Voting record

The Chair referred to the Notice of Motion (NOM) as set out on the agenda, proposed by Councillor Horner, seconded by Councillor Hall and supported by the requisite number of Councillors within the procedural rules to enable it to be considered at the meeting.

The Head of Housing responded to the NOM advising that:

• The term migrant referred to those moving to a local authority area from other parts of the country, those moving to the UK from abroad, refugees and those seeking asylum in the UK. The NOM specifically related to asylum-seekers.
• Asylum seekers are not entitled to welfare benefits or allowed to undertake paid work. The Home Office is responsible for their accommodation and for their subsistence while their asylum claim is considered.
• Local authorities are not consulted on the individuals placed in such accommodation. Such placements are made directly by the Home Office or its approved contractor. The Council is notified of the name of the individuals placed in the accommodation.
• Where asylum is granted, they will at this point be entitled to welfare benefits, to seek paid employment and be entitled to assistance under homelessness legislation.
• The Council is responsible for safeguarding all residents, regardless of background or immigration status. Where safeguarding concerns are identified, they are addressed through established statutory processes embedded within public services, in line with our legal duties.
• 0.02% of Teignbridge population are Asylum Seekers in dispersal accommodation (no hotels are being used for dispersal).
• The NOM identifies three areas: transparency, safeguarding and refusing placements and challenging external placements:
• The Council is committed to transparency in all matters relating to migrant placements, but this must be within relevant legal bounds, and whilst continuing to support the welfare of all residents. Publicly providing the address of an individual property that is being or to be used for asylum dispersal would be in breach of UK GDPR.
• There are established safeguarding arrangements in place within the Council and across relevant agencies, applied to support the welfare of all residents in Teignbridge including asylum-seekers.
• The Council does not have the ability to refuse the placement of any individual person or household in asylum-seeker accommodation in the District.   

Councillor Horner presented his NOM as set out on the agenda, adding that there had been a net migration of 2.6 million in the last 2 years, an unsustainable demand on the NHS, and all immigration should be positive. 

During the debate issues raised included: the focus is on safeguarding and integration, the safety of all residents including immigrants, legal responsibilities including compliance with GDPR and that the NOM is contrary to the Council’s core responsibilities.

In response, Cllr Horner advised on 2024 statistics relating to offences by immigrants.

In accordance with section 4.13.5 of the Constitution a recorded vote was taken on the NOM.

The Chair referred to the Notice of Motion (NOM) as set out on the agenda, proposed by Councillor Palethorpe, seconded by Councillor Hook and supported by the requisite number of Councillors within the procedural rules to enable it to be considered at the meeting.

The Head of Housing responded to the NOM advising that the data provided in relation to persons born outside of the UK and humanitarian arrivals under Ukraine and Afghan resettlement schemes have been verified as accurate against the data sources provided within the NOM.

Councillor Palethorpe presented his NOM as set out on the agenda.

During the debate issues raised included: 8.4% of the armed forces are non-nationals, the NOM gives no action, and other comments of support for the NOM was expressed.

An amendment to the NOM was proposed by Councillor M Smith and seconded by Councillor Hall that: The title of the NOM Celebrating the Contribution of Overseas-Born and Asylum-Seeking Residents be amended to read Celebrating the Contribution of legal overseas-born, and refugee residents; an additional 6 under the heading The Council notes to read the Council notes that the majority of migrants to the UK are by legal means, and an additional 7 to read the Council notes that asylum seekers have a reasonable style of living while awaiting asylum.

The amendment was LOST by 4 votes for and the majority against.

An amendment was proposed by Councillor J Taylor and seconded by Councillor Macgregor that the 8 recommendations of the NOM be deleted and the NOM is rewritten as one overarching statement. The Chair confirmed that the amendment was not permitted under the Procedure Rules relating to NOMs because it materially altered and changed the meaning of the NOM.

Councillor P Parker left the meeting and was not present for the remainder of the meeting.

A further amendment was proposed by Councillor Macgregor and seconded by Councillor J Taylor that the Council investigates supporting migrants in the District with induction on laws, values and community integration providing a full guide to newcomers to the District.

The amendment was LOST 8 votes for, the majority against and 8 abstentions.

A vote was taken on the original NOM as set out on the agenda, proposed by Councillor Palethorpe and seconded by Councillor Hook.

In accordance with section 4.13.5 of the Constitution a recorded vote was taken on the NOM.

Following the resumption of the meeting, an amendment was proposed by Councillor P Parker and seconded by Councillor MacGregor: “The Council to investigate in detail the option for pay to pee services, where assets are used to cover the cost of providing new custom-built facilities through disposal and other funding sources and report back to the next Full Council in October 2025.”

Councillors Keeling, Clarance and MacGregor spoke on the amendment proposed by Councillor P Parker.

Councillor J Taylor proposed a recorded vote on the amendment, and this was duly supported by more than five Members of the Council.

Councillor P Parker and Councillor MacGregor agreed to amend the wording of the amendment to report back to the next Full Council in February 2026.

The amendment put to the vote was as follows:

“The Council resolves to investigate in detail the option for pay to pee services, where assets are used to cover the cost of providing new custom-built facilities through disposal and other funding sources and report back to the next Full Council in February 2026.”

An amendment was proposed by Councillor J Taylor and seconded by Councillor Daws:

“All Toilets will under the ownership of Teignbridge District Council, maintained as public toilets, except those which town and parish councils agree to transfer to their ownership”.

Councillor J Taylor spoke to the amendment and officers responded orally to the comments made.

Councillor J Taylor proposed a recorded vote on the amendment, and this was duly supported by more than five Members of the Council. The amendment was then put to the vote.

The Council RESOLVES to: 1) Ensure the continued provision of public conveniences until April 2027. 2) With immediate effect start consultation with all Towns/Parishes to transfer toilets by April 2027 to enable continued provision of facilities and avoid cessation of services. The Head of Assets in consultation with the Portfolio Holder for Assets and Environmental Services to transfer facilities as agreed with town and parish councils. 3) Where towns and parishes are unable to fund /resource provision of public conveniences the Head of Assets will consult with other interested parties to transfer facilities on the proviso that they continue to be provided as public conveniences for the foreseeable future. 4) Ensure resources are devoted to achieving agreement with Towns/Parishes at the earliest opportunity to enable precepts to be increased if necessary.