Prior to the commencement of the meeting, Provost Cameron intimated that this meeting would be filmed for live or subsequent broadcast via the Council’s internet site.

There were submitted the Minutes of the following meetings of the Council, Boards and Panels on the dates specified:

Council, 26 September 2024
Special Council, 26 September 2024
Special Regulatory Functions Board, 10 October 2024
Placing Requests and Exclusions Appeals Panel, 21 October 2024
Special Audit, Risk and Scrutiny Board, 22 October 2024
Cross Party Sounding Board, 23 October 2024
Special Council, 24 October 2024
Communities and Housing Policy Board, 29 October 2024 
Regulatory Functions Board, 30 October 2024
Education and Children’s Services Policy Board, 31 October 2024 
Audit, Risk and Scrutiny Board, 4 November 2024
Economy and Regeneration Policy Board, 5 November 2024
Planning and Climate Change Policy Board, 5 November 2024
Infrastructure, Land and Environment Policy Board, 6 November 2024
Petitions Board, 11 November 2024
Regulatory Functions Board, 14 November 2024
Local Review Body, 19 November 2024
Finance, Resources & Customer Services Policy Board, 21 November 2024
Special Infrastructure, Land and Environment Policy Board, 22 November 2024
Special Planning and Climate Change Policy Board, 3 December 2024 
Leadership Board, 4 December 2024

DECIDED: That the Minutes be approved.

The Provost advised that an update on the duties she had undertaken since the last meeting of the Council held on 24 October 2024 had been distributed to members.

DECIDED: That the update be noted.

There was submitted a report by the Director of Finance & Resources relative to the Treasury Management and Prudential Indicators Mid-year Review 2024/25. 

The report advised that the mid-year report had been prepared in compliance with the Chartered Institute of Public Finance and Accountancy’s (CIPFA) Treasury Management in the Public Services Code of Practice on Treasury Management 2021.

The report covered a review of the Treasury Management Strategy Statement 2024/25; the annual investment strategy; a review of the Council’s borrowing and investments; a review of compliance with treasury management and prudential indicators; and an economic update and interest rate forecast.

DECIDED: 

(a) That the treasury management activity for the period 1 April 2024 to 11 October 2024 (reporting period 7) be noted; and 

(b) That the ‘Probable’ prudential indicators for capital expenditure as detailed in section 7 of the report be approved.

There was submitted a report by the Director of Finance & Resources relative to a financial update on the General Fund. 

The report advised that successive financial update reports to the Council had highlighted the ongoing and increasingly challenging financial and economic environment the Council was facing.  The report updated Members on the impact of the UK Government Autumn Statement on 30 October 2024.

The report noted that although the draft Scottish Budget had been announced on 4 December 2024, details of the local government grant settlement were not expected to be with officers until 12 December 2024. The draft Budget was expected to be subject to ongoing clarification between COSLA and the Scottish Government, and a full update on the implications of the Budget for the Council’s financial position would be provided to a future Council meeting.

DECIDED:

(a) That the details of the UK Government Autumn Statement outlined in the report be noted;

(b) That the update provided in relation to the current financial year, and current financial risks be noted; and

(c) That the recommended adjustments to the capital plan outlined in section 6 be approved.

Under reference to item 3 of the Minute of the meeting of the Audit, Risk & Scrutiny Board held on 23 September 2024 there was submitted a report by the Lead Officer on behalf of the Audit, Risk & Scrutiny Board relative to the Board’s Review of neighbour disputes.

The report detailed the background and key findings of the review, and the recommendations were outlined in section 12 of the report.

DECIDED: That the findings of the review be noted and the recommendations detailed at section 12 of the report, be approved.

There was submitted a report by the Director of Finance & Resources seeking an amendment to the date of the meeting of the Leadership Board to be held on 30 April 2025; to change the Labour Group membership on various Boards and outside bodies; to seek approval for a reserved power within the Council’s Scheme of Delegations; and to delegate authority to the Head of Economy & Development to establish a Member/Officer Working group in respect of the preparation of the new Local Development Plan.

