Meeting

The Chair will move that the minutes of the meeting be signed as a correct record. The only part of the minutes that can be discussed is their accuracy.

To receive and answer any questions from the public.

(Questions must be received in writing by Democratic Services no later than noon on Tuesday 13 October 2026)

To receive petitions.

(Notice of petitions must be received in writing by Democratic Services, no later than noon on Tuesday 13 October 2026)

a) to receive resignations from Committees and to make any necessary re-appointments

b) to receive resignations from Outside Bodies and to make any re-appointments and (ii) fill any existing vacancies.

Report of the Head of Law and Governance and Monitoring Officer

To approve the calendar of meetings for the 2027/28 Municipal year.

Proposer: Councillor Minas-Bound

Seconder: Councillor Carr

Council notes that:

1. Following the Government’s decision to withdraw its previous decision on Local Government Reorganisation (LGR) in Hampshire and the Solent and review the programme, considerable work and expenditure already undertaken by local authorities may no longer be required or may have to be revisited.

2. The Chief Executive has confirmed that Basingstoke and Deane Borough Council has already committed £239,000 in net direct costs to Local Government Reorganisation, including invoices and work commissioned but not yet paid for.

3. This £239,000 figure represents direct costs and does not reflect the considerable amount of internal officer time devoted to LGR, including work undertaken by the Chief Executive, senior management and officers across the Council.

4. This expenditure and officer resource was committed while the Council was responding to a Government-instigated process, requirements and timescales.

Council believes that:

1. Basingstoke and Deane taxpayers should not be left with a £239,000 bill for a process which the Government has subsequently withdrawn and is now reviewing.

2. Residents deserve to know the full cost of LGR to their Council, not simply the external expenditure. This should include a reasonable assessment of the value of the officer time diverted to the process.

3. Every pound spent on an abandoned or substantially changed process is money which cannot be used for the services and priorities of Basingstoke and Deane residents.

4. Future proposals for restructuring local government should be genuinely locally led, with democratically elected councils and local residents having a meaningful role in determining proposals for their areas.

5. Any future consideration of local authority boundaries, electoral wards or council size should involve the Local Government Boundary Commission for England through the appropriate statutory processes.

Council therefore requests that the Leader of the Council:

1. Asks the Chief Executive, in consultation with the Section 151 Officer, to provide councillors with a breakdown of the £239,000 net direct costs committed to date, including, where appropriate, expenditure on consultants, external advisers, legal advice, financial modelling, communications, research and other external support.

2. Asks that this is supplemented by a reasonable estimate of the internal officer resource devoted to LGR, including the approximate number of officer days or hours involved and an indicative financial value, so that councillors and residents can understand the full estimated cost of LGR to Basingstoke and Deane Borough Council.

3. Writes to the Prime Minister and Secretary of State, copied to Basingstoke and Deane's Members of Parliament, making clear that:

a. Basingstoke and Deane taxpayers should not be expected to pay the £239,000 direct cost of the Government's change of approach to LGR;

b. the Government should reimburse Basingstoke and Deane Borough Council for the eligible direct costs incurred as a consequence of participating in the Government's LGR process;

c. the Government should provide clear answers about the future of Local Government Reorganisation before councils are expected to commit further significant taxpayers' money or officer resources to the process;

d. future restructuring proposals should be genuinely locally led and not imposed as a prerequisite for accessing devolution arrangements or Government funding; and

e. the Local Government Boundary Commission for England should have its appropriate independent and statutory role in considering any future proposals affecting local authority boundaries, electoral wards or council size.

4. Reports the Government's response back to councillors.

Proposer: Councillor Izett

Seconder: Councillor Ganesh

Council notes that:

1. Operation Banner was the deployment of the British Armed Forces in Northern Ireland between 1969 and 2007, during which thousands of service personnel served in extraordinarily difficult and dangerous circumstances.

2. Members of the Armed Forces served in Northern Ireland at the direction of the democratically elected Government of the United Kingdom, supporting the civil power and seeking to protect communities from terrorism and violence.

3. Many Operation Banner veterans are now elderly, and some have faced repeated investigation or the prospect of renewed legal proceedings relating to events which took place decades ago.

4. The Government's approach to Northern Ireland legacy arrangements has created renewed concern amongst veterans and their families about the possibility of previously investigated cases being reopened.

Council believes that:

1. Those who served our country during Operation Banner deserve our gratitude, respect and support.

2. No individual should be above the law and genuinely new and compelling evidence of serious wrongdoing should be capable of proper investigation.

3. However, it is fundamentally unfair for veterans to face repeated investigations into the same historic allegations where those matters have previously been subject to proper investigation and no new and compelling evidence has emerged.

4. Justice must be applied fairly and proportionately and must recognise both the passage of time and the previous investigations to which veterans may already have been subjected.

5. The Government's current approach does not provide sufficient reassurance or protection to Operation Banner veterans from the prospect of repeated investigation and legal uncertainty.

6. This Council therefore rejects the Government's current position and believes a better settlement is required which protects the rule of law while ending the cycle of repeated investigation of veterans in the absence of genuinely new and compelling evidence.

Council resolves to:

1. Place on record its gratitude to all those from Basingstoke and Deane, and across the United Kingdom, who served during Operation Banner and recognise the sacrifices made by them and their families.

2. Request that the Leader of the Council writes to the Prime Minister expressing this Council's opposition to the Government's current approach to Northern Ireland legacy cases involving Operation Banner veterans.

3. Ask the Prime Minister and Government to ensure that veterans are protected from repeated investigation of allegations which have already been properly investigated unless genuinely new and compelling evidence becomes available.

4. Ask the Government to provide Operation Banner veterans and their families with the certainty, fairness and dignity they deserve, while maintaining the fundamental principle that credible new evidence of serious criminal wrongdoing must be capable of proper investigation.

5. Send a copy of the Leader's letter to Basingstoke and Deane's Members of Parliament and the Secretary of State for Defence.

Proposer: Councillor Ganesh

Seconder: Councillor Dillow

This Council notes that:

The Hampshire and the Solent Combined County Authority is already operating, with responsibilities including strategic planning, housing, transport, infrastructure, skills and economic growth.

The first election for the Mayor of Hampshire and the Solent is not currently scheduled until May 2028.

Until then, these important regional decisions are being taken through an interim board of council leaders, including the leaders of Southampton and Portsmouth.

The Government’s original timetable was linked to Local Government Reorganisation. That process is now under review.

This Council believes that:

Hampshire cannot wait until 2028 for directly elected leadership.

North Hampshire needs a strong voice in the decisions that will shape where future growth goes, what infrastructure supports it and where regional investment is made.

Basingstoke and Deane is expected to accommodate significant housing and economic growth. Our residents should have a direct democratic say over the leadership making strategic decisions that will affect our communities for decades to come.

The leaders of Southampton and Portsmouth are elected to represent their cities. They are not elected by the people of Basingstoke and Deane to speak for North Hampshire.

A directly elected Mayor would have a democratic mandate from residents across Hampshire and the Solent and would be directly accountable to them.

With decisions already being made about regional growth, spatial strategy, housing, transport, infrastructure and investment, that democratic accountability should not wait until 2028.

This Council therefore resolves to:

1. Request the Leader of the Council to write to the Secretary of State calling on the Government to bring forward the inaugural election for the Mayor of Hampshire and the Solent from May 2028 to May 2027.

2. Request the Leader to make the case for North Hampshire to have a strong voice in the emerging regional growth and spatial strategy, particularly on housing, infrastructure, transport and economic investment.

3. Request the Leader to make clear that significant regional powers should be accompanied by direct democratic accountability, with a Mayor elected by residents across the whole of Hampshire and the Solent.

4. Request the Leader to invite other councils across Hampshire and the Solent to support the call for a May 2027 mayoral election.

North Hampshire needs a strong voice. These decisions need democratic accountability. Hampshire should not have to wait until 2028.

To receive questions from members in relation to the minutes of the meetings detailed below:

Committee

Meeting Date

Resources Overview and Scrutiny

23 June 2026

Audit and Accounts

1 July 2026

South Ham and Buckskin Regeneration Overview and Scrutiny

6 July 2026

Licensing

7 July 2026

Development Control

8 July 2026

Cabinet

9 July 2026

Council

16 July 2026

Resources Overview and Scrutiny

30 July 2026

Development Control

12 August 2026

Environment and Infrastructure Overview and Scrutiny

3 September 2026

Cabinet

8 September 2026

Development Control

9 September 2026

Standards

14 September 2026

Resident Services Overview and Scrutiny

16 September 2026

To consider whether, in view of the nature of the remaining items on the agenda, any of them are likely to involve the disclosure of exempt or confidential information within the terms of Schedule 12A of the Local Government Act 1972