Agenda item

(a)           Armed Forces – End to the Unjust Benefits System for Veterans – “Credit Their Service”

Proposer:  Cllr Danny Lee
Seconder:   Cllr Brian Laming

Preamble

 

Winchester is a proud supporter of the Armed Forces community, the Royal British Legion (RBL) and Armed Forces Covenant. Our district has deep historic and present-day ties with the Armed Forces, including service personnel, veterans, and their families who contribute to our community.

However, veterans receiving military compensation continue to face unfair treatment in the welfare system. The Royal British Legion’s “Credit Their Service” campaign highlights this serious injustice.

This inequity results in our poorest veterans and their families being denied full financial support that would otherwise be available to civilians receiving equivalent compensation through civil courts. Winchester City Council can lead locally by ensuring military compensation can be treated fairly and advocate for national reform.

 

Council Notes

 

·       That military compensation, awarded by the UK Government for injury, illness or loss sustained in service, is still treated as income by c80% of local authorities in the UK and is therefore means-tested benefits, despite civilian personal-injury compensation being fully disregarded.

·       That the Royal British Legion’s ‘Credit Their Service’ campaign has identified more than 150,000 veterans and family members affected nationally each year.

·       That councils have the discretion to disregard Armed Forces Compensation Scheme (AFCS) and War Pension income in local benefits including Council Tax Support (CTS), Housing Benefit (HB), Discretionary Housing Payments (DHP), and Disabled Facilities Grants (DFG).

·       That the Royal British Legion lists Eastleigh and other authorities – including Wigan, Durham, Northumberland, and Basingstoke – as councils that have adopted fairer treatment by fully disregarding military compensation in local schemes.

·       That Winchester City Council has a strong commitment to the Armed Forces Covenant and can demonstrate national leadership by ensuring local veterans are treated fairly. Winchester City Council signed the Covenant on 2 March 2022[1].

 

Council Resolves

1. To support the Royal British Legion’s “Credit Their Service” campaign, recognising the injustice caused when military compensation is treated as income in local means-tested benefits.

2. To amend all relevant Winchester City Council policies to ensure that

 

·       All Armed Forces Compensation Scheme payments and War Disablement Pensions are fully disregarded when assessing financial liability for Disabled Facilities Grants (DFG).

·       All Armed Forces compensation and War Pension income is fully disregarded when assessing eligibility or award levels for Discretionary Housing Payments (DHP).

·       The same principle is applied wherever legally permissible in Council Tax Support and Housing Benefit calculations within local discretionary parameters.

3. To embed this position explicitly within the Council’s Private Sector Housing Policy and DFG Policy Statement, citing the Armed Forces Covenant duty to ensure fair treatment.

4. To publicise the policy clearly to veterans, local voluntary groups, and Armed Forces representatives across the district.

5. To write to the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions urging national reform so that military compensation is fully exempt from all means-tested Department for Work and Pensions benefits.

6. To work with the Royal British Legion, the Hampshire Armed Forces Covenant Partnership, and neighbouring councils to support consistent adoption of “Credit Their Service” principles across Hampshire.

 

………..

Ref/Notes

1.    Credit their Service

 

 

(b)           Protecting Streams and Rivers Across the Winchester District.

 

Proposer: Cllr Kelsie Learney

Seconder: Cllr Suzanne White

 

This Council recognises that our streams and rivers are vital to the ecological health, cultural heritage, and future sustainability of the Winchester district.

 

Our district includes internationally significant chalk streams, the River Itchen, River Meon, and River Dever, as well as the River Hamble and other watercourses.

 

These rivers provide habitats for unique and endangered species, support livelihoods, recreation, the wellbeing of our residents and have historical and cultural significance.  However rivers across the UK, and here in the Winchester district, face increasing pressures from pollution, over-abstraction, habitat and biodiversity degradation, and climate change.

 

This Council welcomes the priority given to the protection and restoration of rivers and chalk streams within the recently adopted Local Nature Recovery strategy for Hampshire and the specific reference to chalk streams within the recently published consultation draft revision of the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF).

 

However these measures are unlikely to counter the cumulative impact of:

·       Government proposals to scale back biodiversity net gain (BNG) requirements

·       Indications that nature-friendly farming measures within Environmental Land Management schemes (ELMs) may be rolled back.