Councillor Nicolson, seconded by J Cameron moved as an addition to the recommendations: “That Councillor J Cameron be appointed as a member of the Renfrewshire Integration Joint Board in place of Councillor Airlie-Nicolson and that the appointment be effective from January 1st 2025”.

This was agreed unanimously.

DECIDED: 

(a) That it be agreed that Councillor G Graham replace Councillor Gilmour on the Audit, Risk & Scrutiny Board;

(b) That it be agreed that Councillor G Graham replace Councillor Montgomery on the Infrastructure, Land and Environment Policy Board;

(c) That it be agreed that Councillor Montgomery replace Councillor G Graham on the Leadership Board;

(d) That it be agreed that Councillor McDonald replace Councillor G Graham on OneRen;

(e) That it be agreed that Councillor Ann-Dowling replace Councillor Mullin on the Glasgow Airport FlightPath Fund;

(f) That it be agreed to light up the Bascule Bridge either blue or green from 19 to 25 December 2024;


(g) That authority be delegated to the Head of Economy & Development to make the necessary arrangements for the establishment and meetings of a Members/Officers Working Group to consider Local Development Plan evidence ahead of the submission of the LDP3 Evidence Report to Council; and

(h) That Councillor J Cameron be appointed as a member of the Renfrewshire Integration Joint Board in place of Councillor Airlie-Nicolson and that the appointment be effective from 1 January 2025.

There was submitted a Notice of Motion by Councillors Paterson and Innes in the following terms:

“Two-Child Benefit Cap 

Council agrees to write to the Chancellor of the Exchequer and the Department of Work and Pensions Secretary asking them to commit to phasing out the Two-Child Benefit Cap within the current parliamentary term, recognising the urgency of reversing its damaging effects on families and children. Requests that they produce a clear roadmap for how and when this will be achieved and work with the Scottish Government and child poverty organisations to implement a more humane and fair welfare system, one that prioritises the welfare of all children, regardless of family size or circumstance.”

Councillor Paterson, seconded by Councillor Innes, then moved the motion.

Councillor Ann-Dowling, seconded by Councillor McMillan, moved as an amendment that “Council notes the commitment made by the Scottish Labour Party to end the two-child benefit cap”. 

Councillors Paterson and Innes, being the mover and seconder of the motion, agreed in terms of Standing Order 27 to accept the amendment as an addition to the motion.

DECIDED:  Two-Child Benefit Cap 

Council agrees to write to the Chancellor of the Exchequer and the Department of Work and Pensions Secretary asking them to commit to phasing out the Two-Child Benefit Cap within the current parliamentary term, recognising the urgency of reversing its damaging effects on families and children. Requests that they produce a clear roadmap for how and when this will be achieved and work with the Scottish Government and child poverty organisations to implement a more humane and fair welfare system, one that prioritises the welfare of all children, regardless of family size or circumstance.



Council notes the commitment made by the Scottish Labour Party to end the two-child benefit cap.

There was submitted a Notice of Motion by Councillors Innes and Airlie-Nicolson in the following terms:

“Victims of Facial Scarring”

Council believes that everyone who is inflicted with a facial scar due to an assault should be supported as a victim of an extremely traumatic experience.

Council recognises that victims of permanent facial scarring suffer difficult and life-long trauma.

Further, people with facial scarring due to knife attacks or ‘slashing’ suffer stigma and can be vilified in social and professional life due to their scarring.

Council agrees that specialist support should be available for a victim from the earliest possible point and throughout any point in a victim’s life when they may feel they need it.

Council believes this is the best approach to ensure victims are supported with their trauma, to reduce stigma and to ensure the best possible chances of rehabilitation.

Council acknowledges that this support does not exist for those who need it and agrees to work with partners, charities, and organisations to further explore ways to ensure this support is in place for victims of facial scarring.”

