Issue - meetings

To consider the attached Notice of Motion submitted by Councillor M. Thompson which was deferred at the last Meeting of the Council on 18th November 2015.

Any further Notices of Motion will follow on a Supplementary Agenda.  

The Council considered the following motion submitted by Councillor M Thompson and deferred for consideration from the previous meeting of the Council:

“Whilst humans and animals often enjoy a harmonious and mutually beneficial relationship, there are numerous examples of animals suffering extreme and unnecessary cruelty at the hands of humans; sadly and often in the name of entertainment. Bromsgrove District Council should be a Council that promotes animal welfare and as such be a compassionate beacon to other Districts. This motion, therefore, proposes that on its land and premises the Council:

(i)         Does not allow circuses that use animals;

(ii)        Does not allow the use of animals as prizes (for example: goldfish in fairs)

(iii)       Uses only environmentally cleaning products and products that have not been tested on animals.

The motion was proposed by Councillor M Thompson and seconded by Councillor S. P. Shannon.

In proposing the motion, Councillor Thompson suggested that if it was agreed by the Council it would set an example to others, especially young people, about taking steps to protect animals and the planet. 

During debate, Councillor B. T Cooper referred to the licensing situation regarding travelling circuses and the role of DEFRA in enforcing this.  The Council could impose restrictions on circuses on its own land.  Currently the terms and conditions of hire for circuses and fairs using Council-owned land forbade the use of animals and the use of animals as prizes.

With reference to the use of environmentally friendly cleaning and other products, Councillor Cooper reported that where this information was available on the product or COSHH Data sheets, the use of more potentially damaging products was avoided.  However, officers could not guarantee that the all the cleaning products in use by the Council had been ethically tested due to the nature of the data available. 

In the light of this information, Councillor Cooper suggested that the motion was unnecessary and that current practice achieved what was being proposed.  Councillors then debated whether the motion should be agreed in order to confirm as policy what was being practised.

On a requisition under procedure rule 18.3 the following details of voting were recorded:

For the motion: Councillors C. J. Bloore, C. A. Hotham, L.C.R Mallett, P. M. McDonald, C. M. McDonald, S. R. Peters, S. P. Shannon and M. Thompson (8)

Against the motion: Councillors R. J. Deeming, G. N. Denaro, R. L. Dent, M. Glass, J. M. L. A. Griffiths, H. J. Jones, R. J. Laight, P. Lammas, K. J. May, M. A. Sherrey, R. D. Smith, C.B. Taylor, P. L. Thomas, S. A. Webb and P. J. Whittaker (15)

Abstentions: Councillors S. J. Baxter, S. R. Colella, B. T. Cooper and R.E Jenkins (4)

The Chairman declared the motion to be LOST.