trustee to the Marguerite McBey Trust, however having applied the objective test he did not consider that he had an interest and would not be withdrawing from the meeting.

Councillor MacGregor advised that he had a connection in relation to item 9.7 as a Council appointed Trustee to the Aberdeen Endowments Trust, however having applied the objective test he did not consider that he had an interest and would not be withdrawing from the meeting.

Councillor Cooke advised that he had a connection in relation to items 9.1, 9.2 and 9.3 as Chair of the Integration Joint Board, however having applied the objective test he did not consider that he had an interest and would not be withdrawing from the meeting.

Councillor Allard advised that had connections in relation to item 9.5 (North East Scotland Investment Zone) as a Council appointed Director to the Board of Opportunity North East and as a member of the Investment Zone Steering Committee, however having applied the objective test he did not consider that he had an interest and would not be withdrawing from the meeting.

Councillor Grant advised that he had a connection in relation to item 9.1 by reason of his employment by Aberdeen Inspired and as the former City Centre Manager, which was a post referred to in the report, however having applied the objective test he did not consider that he had an interest and would not be withdrawing from the meeting.

Councillor Greig advised that he had a connection in relation to item 9.2 as a member of the Integration Joint Board and item 9.7 as a Council appointed Trustee to the Marguerite McBey Trust, however having applied the objective test he did not consider that he had an interest and would not be withdrawing from the meeting.

Councillor Fairfull advised that she had a connection in relation to items 9.1, 9.2 and 9.3 as a member of the Integration Joint Board, however having applied the objective test she did not consider that she had an interest and would not be withdrawing from the meeting.

The Lord Provost advised that he was moving item 7.1 (Establishment of Working Group - Communities, Housing and Public Protection Committee of 21 November 2024) to the end of the agenda.

The Council had before it the minute of meeting of Aberdeen City Council of 2 October 2024.

The Council resolved:-

to approve the minute.

The Council had before it the minute of the special meeting of Aberdeen City Council of 2 October 2024.

The Council resolved:-

to approve the minute.

The Council had before it the minute of the reconvened meeting of Aberdeen City Council of 11 October 2024.

Councillor Malik referred to Article 4 of the minute and advised that he was unwilling to approve the minute as it stated he was absent from the division, when he had voted for his amendment, but the technology had failed. The Interim Chief Officer - Governance (Assurance) advised that this would be recorded in the minute of this meeting, however officers could not record Councillor Malik as having voted for his amendment as there was no record of that vote having been made.

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

          That all votes at Full Council meetings be conducted by roll call.

On a division, there voted:-

For the procedural motion   (22)  -  Councillors Ali, Blake, Bonsell, Boulton, Brooks, Crockett, Cross, Farquhar, Graham, Grant, Houghton, Kusznir, Lawrence, Macdonald, McLeod, Malik, Massey, Nicoll, Mrs Stewart, Thomson, Tissera and Watson. 

Against the procedural motion  (23)  -  Lord Provost; Depute Provost; and Councillors Al-Samarai, Allard, Alphonse, Bouse, 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.

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

That the apology from Councillor Henrickson to Councillor Tissera be recorded in the minute.

On a division, there voted:-

For the procedural motion   (22)  -  Councillors Ali, Blake, Bonsell, Boulton, Brooks, Crockett, Cross, Farquhar, Graham, Grant, Houghton, Kusznir, Lawrence, Macdonald, McLeod, Malik, Massey, Nicoll, Mrs Stewart, Thomson, Tissera and Watson. 

Against the procedural motion  (23)  -  Lord Provost; Depute Provost; and Councillors Al-Samarai, Allard, Alphonse, Bouse, 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.

In terms of Standing Order 32.8, Councillor Tissera intimated her dissent against the foregoing decision.

The Council resolved:-

(i)             to note that Councillor Malik had voted for his amendment within Article 4, however due to an issue with the electronic voting system his vote had not registered and therefore was not reflected in the minute; and

(ii)           to otherwise approve the minute.

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

The Council resolved:-

(i)             to transfer items 4 (101-103 Union Street), 25 (Beachfront Masterplan - Castlegate) and 29 (Beachfront Shoreline Regeneration (Phase C) - Full Business Case) to the Finance and Resources Committee business planner;

(ii)           to note that item 17 (Scheme of Governance - Terms of Reference) would be reported to the Council meeting in April 2025 as part of the Scheme of Governance review; and

(iii)          otherwise to note the business planner.

Carried forward from October Council meeting

The Council had before it a report by the Chief Officer - Data Insights which presented an Annual Review Report which highlighted progress with respect to the 2023-24 Council Delivery Plan approved by the Council on 1 March 2023.

The report recommended:-

that the Council note the report and provide comments and observations on the information contained in the Annual Review Report at Appendix A.

Councillor Yuill moved, seconded by Councillor Allard:-

That the Council note the report.

Councillor Malik moved as an amendment:-

          That the Council -

(1)  agree to note the Council Delivery Plan Annual Review Report; and

(2)  agree the key milestones noted in the report reflect the ongoing inability of the SNP to deliver anything meaningful within their Council Delivery Plan adopted at Council in May 2022 despite being 2½ years into their term of office.

During the course of Councillor Malik moving his amendment there was a reaction from Councillor Allard which led to various interruptions and the Lord Provost calling a short adjournment. Upon resumption of the meeting, the Lord Provost stated that he had warned Councillor Allard via a nonverbal cue at the time, however he apologised for not articulating this verbally to the meeting.

Councillor Malik then resumed moving his amendment and was seconded by Councillor Watson.

Councillor Brooks moved as a further amendment, seconded by Councillor Kusznir:-

          That the Council -

1.    Notes the report and agrees that the Council delivery plan broadly reflects the manner in which the SNP-led Administration run the Council;

2.    Notes from the report that a number of SNP-Liberal Democrat Administration pledges have:

a.    not been enacted, or

b.    are no longer to be enacted, or

c.     have been watered-down, such as Citizens Assemblies;

which is indicative of a third-rate council leadership, who are ‘managing’ rather than ‘leading’ Aberdeen City Council.

3.    Furthermore, notes the most recent City Centre Masterplan and the City Centre bus priority route correspondence with 3^rd party stakeholders, as highlighted in a recent newspaper article.

4.    Further notes that the Council administration has favoured bus companies over our business-rates paying, city centre businesses in the presentation and consideration of the Experimental Traffic Regulation Order (also known as Bus Gates).

5.    Further notes that the Conservative Group Leader has written to the Executive Director (City Regeneration & Environment) for assurance that the Member-Officer Relations Protocol (MORP) was not breached by any SNP-led Administration pressure, put on Council officers, to favour permanency of the city centre bus priority measures over that of the economic wellbeing of our city centre business-rate paying businesses.

6.    Instructs the Executive Director (City Regeneration & Environment) that should it not be possible to offer assurance that the MORP was not breached (as per item 5) that the item is further investigated and reported back to Full Council.

During the course of summing up, Councillor Malik agreed to incorporate Councillor Brooks’ amendment into his amendment as a joint amendment. Councillor Brooks therefore agreed to withdraw his amendment.

Councillor Tissera moved as  ...  view the full minutes text for item 7.

Carried forward from October Council meeting

The Council had before it a report by the Chief Officer - Data Insights which presented a progress report after the first year of operation of the North East Population Health Alliance (NEPHA).

The report recommended:-

that the Council -

(a)           note the report and provide comments and observations on the information contained in the report; and

(b)           agree to instruct a progress report on the second year of the operation of the strategic partnership agreement.

The Council resolved:-

(i)             to note the report; and

(ii)           to instruct a progress report on the second year of the operation of the strategic partnership agreement.

The Council had before it a report by the Chief Officer - Finance and the Chief Officer - Data Insights which satisfied the requirements of the approved Budget Protocol, in respect of reporting to Council the results of the Phase 2 Public Budget Consultation, which included details of the current estimated budget position for 2025/26, the budget options and the Integrated Impact Assessments. In addition, the report provided a brief update on the budget model following the UK Budget, announced on 30 October 2024, where it was currently known to affect the Council.

The report recommended:-

that the Council -

(a)           note the content of the report;

(b)           agree, subject to any further clarification from Scottish Government, that the General Fund budget model for 2025/26 would assume the cost of increased Employer National Insurance Contributions would be fully funded;

(c)           note that COSLA had identified that the wider cost of Employer National Insurance Contributions increasing had implications for services commissioned and funded to deliver public services;

(d)           agree that the Chief Officer - Finance, working with the Extended Corporate Management team, update the General Fund financial model for 2025/26 for the Local Government Financial Settlement for 2025/26 from Scottish Government and to take account of the analysis work described in the report;

(e)           agree, due to the new financial risks, that updated financial modelling be done in conjunction with NHS Grampian, for the Aberdeen City Integration Joint Board and included in the General Fund budget report for 2025/26; and

(f)             note that the Council would be presented with the final budget position and the request to approve a balanced General Fund Revenue and Capital Budget, and set Council Tax for 2025/26 at the Budget meeting on 5 March 2025.

