Agenda and minutes

The Lord Mayor welcomed all attendees to the meeting and issued the safety information.

Apologies for absence were heard from Councillors Ali, Bradshaw, Davies, Hartley, Hulme, Morris, Pearce, J Scott and S Scott.

To note any declarations of interest from the Councillors.  They are asked to indicate the relevant agenda item, the nature of the interest and in particular whether it is a disclosable pecuniary interest.

Any declarations of interest made at the meeting which is not on the register of interests should be notified to the Monitoring Officer for inclusion.

Cllr Kent declared an interest as a former member of the Bristol Parent Carer Forum, which is the subject of the Golden Motion. This is not a pecuniary interest.

To agree the minutes of the previous meeting as a correct record.

On the motion of the Lord Mayor, seconded by Councillor Hance, it was

RESOLVED:

That the minutes of the meeting of the Full Council held on the 5 July 2020 be confirmed as correct record and signed by the Lord Mayor.

To note any announcements from the Lord Mayor

Full Council noted the sad news that former Councillor Charles Lucas, who served Clifton Ward from 2013 to 2016 has recently passed away. A minutes’ silence was observed.

Public forum items can be about any matter the Council is responsible for or which directly affects the city. Submissions will be treated in order of receipt and as many people shall be called upon as is possible within the time allowed within the meeting (normally 30 minutes).

Further rules can be found within our Council Procedure Rules within the Constitution.

Please note that the following deadlines apply to this meeting:

a. Public petitions and statements: Petitions and written statements must be received by 12 noon on Friday 14 October 2022 at latest. One written statement per member of the public is permitted.

b. Public questions: Written public questions must be received by 5pm on

Wednesday 12 October 2022 at latest. A maximum of 2 questions per member of the public is permitted. Questions should be addressed to the Mayor or relevant Cabinet Member.

Public forum items should be e-mailed to democratic.services@bristol.gov.uk

Public Petitions:

There was one public petition received which was referred to the Mayor for his consideration and response.

Public Statements:

Full Council received and noted the following statements, which were also referred to the Mayor for his consideration / information.

Please note: Up to 10 minutes is allowed for this item.

Petitions notified by Councillors can be about any matter the Council is responsible for or which directly affects the city.  The deadline for the notification of petitions to this meeting is 12 noon on Monday 17 October 2022.

None received.

Recommendation

That Full Council debates the petition and refers it to the Mayor / relevant Cabinet member for a formal response.

The Full Council considered a report of the Director of Legal and Democratic Services setting out details of a petition ‘Enable Group to Address Sewage Pollution in the Avon’. The petition had reached the 3,500 signature threshold to qualify for a Full Council debate.

Becca Blease and Eva Perrin, the petition organisers, were invited by the Lord Mayor to present the objectives of the petition.

The Full Council debated the petition.

Following the debate it was:

RESOLVED: That the petition and the comments from the debate be noted and referred to the Mayor for response.

Recommendation

That Full Council debates the petition and refers it to the Mayor / relevant Cabinet member for a formal response.

The Full Council considered a report of the Director of Legal and Democratic Services setting out details of a petition ‘Road Usage for Hospitality’. The petition had reached the 3,500 signature threshold to qualify for a Full Council debate.

Brendan Murphy, the petition organiser, was invited by the Lord Mayor to present the objectives of the petition.

The Full Council debated the petition.

Following the debate it was:

RESOLVED: That the petition and the comments from the debate be noted and referred to the Mayor for response.

Recommendation

That Council note the progress summarised in this annual report, on the delivery of Bristol’s Corporate Parenting Strategy overseen by the Corporate Parenting Panel.

Full Council considered the Corporate Parenting Annual Report.

Councillor Asher Craig moved the report and the recommendations therein.

There was a debate, and it was:

RESOLVED: That Full Council note the report.

Recommendation

That Stephen Peacock be appointed to the role of Chief Executive and Head of Paid Service with effect from 21 October 2022 until 30 June 2024.

Full Council considered a report on the Appointment of Chief Executive.

Councillor Craig Cheney moved the report and the recommendations therein. Councillor Tony Dyer seconded the report.

There was no debate, and it was:

RESOLVED: That Stephen Peacock be appointed to the role of Chief Executive and Head of Paid Service with effect from 21 October 2022 until 30 June 2024.

Recommendation

To note

1.         The economic outlook and projections within the 5-year MTFP

2.         The Strategic planning approach

To approve

3.         Medium Term Financial Plan for the period 2023/24 to 2027/28 

4.         The Reserve Policy

5.         Capital Strategy for the period 2023/24 to 2032/33

Full Council considered a report on the Medium Term Financial Plan and Capital Strategy.

Councillor Craig Cheney moved the report and the recommendations therein. Councillor Tom Renhard seconded the report.

There was a debate, and it was:

RESOLVED: Full Council NOTED

1. The economic outlook and projections within the 5-year MTFP

2. The Strategic planning approach

Full Council APPROVED

3. The Medium-Term Financial Plan for the period 2023/24 to 2027/28

4. The Reserve Policy

5. The Capital Strategy for the period 2023/24 to 2032/33

Note:

Under the Council’s constitution, 30 minutes are available for the consideration of motions. In practice, this realistically means that there is usually only time for one, or possibly two motions to be considered.

With the agreement of the Lord Mayor, motion 1 below will be considered at this meeting, and motion 2 is likely to be considered, subject to time.

Details of other motions submitted, (which, due to time constraints, are very unlikely to be considered at this meeting) are also set out for information.

MOTIONS RECEIVED FOR FULL COUNCIL

Golden Motion (Conservative)

‘SEND’ SOCIAL MEDIA MONITORING 

“This Council remains extremely disturbed over the confirmed actions of local government officers being engaged in the compiling or collating of social media posts belonging to private individuals.

These controversial retrievals, involving the cross-referencing of tweets, photos and Facebook entries made by two prominent SEND campaigners and leading members of the Bristol Parent Carer Forum (BPCF) was profoundly ill-conceived.

The selective monitoring of those who have been ‘rightly’ critical of the Authority’s SEND provision was also, arguably, contrary to the spirit of family law and associated statutory guidelines designed to foster confidence and promote the ‘co-production, collaboration and partnership working’ with those families who rely on these services. 

Council believes that such data harvesting by officialdom is not an appropriate use of limited resources, has caused serious reputational damage and harmed particularly sensitive community relations.  Moreover, Council is unhappy with this matter being concluded via an internal investigation i.e. effectively the bureaucracy marking its own homework.

In the interests of true transparency, the Mayor is called upon to agree to hold a genuinely independent inquiry, conducted by the LGA or similar appropriate body into all the facts, faults and failings surrounding this incident.  The findings of that external body, together with any recommendations of best practice, must then be brought back to Full Council to determine the best way forward towards rebuilding recklessly broken relationships.”

Golden Motion to be moved by Councillor Geoff Gollop (Conservative)

Received 5 October 2022

--

Silver Motion (Knowle Community Party)

Improved Communication for Ward Councillors

This council notes the result of the governance referendum. It also notes that over recent years more decisions, which sometimes have major local consequences, are being taken by the central administration or council officers without reference to local ward councillors.

This council calls for improved communication to ward councillors and the adoption of a default position that they should at least be informed and hopefully meaningfully consulted before action is taken that will affect their ward.

This will lead to better informed and more accepted decisions being made.

Proposed by Councillor Gary Hopkins (Knowle Community Party)

Received 21 September 

Motion 1 – Golden Motion (altered): ‘SEND’ SOCIAL MEDIA SURVEILLANCE

This motion was altered, which means that all groups agreed to the change, which in this case was the addition of the final two paragraphs.

Councillor Geoff Gollop moved the following motion:

“This Council remains extremely disturbed over the confirmed actions of local government officers being engaged in the compiling or collating of social media posts belonging to private individuals.

These controversial retrievals, involving the cross-referencing of tweets, photos and Facebook entries made by two prominent SEND campaigners and leading members of the Bristol Parent Carer Forum (BPCF) was profoundly ill-conceived.

The selective monitoring of those who have been ‘rightly’ critical of the Authority’s SEND provision was also, arguably, contrary to the spirit of family law and associated statutory guidelines designed to foster confidence and promote the ‘co-production, collaboration and partnership working’ with those families who rely on these services. 

Council believes that such data harvesting by officialdom is not an appropriate use of limited resources, has caused serious reputational damage and harmed particularly sensitive community relations.  Moreover, Council is unhappy with this matter being concluded via an internal investigation i.e. effectively the bureaucracy marking its own homework.

In the interests of true transparency, the Mayor is called upon to agree to hold a genuinely independent inquiry, conducted by the LGA or similar appropriate body into all the facts, faults and failings surrounding this incident.  The findings of that external body, together with any recommendations of best practice, must then be brought back to Full Council to determine the best way forward towards rebuilding recklessly broken relationships.

Bristol Parent Carer Forum (BPCF) have provided a vital voice for parents within the SEND process but  on 21st July the administration wrote to BPCF, other SEND groups, the Department of Education, and Contact informing them that they would not support the continued funding of BPCF with the parent participation grant of £17,500. 

Full Council calls on the Administration to issue a new letter to the Department of Education, Contact, and BPCF making it clear that Bristol Council will sign the new contract and to ensure that BPCF are included in all coproduction, as previously, so that the council and BPCF can work to build trust and cooperation.” 

The motion was seconded by Councillor Christine Townsend

Following debate and final remarks, upon being put to the vote, the motion was CARRIED (39 For, 0 against, 18 abstentions) and it was:

RESOLVED:

“This Council remains extremely disturbed over the confirmed actions of local government officers being engaged in the compiling or collating of social media posts belonging to private individuals.

These controversial retrievals, involving the cross-referencing of tweets, photos and Facebook entries made by two prominent SEND campaigners and leading members of the Bristol Parent Carer Forum (BPCF) was profoundly ill-conceived.

The selective monitoring of those who have been ‘rightly’ critical of the Authority’s SEND provision was also, arguably, contrary to the spirit of family law and associated statutory guidelines designed to foster confidence  ...  view the full minutes text for item 13.