Councillor Innes, seconded by Councillor Airlie-Nicolson, then moved the motion which was agreed unanimously.

DECIDED: Victims of Facial Scarring

Council believes that everyone who is inflicted with a facial scar due to an assault should be supported as a victim of an extremely traumatic experience.

Council recognises that victims of permanent facial scarring suffer difficult and life-long trauma.

Further, people with facial scarring due to knife attacks or ‘slashing’ suffer stigma and can be vilified in social and professional life due to their scarring.

Council agrees that specialist support should be available for a victim from the earliest possible point and throughout any point in a victim’s life when they may feel they need it.

Council believes this is the best approach to ensure victims are supported with their trauma, to reduce stigma and to ensure the best possible chances of rehabilitation.

Council acknowledges that this support does not exist for those who need it and agrees to work with partners, charities, and organisations to further explore ways to ensure this support is in place for victims of facial scarring.

There was submitted a Notice of Motion by Councillors Andy Doig and Hood in the following terms:

“Better Prostate Cancer Screening for Men

Renfrewshire Council commends the bravery of leading Scottish sports personality, Sir Chris Hoy, in speaking out about his own personal battle with prostate cancer, articulating how he has coped with those challenges, and encouraging others to do the same.

Council further supports the efforts of charities such as Prostate Cancer UK to raise awareness of the fact that prostate cancer is one of the biggest killers of men, commends their educational campaigns about the risk factors and symptoms of prostate cancer, and their robust advocacy for further research on the causes of prostate cancer. 

Council agrees with Prostate Cancer UK that current NHS guidance on prostate screening is outdated, recognizes the limitations of the PSA test, and therefore resolves to write to the Cabinet Secretary for Health and Social Care advising that NHS Scotland provide prostate cancer screening for all men over 45 years who have a family history of the disease.”

Councillor Andy Doig, seconded by Councillor Hood, then moved the motion.

Councillor Nicolson, seconded by Councillor J Cameron, moved as an amendment “Insert after years…..’in particular those who’….have a family history of the disease.”

Councillors Andy Doig and Hood, being the mover and seconder of the motion, agreed in terms of Standing Order 27 to accept the amendment as an addition to the motion.

DECIDED:  Better Prostate Cancer Screening for Men

Renfrewshire Council commends the bravery of leading Scottish sports personality, Sir Chris Hoy, in speaking out about his own personal battle with prostate cancer, articulating how he has coped with those challenges, and encouraging others to do the same.

Council further supports the efforts of charities such as Prostate Cancer UK to raise awareness of the fact that prostate cancer is one of the biggest killers of men, commends their educational campaigns about the risk factors and symptoms of prostate cancer, and their robust advocacy for further research on the causes of prostate cancer.

Council agrees with Prostate Cancer UK that current NHS guidance on prostate screening is outdated, recognizes the limitations of the PSA test, and therefore resolves to write to the Cabinet Secretary for Health and Social Care advising that NHS Scotland provide prostate cancer screening for all men over 45 years, in particular those who have a family history of the disease.

There was submitted a Notice of Motion by Councillors Ann-Dowling and G Graham in the following terms:

“Corseford College

Corseford College is Scotland’s only further education college for young people with complex needs. The college opened in 2022 as part of a two-year pilot programme funded by Scottish Government, extended for a further year in 2024-25. Specialist further education college provision is a proven and successful model in England and Wales.

Now in its third and potentially final year unless long term funding is secured, Corseford College supports students with the delivery of education, physical therapies and life-skills development from its base in Inchinnan in Renfrewshire.

Corseford College offers post-school education to young people in Renfrewshire and beyond for young people aged between 18-25 whose needs cannot be met in a mainstream college. It is delivering lifelong learning opportunities while supporting these young people to develop life skills and ways to live a more independent life in the future.