Councillor McLellan moved, seconded by the Depute Provost:-

          That the Council -   

(1)       approves the recommendations;

(2)       notes that the Scottish Government’s proposed budget, presented to the Scottish Parliament on 4 December 2024, provides an uplift to local authority budgets in a continued context of financial challenge for public services, and that this budget goes some way to meeting COSLA’s asks; however, recognises it will take more than a single year’s settlement to restore the financial position of local authorities;

(3)       notes that the Scottish Government estimates (published 20 November 2024) a £549m cost implication, including £265m cost to local government, of employer National Insurance Contributions (NICs) changes to the directly employed devolved Scottish public sector workforce as a result of UK employer NICs policy;

(the Scottish Government, 20 November 2024)

(4)       agrees the UK Government must urgently clarify additional funding to protect Scotland’s local government, including ALEOs and partners who deliver statutory services, from additional costs arising from the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 9.

The Lord Provost agreed to take item 10.1 (Notice of Motion by Councillor Kusznir) at this juncture, before considering what would happen with the remaining business.

“That the Council:

(1)            Notes the Aberdeen Friends of Ukraine dinner on 14 September 2024 which brought together the Ukrainian community, supporters and elected members, from myriad political parties, to recognise the local efforts of support and assistance since the illegal invasion of Ukraine by Russia;

(2)            Recognises the ongoing support from both the Council to the Ukrainian community and that from ordinary Aberdonians who support the Ukrainian school at Rosemount Community Centre; and

(3)            Reaffirms the Council’s commitment to continuing support for the Ukrainian community in the face of continuing Russian aggression.”

The Council had before it a notice of motion by Councillor Kusznir in the following terms:-

“That the Council:

(1)           Notes the Aberdeen Friends of Ukraine dinner on 14 September 2024 which brought together the Ukrainian community, supporters and elected members, from myriad political parties, to recognise the local efforts of support and assistance since the illegal invasion of Ukraine by Russia;

(2)           Recognises the ongoing support from both the Council to the Ukrainian community and that from ordinary Aberdonians who support the Ukrainian school at Rosemount Community Centre; and

(3)           Reaffirms the Council’s commitment to continuing support for the Ukrainian community in the face of continuing Russian aggression.”

The Council resolved:-

to approve the notice of motion.

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

          That the Council -

(1)       refer item 10.2 to the Communities, Housing and Public Protection Committee;

(2)       refer item 10.3 to the budget process;

(3)       refer item 10.4 to the Finance and Resources Committee;

(4)       refer item 10.5 to the Communities, Housing and Public Protection Committee;

(5)       defer items 7.1, 9.5, 9.6, 9.7 and 9.10 to the next Council meeting; and

(6)       refer items 9.8 and 9.9 to the Finance and Resources Committee.

On a division, there voted:-

For the procedural motion  (23)  -  Lord Provost; Depute Provost; and Councillors Al-Samarai, Allard, Alphonse, Bouse, Hazel Cameron, Clark, Cooke, Copland, Cormie, Davidson, Fairfull, Greig, Henrickson, Hutchison, MacGregor, McLellan, McRae, Mennie, Radley, van Sweeden and Yuill.

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

Declined to vote  (1)  -  Councillor Cross.

The Council resolved:-

to adopt the procedural motion.

The Lord Provost noted that the meeting was approaching the 6 hour mark and that item 9.4 (Housing Revenue Account Budget 2025/26) was still to be dealt with, therefore the Council would be unable to complete the item unless it suspended Standing Orders.

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

That the Council suspend Standing Order 40.2 to extend the length of the meeting to consider item 9.4.

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

          That the vote on this item be conducted by roll call.

On a division, there voted:-

For the procedural motion   (22)  -  Councillors Ali, Blake, Bonsell, Boulton, Brooks, Crockett, Cross, Farquhar, Graham, Grant, Houghton, Kusznir, Lawrence, Macdonald, McLeod, Malik, Massey, Nicoll, Mrs Stewart, Thomson, Tissera and Watson. 

Against the procedural motion  (23)  -  Lord Provost; Depute Provost; and Councillors Al-Samarai, Allard, Alphonse, Bouse, 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.

The Council then voted on the initial procedural motion by Councillor Houghton.

On a division, there voted:-

For the procedural motion   (22)  -  Councillors Ali, Blake, Bonsell, Boulton, Brooks, Crockett, Cross, Farquhar, Graham, Grant, Houghton, Kusznir, Lawrence, Macdonald, McLeod, Malik, Massey, Nicoll, Mrs Stewart, Thomson, Tissera and Watson. 

Against the procedural motion  (23)  -  Lord Provost; Depute Provost; and Councillors Al-Samarai, Allard, Alphonse, Bouse, 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.

With regard to item 9.4 and the amendment from the Labour Group which had been circulated prior to the meeting, Councillor Radley asked the Chief Officer - Finance for his advice regarding the use of reserves in accordance with Standing Order 29.11. The Chief Officer - Finance advised that he had been consulted on the amendment and his strong advice was  ...  view the full minutes text for item 11.