Voting record

Cllr Macgregor proposed an amendment that recommendations 1 and 3 as set out on the agenda report supporting the 4/5/1 model be approved as the best option for the residents of Teignbridge. This was seconded by Cllr G Taylor.

Cllr Macgregor confirmed the wording of his proposed amendment would be recommendation 1 and 3 of the agenda report as a recommendation to the Executive with a revised recommendation 2 of the agenda report to read:

2. Teignbridge District Council only support the option of 4/5/1.

The amendment was seconded by Cllr G Taylor.

The amendment to recommendation 2 would ensure that Dartmoor National Park in its entirety would remain in one unitary authority and address Cllrs concerns about the expansion of Plymouth City Council’s boundaries. 

A recorded vote in accordance with paragraph 4.13.5. of the Constitution was taken.

In accordance with paragraph 4.13.5. of the Constitution a recorded vote was taken on the substantive motion.

RECOMMENDED to the Executive that

1.     Teignbridge District Council endorses the submission of ‘Reimagining Devon – Believe in Better’ (Appendix 4) as the Council’s response to the invitation from the Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government for Local Government Reorganisation in Devon, with two new unitary authorities and Plymouth as a ‘continuing authority’.

2.     Teignbridge District Council only support the option of 4/5/1.

3.     Delegated power be given to the Managing Director, in consultation with the Executive Member for Local Government Reorganisation to submit the proposals and covering letter (Appendix 5) to the Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government by the deadline of 28th November 2025.

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.