Agenda item - Motions on Notice

Agenda item

Motions on Notice

A period of up to one hour is allocated to consider the motions on notice.  This may only be extended with the agreement of the Council.

 

Minutes:

LEP

 

Members considered the following notice of motion, submitted by Councillor S. Colella.

 

"This motion calls on the Leader to formally withdraw from the Greater
Birmingham and Solihull Local Enterprise Partnership (GBSLEP) in favour of
more heightened involvement in the Worcestershire LEP.”

 

In considering the motion Councillor Colella requested that the Leader provide an update in respect of the LEPs.

 

The Leader explained that the government had recently published a report in respect of LEPS.  This report outlined requirements which stipulated that LEPs should no longer overlap in terms of the areas that they covered.  The Chairmen of the LEPs would be required to meet to discuss how to resolve this issue, including the Chairmen of Worcestershire LEP and the Greater Birmingham and Solihull LEP.  A decision would need to be taken by the end of September in relation to this matter, though would not come into effect until 2020.

 

Councillor Colella commented that he would be keen for full Council to have a chance to consider which LEP the Council would remain a member of moving forward. 

 

Based on the update provided, Councillor Colella withdrew the motion.

 

Prayers

 

Members considered the following notice of motion, submitted by Councillor S. Webb.

 

"Council notes:

·                Of the 6 district councils in Worcestershire, 4 councils currently have a space for prayer and reflection. Since 2015, the right of Councils to decide to hold prayers has been enshrined in law.

·                A space for prayers and reflection gives an opportunity to welcome different communities and faiths into the heart of local government in Bromsgrove, and sends a powerful message to all communities that they are welcome here.

·                That it is important to make local democracy as open and inclusive as possible, with a role for every faith community and none. Council emphasises that including a space for reflection and prayer is an opportunity to allow all faiths and none to play a role in local government, not to appear to subscribe to one faith in particular, and those who do not wish to participate in a prayer or thought for the day have no obligation to do so.

 

Council resolves:

·                To introduce a space for prayers and reflection as a part of Full Council meetings at the beginning. Council takes this opportunity to welcome all faiths and none to play a role in local government in Bromsgrove, and resolves to write to representatives of different faiths and nonreligious local figures to ask if they would like to participate.”

 

The motion was proposed by Councillor S. Webb and seconded by Councillor R. Laight.

 

In proposing the motion Councillor Webb commented that Councils that practised prayers and moments of reflection across the country often chose to have a rotating series of local faith representatives play a part in the Council’s business from week to week.  This provided a chance to open the doors of local government to representatives of all communities so that members of the public could be involved.  Prayers would provide an opportunity to welcome everyone to a Council meeting. 

 

Members, staff and residents would not be forced to participate in the prayer if they did not wish to do so and could stand or sit as they felt appropriate during the course of the prayer.  Public office inevitably meant that Members would come into contact with many different faiths, cultures and ceremonies.  However, Councillor Webb suggested that it was important to distinguish between this, which could sometimes involve being present in a room where prayers were taking place, and active participation in the prayer.

 

Councillor Webb expressed the view that Council meetings in Bromsgrove could be quite lively and she raised concerns that this could be off-putting for some residents.  Members got involved with the Council in order to make a difference and to represent their residents and Councillor Webb suggested that a quiet space for reflection in the Council Chamber was needed to help remember this.

 

Finally, Councillor Webb concluded by suggesting that the reintroduction of prayers and a space for reflection would provide Members with space to welcome representatives of all faiths and none to the heart of local government in Bromsgrove whilst reminding Members why they were there.

 

Following the presentation of the motion Members discussed the subject in detail and raised a number of issues:

 

·                Concerns were raised that the Council Chamber was a place where politics should be conducted and it was suggested that politics and religion should be separate issues. 

·                Members noted that many people had a strong religious faith but often this would be private and they might not want to take part in the prayers. 

·                Further concerns were highlighted that some people could be made to feel uncomfortable if they felt they wanted to leave the Chamber during the course of the prayer. 

·                The suggestion was made that another room should be made available close to the Parkside Suite which could be used by those who wanted to participate in a prayer immediately before the start of a Council meeting.

·                It was noted that there was a long tradition of holding prayers at the start of Council meetings in Bromsgrove.

·                The prayer would provide those present with an opportunity for reflection and this would not necessarily require religious faith.

·                Prayers were held at the start of Council meetings by a number of other local authorities, including Worcestershire County Council.

 

In accordance with Council Procedure Rule 18.3 a recorded vote was taken and the voting was as follows:

 

For the motion: Councillors Allen-Jones, Deeming, Denaro, Dent, Glass, Jones, Laight, May, Sherrey, Taylor, Thomas, S. Webb and Whittaker. (13)

 

Against the motion: Councillors Buxton, Colella, Jenkins, Mallett, C. McDonald, P. McDonald, Shannon, Thompson and Van der Plank. (9)

 

Abstentions: Councillor Cooper. (1)

 

The Chairman declared the motion to be carried.