Council agrees to write to the Scottish Government requesting that it ensures a sustainable future for the college; to recognise the critical role the college plays by providing the necessary funding to ensure that no young person with complex needs in Scotland is left without a positive destination after school.

Council asks the Scottish Government to recognise the college as a fundable body by the Scottish Funding Council or for funding to be secured on a long-term basis from other Scottish Government departmental budgets.”

Councillor Ann-Dowling, seconded by Councillor G Graham, then moved the motion which was agreed unanimously.

DECIDED:  Corseford College

Corseford College is Scotland’s only further education college for young people with complex needs. The college opened in 2022 as part of a two-year pilot programme funded by Scottish Government, extended for a further year in 2024-25. Specialist further education college provision is a proven and successful model in England and Wales.

Now in its third and potentially final year unless long term funding is secured, Corseford College supports students with the delivery of education, physical therapies and life-skills development from its base in Inchinnan in Renfrewshire.

Corseford College offers post-school education to young people in Renfrewshire and beyond for young people aged between 18-25 whose needs cannot be met in a mainstream college. It is delivering lifelong learning opportunities while supporting these young people to develop life skills and ways to live a more independent life in the future.

Council agrees to write to the Scottish Government requesting that it ensures a sustainable future for the college; to recognise the critical role the college plays by providing the necessary funding to ensure that no young person with complex needs in Scotland is left without a positive destination after school.

Council asks the Scottish Government to recognise the college as a fundable body by the Scottish Funding Council or for funding to be secured on a long-term basis from other Scottish Government departmental budgets.

There was submitted a Notice of Motion by Councillors Ann-Dowling and McMillan in the following terms:

“Linwood War Memorial

Linwood is the only large population centre in Renfrewshire without a permanent war memorial for local people to pay their respects on Remembrance Sunday.

Instead, the people of Linwood have to organise Remembrance and Armistice Day services at a temporary site at a metal railing in the town. These efforts are led by local volunteers and the Linwood War Memorial Association, who have made extensive efforts to fundraise to erect a war memorial for Linwood.

Council agrees that it is unacceptable that Linwood is the only large village or town in Renfrewshire that doesn’t have a permanent monument to the men and women who were born in, lived in and worked in Linwood, who fell in war and conflict.

Council agrees to contribute £0.075m to the Linwood War Memorial Association once their community asset transfer transaction is concluded, as a donation towards the costs of erecting a permanent war memorial in Linwood.”

Councillor Ann-Dowling, seconded by Councillor McMillan, then moved the motion.

Councillor Innes, seconded by Councillor Audrey Doig, moved as an amendment “Council notes the hard work and dedication that has been put in by the Linwood War Memorial Association to give Linwood a place to honour the victims of war.

Council agreed in a previous motion that officers provide support to Linwood War Memorial Association and further encourages the group to apply for funding from the relevant grant funding stream.”

On the roll being called, the following members voted for the amendment: Councillors Adam, Airlie-Nicolson, J Cameron, Provost L Cameron, Councillors Campbell, Andy Doig, Audrey Doig, Hannigan, Hughes, Innes, MacFarlane, K MacLaren, M MacLaren, McEwan, McGurk, McNaughtan, Nicolson, Paterson, Rodden, Shaw and Steel.

The following members voted for the motion: Councillors Ann-Dowling, Clark, Davidson, Devine, Gilmour, Grady, G Graham, N Graham, Gray, Hood, Leishman, J MacLaren, McCulloch, McDonald, McGonigle, McGuire, McMillan, Montgomery, Mullin, Mylet and Smith.

21 members voted for the amendment and 21 members voted for the motion.  There being an equality of votes, the Provost used her second and casting vote in favour of the amendment.

DECIDED:  Council notes the hard work and dedication that has been put in by the Linwood War Memorial Association to give Linwood a place to honour the victims of war.

Council agreed in a previous motion that officers provide support to Linwood War Memorial Association and further encourages the group to apply for funding from the relevant grant funding stream.

There was submitted a Notice of Motion by Councillors McMillan and Davidson in the following terms:

“Ward 36 at the RAH

Council is opposed to any plans to close Ward 36 at the RAH.

Council therefore agrees to write to the Scottish Health Secretary to ask for any closure proposals to be axed and Ward 36 to remain open.”

Councillor McMillan, seconded by Councillor Davidson, then moved the motion which was approved unanimously.

DECIDED: Ward 36 at the RAH

Council is opposed to any plans to close Ward 36 at the RAH.

Council therefore agrees to write to the Scottish Health Secretary to ask for any closure proposals to be axed and Ward 36 to remain open.

There was submitted a Notice of Motion by Councillors MacFarlane and Nicolson in the following terms:

“Renfrewshire Council demands that the Labour UK Government should fully reimburse the over £500m costs of employer National Insurance contributions to the public and third sectors in Scotland as a result of the UK Autumn Statement, and that this should include full reimbursement to Renfrewshire Council and our partners.  Council further recognises that if the Chancellor does not fully reimburse these costs that it will have a detrimental impact on the wide range of services the people of Renfrewshire rely upon.”

Councillor MacFarlane, seconded by Councillor Nicolson, then moved the motion.

Councillor Ann-Dowling, seconded by Councillor McMillan moved as an amendment that: “Renfrewshire Council recognises that the UK Labour Budget delivered the largest settlement for the Scottish Government in the history of devolution, in addition to compensation for changes to employer National Insurance Contributions for public sector employees.

Council further notes that a key influence on provision of council services is the detrimental impact on council finances from years of underfunding by SNP Government.

Renfrewshire Council demands that the Scottish Government gives an assurance that the additional Barnett consequentials allocated to the Scottish Government by the UK Government of £1.5 billion for 2024/2025 and £3.4 billion for 2025/2026 will be allocated to local councils and to Health and Social Care Partnerships in proportion to the national insurance increases in these areas by the UK Government.”

On the roll being called, the following members voted for the amendment: Councillors Ann-Dowling, Clark, Davidson, Gilmour, Grady, G Graham, McCulloch, McDonald, McGuire, McMillan, Montgomery, Mullin and Smith. 

The following members voted for the motion: Councillors Adam, Airlie-Nicolson, J Cameron, Provost L Cameron, Councillors Campbell, Audrey Doig, N Graham, Gray, Hannigan, Hughes, Innes, Leishman, MacFarlane, J MacLaren, K MacLaren, M MacLaren, McEwan, McGonigle, McGurk, McNaughtan, Mylet, Nicolson, Paterson, Rodden, Shaw and Steel.

The following members abstained: Councillors Devine, Andy Doig and Hood.

26 members having voted for the motion, 13 members having voted for the amendment and 3 members having abstained, the motion was accordingly declared carried.

DECIDED:  Renfrewshire Council demands that the Labour UK Government should fully reimburse the over £500m costs of employer National Insurance contributions to the public and third sectors in Scotland as a result of the UK Autumn Statement, and that this should include full reimbursement to Renfrewshire Council and our partners. Council further recognises that if the Chancellor does not fully reimburse these costs that it will have a detrimental impact on the wide range of services the people of Renfrewshire rely upon.

There was submitted a Notice of Motion by Councillors McMillan and Clark in the following terms:

“IJB Budget

Council notes that the IJB meeting to be held on the 13th December is facing some difficult decisions in order to achieve a balanced budget.

Council is concerned about potential service cuts having a detrimental impact on some of the most vulnerable people and their families in Renfrewshire.

Council therefore agrees to write to the Scottish Government, First Minister, Finance Minister and the Health Secretary to: raise Renfrewshire Council concerns about the impact any significant reduction in service levels or removal of health and social care services will have on the people of Renfrewshire; and to ask what steps the Scottish Government is taking to ensure the health and social care needs of the people of Renfrewshire continue to be met in the face of IJB budget constraints.

Finally, Council agrees that IJB’s need to work for the residents and service users of Renfrewshire.”

Councillor McMillan, seconded by Councillor Clark, then moved the motion.

Councillor Adam, seconded by Councillor Nicolson moved as an amendment that the final sentence of the motion be deleted and replaced with “Council notes that on 2 May 2018, the then Cabinet Secretary for Health and Sport undertook that a review of progress by Integration Authorities would be taken. Audit Scotland in its report in 2018 highlighted difficult challenges facing integration schemes which included financial planning. In the intervening period and recognising the significant risk to the councils own financial planning this Council now believes that a systemic review is required on the integration scheme with regards to financial sustainability.

Renfrewshire Council agrees to write to the Cabinet Secretary for Health and Social Care to consider a new funding model for the Integrated Joint Scheme and for the resources required to provide the services that the people of Renfrewshire rely upon.”

Councillors McMillan and Clark, being the mover and seconder of the motion, agreed in terms of Standing Order 27 to accept the amendment as an addition to the motion.

DECIDED:  IJB Budget

Council notes that the IJB meeting to be held on the 13 December is facing some difficult decisions in order to achieve a balanced budget.

Council is concerned about potential service cuts having a detrimental impact on some of the most vulnerable people and their families in Renfrewshire.

Council therefore agrees to write to the Scottish Government,  First Minister, Finance Minister and the Health Secretary to: raise Renfrewshire Council concerns about the impact any significant reduction in service levels or removal of health and social care services will have on the people of Renfrewshire; and to ask what steps the Scottish Government is taking to ensure the health and social care needs of the people of Renfrewshire continue to be met in the face of IJB budget constraints.

That Council notes that on 2 May 2018, the then Cabinet Secretary for Health and Sport undertook that a review of progress by Integration Authorities would be taken. Audit Scotland in its report in 2018 highlighted difficult challenges facing integration schemes which included financial planning. In the intervening period and recognising the significant risk to the councils own financial planning this Council now believes that a systemic review is required on the integration scheme with regards to financial sustainability.

Renfrewshire Council agrees to write to the Cabinet Secretary for Health and Social Care to consider a new funding model for the Integrated Joint Scheme and for the resources required to provide the services that the people of Renfrewshire rely upon.

There was submitted a Notice of Motion by Councillors Clark and Smith in the following terms:

“Police Provision in Paisley 

Renfrewshire Council notes Police Scotland‘s wish to close Paisley’s Mill Street Police Station.

Council believes that in Scotland’s largest town it is imperative that Police Scotland maintain their current policing provision including 24/7 public counter access and CID.

Council requests that the closure of Paisley’s Mill Street Police Station should be fully dependent on Police Scotland obtaining or leasing alternative premises that fully meet with a like-for-like provision of existing services or indeed improve them.”

Councillors Clark, seconded by Councillor Smith, then moved the motion which was agreed unanimously.

DECIDED: Police Provision in Paisley 

Renfrewshire Council notes Police Scotland‘s wish to close Paisley’s Mill Street Police Station.

Council believes that in Scotland’s largest town it is imperative that Police Scotland maintain their current policing provision including 24/7 public counter access and CID.

Council requests that the closure of Paisley’s Mill Street Police Station should be fully dependent on Police Scotland obtaining or leasing alternative premises that fully meet with a like-for-like provision of existing services or indeed improve them.

The Board resolved that the press and public be excluded from the meeting during consideration of Item 17 as it was likely, in view of the nature of the business to be transacted, that if members of the press and public were present, there would be disclosure to them of exempt information as defined in paragraphs 6 and 9 of Part I of Schedule 7A of the Local Government (Scotland) Act 1973.

There was submitted an exempt joint report by the Chief Executive and Director of Finance & Resources relative to an update on the Glasgow Airport Investment Area Project Mediation.

DECIDED:  That the recommendations as indicated at sections 2.1 and 2.2 within the report be agreed.