·       Proposed changes weakening Habitats Regulations

·       Reference in the draft NPPF to “an unacceptable adverse effect on water quality” rather than absolute protection

·       The removal of the House of Lords’ amendment to the Planning and Infrastructure bill which required spatial development strategies to identify the measures to protect chalk streams from environmental damage; and impose responsibilities on strategic planning authorities in relation to the protection and enhancement of chalk stream habitats.

 

Council therefore resolves to:

 

1.    Restate this Council’s intention to lead by example to protect and restore our rivers and streams and their catchments.

 

2.    Continue to advocate to Government and national and regional bodies, including the Environment Agency, for the protection of our chalk streams and other freshwater ecosystems.

 

3.    Support local initiatives and citizen monitoring efforts that protect and restore river health, such as citizen science water testing and river fly monitoring, riparian buffer planting, natural flood management, creating wildlife corridors and sustainable agriculture partnerships.

 

4.    Support public engagement to raise awareness of the importance of chalk streams and rivers to Hampshire’s natural and cultural heritage.

 

 

 

(c)           Hampshire Mayoral Election.

 

Proposer: Cllr Caroline Horrill

Seconder: Cllr Stephen Godfrey

This council notes the announcement last month from the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government that the inaugural elections to select a Mayor for the new Hampshire Mayoral Combined Authority would not take place until May 2028.

This Council believes that the election of a Mayor for the Hampshire & the Solent Combined County Authority must happen as early as possible, preferably in May 2026, but should not be delayed beyond May 2027.

This Council resolves to:

1.????Formally oppose the Government’s proposal to delay the Hampshire Mayoral election from May 2026 to May 2028.

2.????Write to the Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government expressing this Council’s concern at the proposed delay and calling for the election to proceed in May 2026 as originally planned and not to be postponed beyond May 2027.

 

(d)           Local Elections.

 

Proposer: Cllr Caroline Horrill

Seconder: Cllr Stephen Godfrey

 

This council notes the letter from the Minister of State for Local Government and Homelessness on 18th December 2025 inviting views on the postponement of local elections from May 2026.

 

This Council believes that local elections, including those planned for Winchester City Council in May 2026, must not be postponed.

This Council resolves to request that the Leader responds to the Minister accordingly – making clear that Winchester City Council does not support postponement of its elections.

 

In accordance with Council Procedure Rule 15, four motions had been submitted for Council.

 

a)    Armed Forces – End to the Unjust Benefits System for Veterans – ‘Credit Their Service’

 

Councillor Godfrey left the chamber during consideration of this item and took no part in the discussion or decision.

 

The first motion submitted was by Councillor Lee and was as set out on the agenda and was seconded by Councillor Laming. Following its introduction by Councillor Lee, Council then debated the matters in the motion. In summary the following points were raised:

 

·       The council should understand additional costs of it supporting the motion.

 

·       The council should ensure that outcomes of the motion should continue as a legacy to the future unitary council responsible for the area.  However, they would need to make their own decisions on processes at the appropriate time.

 

·       Repeal of the Legacy Act was regarding lawfulness of acts during military service.  The proposals in the motion was compensation (for the individual and their family) for significant personal consequence in military service.

 

·       The council should use the discretion afforded to it on any elements in favour of veterans.

 

·       The council will look within the budget regarding topping up the existing discretionary housing payments fund, as this was depleted each year.

 

·       It was confirmed that support for the motion would be inclusive of disabled facilities grants.

 

Having reserved their right to speak, the seconder of the motion (Councillor Laming) then addressed Council, followed by the proposer of the motion (Councillor Lee) who exercised their right to respond to debate.

 

The Council then voted on the motion as set out on the agenda.

 

RESOLVED:

 

That the motion proposed by Councillor Lee (seconded by Councillor Laming) be supported, and that this Council resolves:

 

1.   To support the Royal British Legion’s “Credit Their Service” campaign, recognising the injustice caused when military compensation is treated as income in local means-tested benefits.

2.   To amend all relevant Winchester City Council policies to ensure that

 

·       All Armed Forces Compensation Scheme payments and War Disablement Pensions are fully disregarded when assessing financial liability for Disabled Facilities Grants (DFG).

 

·       All Armed Forces compensation and War Pension income is fully disregarded when assessing eligibility or award levels for Discretionary Housing Payments (DHP).

 

·       The same principle is applied wherever legally permissible in Council Tax Support and Housing Benefit calculations within local discretionary parameters.

3.   To embed this position explicitly within the Council’s Private Sector Housing Policy and DFG Policy Statement, citing the Armed Forces Covenant duty to ensure fair treatment.

4.   To publicise the policy clearly to veterans, local voluntary groups, and Armed Forces representatives across the district.

5.   To write to the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions urging national reform so that military compensation is fully exempt from all means-tested Department for Work and Pensions benefits.

6.   To work with the Royal British Legion, the Hampshire Armed Forces Covenant Partnership, and neighbouring councils to support consistent adoption of “Credit Their Service” principles across Hampshire.

 

 

b)    Protecting Streams and Rivers Across the Winchester District

 

The motion submitted was by Councillor Learney and was as set out on the agenda and was seconded by Councillor White.

 

Following its introduction by Councillor Learney, Council then debated the matters in the motion.  In summary the following points were raised:

 

·       Did ‘cultural history’ (as referenced in resolution 2) include industrial and agricultural practices that have formed the ecosystems around our rivers?

 

·       Data from Rivers and Seas Watch indicated that the scale of the release of untreated sewage and storm water from the combined sewage overflows are a threat to public health, notably in recreational areas where this regularly occurred.

 

·       The rivers and streams made Winchester and district special, and it was the council’s responsibility to preserve these vital resources. 

 

·       Foul water discharges into our rivers must be monitored and practical steps to reduce the frequency and impact of these discharges should be supported.  The council should be open and transparent about its activity near its own water treatment works.

 

AMENDMENT – Moved by Councillor Godfrey and seconded by Councillor Bolton:

Add new Resolution 6.  Request that the Council publishes a quarterly report on discharges from council-operated water treatment works. 

Council proceeded to debate the matters in the Amendment. In summary the following points were raised:

 

·       The Environment Agency inspection reports indicated that council operated treatment works function well, however other discharges such as nitrates or phosphates were not currently monitored or reported on.  

 

·       The council operate many wastewater treatment plants and so it would not be effective use of resources to produce monitoring data for each.  It would be better to direct these resources where interventions were planned for.

 

·       The council was already working to upgrade its water treatment works.

 

·       A quarterly report would take additional resources to achieve and may appear as the council ‘marking its own homework’.

 

·       The council would provide a link on its website to the Environment Agency, so residents could readily access the most up-to-date information.

 

·       The council should be prepared to lead by example and measure and publish its own output.

 

Following the proposer of original motion (Councillor Learney) exercising their right to reply to the debate on the Amendment, council then voted on the Amendment as set out above.

 

AMENDMENT LOST

 

Council then proceeded to continue to debate the original motion before it and in summary, the following additional points were raised:

 

·       The motion will protect all water ways in the district and not only chalk streams.

 

·       Local voluntary groups must be commended for their work and campaigning for cleaner rivers.

 

·       Occurrences of failure of some Southern Water wastewater networks (alongside agricultural runoff and road pollution) had demonstrated the vulnerability of our rivers and chalk streams.

 

·       A ‘Rights of River’ approach within the motion may have provided a case for changes to legislation and was an approach adopted by some other councils in Hampshire. 

 

Having reserved their right to speak, the seconder of the motion (Councillor White) then addressed Council, followed by the proposer of the motion (Councillor Learney) who exercised their right to respond to debate.

 

The Council then voted on the motion as set out on the agenda.

 

RESOLVED:

 

That the motion proposed by Councillor Learney (seconded by Councillor White) be supported, and that this Council resolves to:

 

1.    Restate this Council’s intention to lead by example to protect and restore our rivers and streams and their catchments.

 

2.    Continue to advocate to Government and national and regional bodies, including the Environment Agency, for the protection of our chalk streams and other freshwater ecosystems.

 

3.    Support local initiatives and citizen monitoring efforts that protect and restore river health, such as citizen science water testing and river fly monitoring, riparian buffer planting, natural flood management, creating wildlife corridors and sustainable agriculture partnerships.

 

4.    Support public engagement to raise awareness of the importance of chalk streams and rivers to Hampshire’s natural and cultural heritage.

 

5.    Request that the Environment Agency publishes an annual "State of the Rivers" report to track progress in protecting the aquatic environment, in collaboration with local environmental organisations.

 

 

c)    Hampshire Mayoral Election.

 

The Leader (Councillor Tod) left the chamber during consideration of this item and took no part in the discussion or decision.

 

The motion submitted was by Councillor Horrill and was as set out on the agenda and was seconded by Councillor Godfrey.

 

Following its introduction by Councillor Horrill, Council then debated the matters in the motion. In summary the following points were raised:

 

·       Delaying the mayoral elections created a technical issue regarding how a new combined authority can operate.

 

·       The decision regarding a combined mayoral authority was made on the understanding that it would drive necessary investment to the area.  Transition to a new authority should take place in the way that was respectful of the residents’ expectations and giving Hampshire the stable framework that it deserved.

 

AMENDMENT – Moved by Councillor Pinniger and seconded by Councillor Power:

 

Add new words showing in bold italics. 

 

This council notes the announcement last month from the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government that the inaugural elections to select a Mayor for the new Hampshire Mayoral Combined Authority would not take place until May 2028.

 

This Council believes that the election of a Mayor for the Hampshire & the Solent Combined County Authority must happen as early as possible, preferably in May 2026, but should not be delayed beyond May 2027. This Council further believes that the most effective way of securing this change is through continuing with a collaborative and coordinated approach with other Hampshire and Isle of Wight authorities – and that the request should also include a restoration of funding levels to £43m a year.

 

This Council resolves to:

 

1. Formally oppose the Government’s proposal to delay the Hampshire Mayoral election from May 2026 to May 2028.

 

2. Write to the Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government expressing this Council’s concern at the proposed delay and calling for the election to proceed in May 2026 as originally planned and not to be postponed beyond May 2027 as part of a coordinated plan with other authorities and if current approaches are not successful.

 

With the leave of the proposer of the original motion before Council (Councillor Horrill), Council agreed that the matters in the amendment were acceptable and that no debate on the amendment was required.

 

AMENDMENT CARRIED.

 

Council then proceeded to further debate the motion (as amended) and now the substantive motion before the meeting.

 

In summary the following points were raised:

 

·     The mayoral election should proceed under the Supplementary Vote (SV) system as the First-Past-the-Post system risked conferring extensive executive powers on candidates elected with the support of only a minority of voters, particularly where multiple candidates stand.

 

Having reserved their right to speak, the seconder of the original motion (which was now as amended), Councillor Godfrey, then addressed Council, followed by the proposer of the original motion (Councillor Horrill) who exercised their right to respond to debate.

 

The Council then voted on the motion as set out on the agenda, as amended above.

 

RESOLVED:

 

That the motion proposed by Councillor Horrill (seconded by Councillor Godfrey), as amended (proposed by Councillor Pinniger, and seconded by Councillor Power) be supported, and that this Council resolves to:

 

1. Formally oppose the Government’s proposal to delay the Hampshire Mayoral election from May 2026 to May 2028.

 

2. Write to the Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government expressing this Council’s concern at the proposed delay and calling for the election to proceed in May 2026 as originally planned and not to be postponed beyond May 2027 as part of a coordinated plan with other authorities and if current approaches are not successful.

 

d)    Local Elections.

 

The motion submitted was by Councillor Horrill and was as set out on the agenda. The motion was seconded by Councillor Godfrey.

 

Following its introduction by Councillor Horrill, Council then debated the matters in the motion. In summary, the following points were raised:

 

·       Stability, transparency, and public confidence all depend on scheduled elections taking place.

 

·       The Supplementary Vote (SV) system would not be available for the forthcoming local elections.

 

·       Local elections were one of the most fundamental ways residents engaged with local issues and voting in local politics was an important right.

 

·       There was absolute confidence that officers had the capacity and expertise to deliver elections at this time, and there was absolutely no reason for them to be delayed.

 

Having reserved their right to speak, the seconder of the motion (Councillor Godfrey) then addressed Council, followed by the proposer of the motion (Councillor Horrill) who exercised their right to respond to debate.

 

The Council then voted on the motion as set out on the agenda.

 

RESOLVED:

 

That the motion proposed by Councillor Horrill (seconded by Councillor Godfrey) be supported, and that this Council resolves to:

 

Request that the Leader responds to the Minister accordingly – making clear that Winchester City Council does not support postponement of its elections.