 

Court Leet

 

Members considered the following notice of motion, submitted by Councillor P. McDonald.

 

"Although the Court Leet is fictitious the cost to this Council is not.

At a time of political austerity with many people going without and local food banks unable to cope with demand; valuable resources cannot be justified for people to dress up as ancient lords of the manor in the twenty first century.

Therefore, this Council no longer in anyway facilitates either in monies or kind the antics of those professing to be of the defunct Court Leet."

 

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

 

In proposing the motion Councillor McDonald expressed concerns that the Council was supporting the Court Leet at a time of austerity.  Many families were struggling financially as a result of austerity so it was important to ensure appropriate investment of Council resources.  The Court Leet celebrated an historical matter and it was suggested that those participating in the celebrations could raise funds and obtain support from other sources.  Councillor McDonald also expressed concerns that police resources were used as security during the Court Leet which could have been used for other purposes.

 

In seconding the motion Councillor Shannon expressed concerns that the Court Leet appeared to be receiving indirect support from the Council at a time when local government finances were challenging.  Councillor Shannon suggested that the Council should instead focus on supporting those in need in the district.

 

In responding to the motion the Portfolio Holder for the Economic Development and the Town Centre, Councillor K. May, explained that the Court Leet was key to Bromsgrove’s market town identity.  The event encouraged visitors to the town who would subsequently return, which had a positive impact on the local economy.  The Court Leet celebrated the charter awarded to Bromsgrove in 1199.  The Council had provided a few staff hours prior to the event for set up purposes at a cost of £250 and had also provided some market stalls for free, though if a charge had been applied the cost would have been approximately £250.

 

Councillor May went on to note that over the past few years there had been a number of events in the town centres in the district which had attracted visitors.  Furthermore there had been 6,000 views of a video of the Festival of Light Parade on social media.  All of this raised the profile of Bromsgrove and this highlighted the benefit associated with holding events in the town like the Court Leet.

 

On being put to the vote the motion was lost.

 

Housing Shortage

 

Members considered the following notice of motion, submitted by Councillor M. Thompson.

 

“Council notes the impact of the housing shortage in Bromsgrove. The necessity of this town to provide affordable housing for all is paramount to our economy, livelihoods and wellbeing. Noting this, council resolves to refer the following matters to the Strategic Planning Steering Group for consideration as part of the ongoing review of the Local Plan.

 

1. Introduce a minimum of 60% affordable housing on all new developments, of which half of this quota is for social rent.

 

2. 20% of all new developments be made "lifetime homes" (or similar) so that, where necessary, homes are more easily adaptable for the less able.

 

3. Reduce the minimum quota (for the above) to 5 dwellings (or equivalent on land mass).

 

4. Publicly declare any variation made by commercial developers.

 

5. Undertake a feasibility study on cooperative housing developments in Bromsgrove.”

 

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

 

In proposing the motion Councillor Thompson commented that there was a need for the Council to increase the supply of affordable housing in the district.  Councillor Thompson urged Council to remove the cap on affordable housing, to increase the proportion of social housing in the district and to require developers to build more lifetime homes suitable for people with physical disabilities.  Where developers failed to meet these targets Councillor Thompson suggested that this needed to be addressed.

 

In seconding the motion Councillor P. McDonald commented that there were many working people employed on the minimum wage and on zero hours’ contracts who struggled with living costs.  There was a disparity between affordable housing and properties that were priced at the market value in the district and Councillor McDonald expressed concerns that young people living in parts of Bromsgrove would struggle to afford a home.  To address this Councillor McDonald suggested that the cap for affordable housing in local planning policies needed to be increased from 40 per cent to 60 per cent.  Furthermore he suggested that if developers asked for a change to their planning conditions following approval to reduce the number of affordable homes in a housing estate this should be made public.  Members were asked to note that at Manchester City Council such requests from developers were made public.

 

Following the presentation of the motion Members discussed a number of points in detail:

 

·                The waiting list for social housing in Bromsgrove and the need to provide people on the list with housing.

·                The potential to undertake a feasibility study to ensure that any plans in respect of housing development met the needs of local residents.

·                The approach to housing residents in Redditch, including Council Housing and social housing provision, and the potential to replicate this in Bromsgrove district.

·                The potential for 100 per cent of houses built in the district to be lifetime homes.

·                The impact that a requirement for 60 per cent of houses to be affordable would have on development in the district.  Councillor P. Whittaker expressed the view that this would deter developers from building houses in the district as it would impact on the viability of the development.

·                The role of the Strategic Planning Steering Group in reviewing planning policy moving forward.  The Portfolio Holder for Planning and Strategic Housing, Councillor Taylor, urged all Members to attend meetings of this group as it would provide them with an opportunity to shape planning policy moving forward.

·                The position of housing developers.  Councillor Taylor noted that developers had a right to make 20 per cent on their return.

·                The potential to amend the local plan so that instead of requiring up to 40 per cent of houses to be affordable developers could be asked to build at least 40 per cent of a development as affordable housing.

 

On being put to the vote the motion was lost.

 

Supporting documents: