Agenda item

Motions

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

 

1.                  Excluded UK (Golden Motion)

 

Full Council notes that:

Three million people across the UK have missed out on the Government’s financial support schemes (‘the excluded’), due to technicalities such as: recently changing job, being a director of a limited company, being self-employed less than a year, earning less than half their income through self-employment, and a myriad of other reasons.

The lack of financial support has had a devastating effect on people’s livelihoods and their mental wellbeing.

Financially supporting these individuals and businesses is largely outside of the Council’s control and needs to be financed by central Government.

The end of the Brexit transition period will lead to increased uncertainty for already-struggling small businesses, including small limited companies and the self-employed who have largely been excluded from the Government’s financial support schemes.

 

Full Council believes that:

The Government should close the gaps in its financial support schemes, and explore options to retroactively compensate people and businesses that were ineligible for the Government’s financial support.

 

Full Council resolves to:

Lend its support to ExcludedUK, its efforts to support ‘the excluded’ and its campaign for fair treatment of ‘the excluded’.

Call on the Government to address the disparities in support, to ensure that all individuals and businesses currently excluded, entirely or largely, from Covid-19 grants are given the support they need and rightfully deserve.

Call on all councillors to sign ExcludedUK’s open letter to the Chancellor that calls for this.

Call on Party Group leaders to consider writing a separate letter to the Chancellor to urge him to look at ways to provide support to businesses that have missed out on the Covid-19 financial support schemes, using Bristolian people and businesses as case studies, and give councillors the opportunity to contribute to, and co-sign this letter.

Ask the Mayor to write to Bristol’s MPs to arrange a roundtable discussion with them and their constituency’s councillors to hear more of their excluded constituents’ stories, and work alongside MPs to continue to offer support and advise their constituents wherever possible.

 

Motion to be presented by: Cllr. Shah, Labour Group

Submitted: 26th November 2020

 

2.                  Energy Efficiency Support for every Householder in Bristol: making ideas work (Silver Motion)

 

Council notes:

 

              the Climate and Ecological Emergency Programme and its component documents set out where the city needs to go and what it seeks to achieve but not at this stage how this is to be accomplished

              addressing the poor energy performance of our current buildings, particularly homes, that will save energy, reduce carbon emissions and alleviate fuel poverty is crucial to achieving Bristol’s adopted 2030 Climate Emergency resolutions

              the up-grading of the huge majority of our domestic buildings has been sporadic and piecemeal to date.. Technical and financial advice can be accessed but multifaceted interventions are challenging and a disincentive.

              the easier, more currently cost-effective measures such as loft and cavity-fill insulation , draught-proofing and smarter boilers have been much, though patchily, carried out - but are not enough where they are in place, and there are too many places where they are not

              retro-fitting by Bristol City Council is directed to our large social housing stock and advice is rightly focused on people experiencing fuel poverty

              the revenue-saving benefits from capital investment may be simply calculated over time where the owner is the occupier but this is a more complicated model for publicly-managed social housing and even more so in the Private Rented Sector. 

              energy providers and bankers can manage initial investment for home-owners, and some do, as with the Green Deal model for larger investors.  Landlords can recover investment through rent but there are poorly-adopted schemes for energy-saving passports and sales premiums for home-owners.

 

Council intends:

 

              to assemble the details of a service by which every household in the city will be able to access appropriate support with home energy efficiency and renewable technology. The service will encourage a greater uptake of energy efficiency measures in Bristol; lowering emissions and energy bills, as well as promoting the creation of low-carbon skills and employment in the area.

              to extend the scope of the council’s work to deliver our 2030 resolutions, to consider its role in encouraging all households , including individual private house-owners, to appreciate the value to themselves, let alone society,  of an investment to secure long –term savings, particularly when the calculated return falls outside their personal occupation period.

              to look beyond the good work in fuel poverty mitigation and capital schemes within our own housing stock and the wider Heat Network to be a hub for general advice and a facilitator for delivering beneficial schemes

 

This Council agrees

 

              that reducing domestic energy consumption, and the resultant carbon emissions, should be encouraged within Bristol by widening the advice and support on offer to incorporate every household in the city

 

This council resolves:

 

·         to request the mayor to instruct officers to explore the feasibility of expanding the scope of work carried out by officers across the council aincluding the setting up of a team to focus support on a wider range of households in Bristol to have access to green energy and to reduce their energy use to help Bristol to becoming Carbon Neutral by 2030.   The scope of the study should be as wide as needed but should at least include technical and financial advice, practical on-site consultation and implementation support, all or any of which might be provided in-house oir through commercial agencies

·         to request the mayor to instruct officers to build a business case to create a comprehensive service offer and methodology for directing appropriate and tailored support to every household in the city. The business case will consider the level of resourcing currently available to BCC, and consider options to increase capacity; including the exploration of strategic partnerships to provide the comprehensive service and offer

·         to request the mayor to instruct officers to explore a programme for developing a local, highly-skilled workforce to deliver low-carbon, energy efficiency installations within the city

·         request the mayor to  instruct officers to explore the potential of financing the capital cost of low-carbon technologies for private housing tenures, through the provision of grants and loans.

·         to request that a further report on progress os requested to be brought back to the council by 1st March 2021

 

 

Motion to be presented by Cllr. Anthony Negus (Cotham, LibDem councillor)

Date submitted: 26th November 2020

 

3.                  Nursery Funding

 

Full Council recognize the vital role that early years provision and our nursery school network play in supporting communities across the whole city. Bristol should be justly proud of its achievements in this area. Throughout the hard times of austerity and COVID, dedicated and committed staff have ensured that children and families get the support they need, including those with complex needs. 

 

Yet the long-term financial sustainability of our nursery school network is under threat due to failure by government to review and revise the formula through which funding is provided, despite promises to do so. 

 

The Chancellor's recent announcement of an "above inflation" rise amounts to only a few pence per child and is therefore totally inadequate as a protection for the long-term future of this vital service, as it does not take into account the effect that a decade of austerity has had on child poverty rates.

 

 

Full Council resolves to:

 

1) Acknowledge the unique contribution that early years provision and our nursery schools play in offering the best start in life for children from all backgrounds and communities.

 

2) Ask that the Mayor, the Cabinet Member for Education, and the Cabinet Member for Women, Children, and Families organise a meeting of Members of Parliament and interested councillors to discuss this vital matter and agree how best to continue to lobby the Government on the matter. 

 

3) As that the Mayor, the Cabinet Member for Education, and the Cabinet Member for Women, Children, and Families, to write to the Minister for Early Years and to the Chancellor of the Exchequer to demand that they give priority to introducing a new fair funding formula and the necessary additional resources to ensure a stable long-term future for state provided nursery and early years provision.

Motion to be moved by: Cllr Tincknell, Labour Group

Date of submission: 17 December 2020

 

 

4.                  Liveable Neighbourhoods for Bristol

Full Council notes:

 

1.      that streets in Bristol are often affected by rat-running, speeding vehicles, congestion, and pollution;

2.      streets across the city are frequently hostile places for children, older residents, and those with disabilities, the council has declared an aim to be an age friendly, child friendly, and inclusive city and has declared climate and ecological emergencies;

3.      redesigning our streets and neighbourhoods can create a healthier, safer, greener, and less stressful and more peaceful environment;

4.      progress to make neighbourhoods more liveable is underway in many cities in Britain and other countries, 

5.      there are groups in many parts of the city campaigning for liveable neighbourhoods, with a citywide Liveable Neighbourhoods for Bristol [ref 1] campaign supported by 38 groups representing a wide range of needs and interests;

6.      the council is currently consulting on several innovative proposals for better street space in high streets and rat runs on ‘bristol citizenspace’ which may incorporate many of the same features as liveable neighbourhoods;

7.      the basic features of liveable neighbourhoods are to filter out rat running and through traffic across an area, and to enable safer movement by active travel, as well as the introduction of facilities for local people such as pocket parks, seating, shelter, nature, and maintain essential access;

8.      in liveable neighbourhoods there is evidence that lives are healthier, overall levels of motor traffic reduce while active travel increases;

9.      streets can become more favourable for young families, children, older people and disabled people once there is less through traffic;

10.  support for liveable neighbourhoods has already been declared by the current Labour administration [ref 2] Greens [ref 3], and many other organisations [ref 4] but a strategy does not yet exist to implement them and no resources have yet been identified.

 

 

Full Council believes that:

 

11.  developing liveable neighbourhoods can help tackle many of the problems affecting streets across the city and assist many local traders, hospitality and cultural organisations affected by the pandemic;

12.  a participatory and inclusive process is needed to inform solutions and deal with many issues in different neighbourhoods, addressing inequalities in streets and different parts of the city, just as with the street space consultation process underway; there are many myths [ref 5] and engagement is needed to discuss and dispel these;

13.  area based solutions are needed [to avoid traffic and parking displacement] and concerns about essential access, deliveries, disabled parking, and space for local traders has to be informed by evidence and examples from elsewhere, but there is no uniform model that should be imposed on areas of the city;

14.  a mix of different facilities, layouts, amenities and traffic management options can be trialled and adopted to create liveable neighbourhoods depending on local needs, preferences and opportunities, e.g. to incorporate school streets.

 

 

Full Council calls on the Mayor to:

 

15.  commit to making Bristol a city of liveable neighbourhoods 

16.  build on the street space projects by working with residents and stakeholders across the city to enable residents and other partners to work together with council support to develop and trial liveable neighbourhoods;

17.  identify budgets [such as community infrastructure levy], support, and facilities that could be used to progress the introduction of liveable neighbourhoods in conjunction with government and WECA funds for active travel, play, and COVID recovery.

 

Motion to be moved by: Cllr Martin Fodor, Green Group

Date submitted:  21st December 2020

 

 

 

Ref

1. https://liveablebristol.org.uk/

2. https://thebristolmayor.com/2020/11/23/liveable-neighbourhoods/?fbclid=IwAR1yaEvgRknvDcRE0m3VhWUVlaRynNLIzPRhvpFdQuemK82E8RxjFgtBxNM

3. https://sandy4mayor.co.uk/flourishing-bristol-liveable-neighbourhoods/?fbclid=IwAR1U3agx41GFfPxwMvxjdIaW206t6IripFfDcOkvAsRbgJU1PYG1sTflpgI 

4. https://bristolcycling.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2020/08/LNfB-Open-Letter.pdf 

5. for instance these eight relating to low traffic neighbourhoods: https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2020/nov/16/mythbusters-eight-common-objections-to-ltns-and-why-they-are-wrong



 

5.                  Introduce a ‘Low Carbon Advertising Policy’

 

Full Council notes:

  1. That Bristol City Council currently holds an Advertising Concession Agreement (ACA) with Clear Channel UK involving the upkeep and maintenance of over 300 bus stops across the city, many of which include digital advertising screens. This contract is due to come to an end soon and a new one will need to be re-tendered. [1]
  2. That advertising prohibitions and restrictions already exist regarding all tobacco products and e-cigarettes, guns and offensive weapons, breath testing and products designed to mask the effects of alcohol, ‘pyramid schemes’, prostitution services, ‘obscene material’ as well as other rules regarding marketing to children, high fat sugar and salt products, medical and health claims, religion, financial products, and pornography. [2]
  3. That a double-sided digital bus stop advertising screen uses four times the electricity of the average British home. [3]
  4. That Bristol City Council declared a Climate Emergency in November 2018, which included a commitment for Bristol to go carbon neutral by 2030.
  5. That Bristol’s One City Climate Strategy includes a plan to create ‘advertising standards and restrictions to support responsible consumption.’ [4]
  6. That Bristol City Council is currently drafting an Advertising and Sponsorship Policy, which was discussed at an Overview & Scrutiny Management Board meeting on 2nd November [5]. However, at present this draft policy does not include restrictions to support responsible consumption, nor any interaction with the Council’s planning powers or property strategy.

 

Full Council believes:

  1. That the very purpose of advertising is to stimulate demand for goods and services.
  2. That some advertising content undermines the council's objectives regarding public health, air pollution and sustainable consumption. For example: High Fat Sugar and Salt (HFSS) products undermine health objectives, petrol and diesel car adverts (especially for Sports Utility Vehicles) undermine air quality objectives, and airline advertising undermines carbon emission targets.

 

Full Council resolves:

  1. To call on the Cabinet member for Transport to review the Advertising Concession Agreement immediately, to investigate the possibility of amending the set of prohibitions and restrictions to include high carbon products and services (with a definition of what constitutes high-carbon), products that worsen air pollution, and HFSS products. These changes should be drafted now to take effect when the ACA is re-tendered.
  2. To call on the Cabinet member for Planning to implement a Low Carbon Advertising Policy as part of the council's planning policies, to apply to bus stops, billboards (including digital billboards) and advertising spaces in the city within the jurisdiction of the Local Planning Authority.
  3. To call on all Cabinet members to look into broadening and strengthening the proposed Advertising and Sponsorship Policy into an overarching Bristol City Council advertising policy that links the One City Climate Strategy, Local Plan and public health objectives by setting targets, expectations or restrictions on all advertising in the city that interacts with the Council’s objectives on public health, air pollution, climate change and sustainable consumption.

 

Motion to be moved by: Councillor Carla Denyer, Green Group

Submitted: 21st December 2020

 

References:

1)      https://democracy.bristol.gov.uk/ieDecisionDetails.aspx?AIId=12821

2)      https://www.badverts.org/case-studies

3)      http://adblockbristol.org.uk/2019/11/the-electricity-cost-of-digital-advert

4)      https://www.bristolonecity.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/one-city-climate-strategy.pdf, page 46

5)      https://democracy.bristol.gov.uk/ieListDocuments.aspx?CId=165&MId=8591&Ver=4

 

 

 

6.                  Proportional Representation

 

In the 2019 General Election, Full Council notes that the 'First Past the Post' voting system:

  1. Has again failed to elect a government representing the majority of voters, with the Conservative party winning 43% of the popular vote, yet gaining over half of the seats in parliament.
  2. Has again yielded a wildly disproportionate allocation of seats with, for example, the Democratic Unionist Party gaining 8 seats from 244,127 votes compared with 11 seats from 3.6 million votes for the Liberal Democrats.
  3. Has spectacularly failed to match votes to seats with, for example, only 25,882 Scottish National Party votes cast for each SNP MP elected, compared with over 800,000 Green votes resulting in the election of one Green Party MP.
  4. Has resulted in 70.8% of votes being ‘wasted’ i.e. having no effect on the outcome of the election. The largest number of ignored votes in any UK constituency was in Bristol West with 56,718 votes being ignored (either votes cast for a losing candidate or surplus votes).

 

Full Council further notes:

5.      That worldwide, FPTP systems inherited from colonial rule cause the under-representation of minority groups, contributing to ethnic tensions and instability [1].

  1. That no country using FPTP achieves greater than 40% female representation in parliament. [2]
  2. That there is a statistically significant link between countries using proportional election systems and having lower levels of income inequality [3], and scoring more highly on the United Nations Index of Human Development [4].
  3. That the Single Transferable Vote system is already used for local elections in Scotland, where it has led to an increase in turnout and voter confidence in the electoral process [5], and in both Northern Irish local elections and the Northern Ireland Assembly. Other proportional electoral systems are used to elect the devolved parliaments and assemblies in Scotland, Wales and London.
  4. That support for proportional representation is official policy of the Green Party, the SNP and the Liberal Democrats; polling shows three quarters of Labour members want their party to campaign for it [6].

 

Full Council believes:

10.  That a Parliament that more accurately reflects the views of the nation is more likely to develop an economic, social and environmental agenda that benefits Bristol’s residents;

  1. That enabling people to feel that their votes count would increase voter engagement and participation;
  2. That a robust democracy must include a fair voting system and that nobody should be disenfranchised because of where they live.

 

Therefore, Full Council:

13.  Applauds the many groups and organisations campaigning for fair votes including the Electoral Reform Society, Make Votes Matter and the Labour Campaign for PR;

  1. Calls for the introduction of a proportional voting system
    1. for local elections in England and Wales;
    2. for Westminster elections;
  2. Requests for Bristol to be allowed to pilot the holding of local elections under a proportional system.

 

Full Council resolves to call on the Mayor to:

16.  Publicly support proportional representation for local elections in Bristol and as the national electoral system;

  1. Inform local MPs and the media of this decision and work with them in support of this campaign;
  2. Forward a copy of this motion to the Leaders of all political parties represented in the UK Parliament, and to all Bristol MPs.

 

Motion to be moved by: Cllr Eleanor Combley, Green Group

Date of submission: 21st December 2020

 

Notes:

[1] http://aceproject.org/ero-en/topics/electoral-systems/Electoral%20Systems%20and%20the%20Protection%20and%20Participation%20of%20Minorities.pdf

[2] https://www.makevotesmatter.org.uk/equality

[3] Birchfield, Vicki and Crepaz, Markus (1998). “The Impact of Constitutional Structures and Collective and Competitive Veto Points on Income Inequality in Industrialized Democracies.” European Journal of Political Research 34: 175-200.

[4] Carey, John M. and Hix, Simon (2009). “The Electoral Sweet Spot: Low-magnitude Proportional Electoral Systems.” PSPE Working Paper 01-2009. Department of Government, London School of Economics and Political Science, London, UK

[5] https://www.electoralcommission.org.uk/who-we-are-and-what-we-do/elections-and-referendums/past-elections-and-referendums/scotland-local-council-elections/report-how-2017-scottish-local-elections-were-run

[6] https://www.makevotesmatter.org.uk/newsroom-2/2019/12/16/poll-three-quarters-of-labour-members-want-proportional-representation

 

 

7.                  Mobilise community investments to tackle climate change

 

Full Council notes:

1.      That this council unanimously declared a climate emergency in November 2018 following a Green Motion to Council

2.      The motion committed the city to achieve net zero carbon impact by 2030 and there are now 10 years left to this target date

3.      The council has been progressing a package of low carbon opportunities called City Leap since May 2018. City Leap is still subject to a procurement process since a new process was started in 2020.

4.      A new low risk model called Community Municipal Investments [CMI] has been developed by Leeds University and Abundance Investments platform with UK Government and EU support. This had the support of 4 local authorities including Bristol City Council. [1]

5.      This concept is proven to mobilise local and other investment and channels local savings into local projects with low risk and a modest return to investors [2] and after the first issue further calls can be automated.

 

Full Council believes:

6.      That offering local savers a way to support the city’s journey to carbon neutrality mobilises community engagement in the process of change, attracts significant sums for named projects, and should be developed. 72% of people want to lend savings to help councils develop Climate Emergency Plans [3]

7.      That offering security and a modest rate of interest through municipal bonds is an established way to develop local infrastructure [4]. This could complement other projects such as the successful Bristol Energy Cooperative.

8.      That CMIs can help us develop a series of practical projects for a low carbon transition now in partnership with others which will be popular with local savers.

9.      The Mayor should prioritise CMIs as part of the package of investments that will create positive economic opportunities and carbon neutrality while building community wealth.

10.  Bristol should join the other 3 pioneers of CMI in developing local opportunities for local investors [e.g. 5]

 

 

Full Council resolves:

1.      To call on the Mayor to begin development of Community Municipal Investments for the city.

2.      That the Mayor promote CMI as a way residents and institutions can be engaged and actively involved in contributing to a zero carbon city.

3.      To request officers to identify carbon saving projects suited to CMI investment in conjunction with city partners.

 

Motion to be moved by: Cllr Martin Fodor, Green Group

Date of submission: 21st December 2020

 

 

References:

1)      The report supported by Bristol: https://baumaninstitute.leeds.ac.uk/research/financing-for-society/

2)      Initial proposed interest rate is 1.2%. See: Your questions answered on Green Community Bonds | Abundance Blog
https://medium.abundanceinvestment.com/community-municipal-investments-your-questions-answered-25218ed4d2cb

3)      Survey by One Poll, 2020, cited by the Local Government Association.

4)      https://medium.abundanceinvestment.com/community-municipal-investments-the-new-option-for-your-low-risk-money-a9cc5d72e03a?source=post_internal_links---------1------------------

5)      These are: Leeds Council, Warrington, and West Berkshire. Eg Invest now: https://info.westberks.gov.uk/wbcmi; https://www.abundanceinvestment.com/invest-now/warrington-2025

 

 

8.                  A Universal Basic Income Trial for Bristol

 

This council notes:

1.      The drastic impacts of the Covid pandemic on employment and household incomes in the city;

2.      The threat to income and employment from automation and artificial intelligence, which could affect a great many more jobs in future;

3.      The impact of large scale temporary and precarious employment and zero hours contracts on household incomes;

4.      The development of universal basic income (UBI) trials in other countries, which offer a non-means-tested sum paid by the state to cover the basic cost of living, which is paid to all citizens individually, regardless of employment status, wealth, or marital status, which has been widely debated in recent months;

5.      That a trial of UBI was promised by the Labour party had the party won the last general election;

6.      The resolutions of other local authorities including Sheffield, Birmingham, Lewes,  and Brighton and Hove [with cross party support] calling for trials of UBI;

7.      A network of Universal Basic Income Labs has been set up and works with local authorities across the UK developing UBI proposals to address problems such as poverty, inequality, discrimination and environmental damage, long-term and immediately, in relation to coronavirus. One is operating in Bristol. (1)

8.      Birmingham City Council has issued a briefing on UBI (2)

9.      UBI has been Green Party Policy since about 1973 and more recently taken up by other parties (3)

 

This council believes:

10.  That the current benefit system is failing citizens, with Universal Credit causing hardship to many communities;

11.  A UBI is the fairest, most effective way to mitigate the effects of coronavirus on people’s incomes as it does not discriminate between employment status, caring responsibilities, age, or disability when providing basic support;

12.  There is a danger of increasing numbers of people facing poverty as a result of the coronavirus crisis; 

13.  Testing a UBI is needed, as a UBI has the potential to help address key challenges such as inequality, poverty, precarious employment, loss of community, and breach of planetary boundaries through: 

                                  i.          Giving employers a more flexible workforce whilst giving employees greater freedom to change their jobs; 

                                ii.          Valuing unpaid work, such as caring for family members and voluntary work; 

                               iii.          Removing the negative impacts of benefit sanctions and conditionality; and 

                               iv.          Giving people more equal resources within the family, workplace and society; 

                                v.          Breaking the link between work and consumption, thus helping reduce strain on the environment in line with the One City Climate Strategy; 

                               vi.          Enabling greater opportunities for people to work in community and cultural activities or to train or reskill in areas that will be needed to transition to a lower-carbon economy. 

14.  The success of a UBI pilot should not be measured only by impact upon take-up of paid work, but also the impact upon communities and what the people within them do, how they feel, and how they relate to others and the environment around them; and 

15.  Given its history of social innovation, wealth of expertise, and active networks across community, business and public services, Bristol is ideally placed to pilot a UBI. 

 

This council calls on the Mayor to:

16.  Send a joint letter with the other party leaders to the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, the Chancellor of the Exchequer, the leader of the party in Government, their counterparts in all opposition political parties in parliament, and all local MPs, asking for a trial of Universal Basic Income in the city citing the above reasons.

 

Motion to be moved by: Martin Fodor, Green Group

Date submitted: 21st December 2020

 

References:

1)      https://www.facebook.com/UBILabBristol/ - see petition here: https://actionnetwork.org/petitions/a-universal-basic-income-pilot-for-bristol/?fbclid=IwAR1ydKKxMUwr9DdFEL3o6Xt3UDEQYkXjQk8ZhxsADDfUQ2VIA4f7AMUTfGY

2)      https://birmingham.cmis.uk.com/Birmingham/Document.ashx?czJKcaeAi5tUFL1DTL2UE4zNRBcoShgo=i61IWQjjqSLhwtZSe64GrO313wyLwckybZN1CvFkjCoRP4xk%2BCozFQ%3D%3D&rUzwRPf%2BZ3zd4E7Ikn8Lyw%3D%3D=pwRE6AGJFLDNlh225F5QMaQWCtPHwdhUfCZ%2FLUQzgA2uL5jNRG4jdQ%3D%3D&mCTIbCubSFfXsDGW9IXnlg%3D%3D=hFflUdN3100%3D&kCx1AnS9%2FpWZQ40DXFvdEw%3D%3D=hFflUdN3100%3D&uJovDxwdjMPoYv%2BAJvYtyA%3D%3D=ctNJFf55vVA%3D&FgPlIEJYlotS%2BYGoBi5olA%3D%3D=NHdURQburHA%3D&d9Qjj0ag1Pd993jsyOJqFvmyB7X0CSQK=ctNJFf55vVA%3D&WGewmoAfeNR9xqBux0r1Q8Za60lavYmz=ctNJFf55vVA%3D&WGewmoAfeNQ16B2MHuCpMRKZMwaG1PaO=ctNJFf55vVA%3D

3)      https://www.bristol247.com/opinion/your-say/otherpartieswillriudiculegreenpolicies/

 

 

 

9.      Supporting In-House Security and Cleaning Staff

 

“This Council is concerned over the recent announcement to outsource security and cleaning staff to Bristol Waste.  Such a proposal seems particularly insensitive and ill-judged given the contribution this cohort has made to keep the Authority’s main office buildings open and COVID compliant. 

 

The timing of such a proposal will strike many as egregious at this moment given that it involves disposal of some of our lowest paid employees who have proven themselves to be absolutely key workers during the health crisis.

 

Council does not believe moving these people off payroll represents an acceptable way to reward such service.  Moreover, Members have not been provided with sufficient information to properly evaluate whether or not any suggested financial savings merit or might justify such a controversial move.

 

Accordingly, Council calls on the Mayor to withdraw or remove this threat and provide an assurance that these workers will remain highly valued local government employees.”

 

Motion to be moved by: Councillor Richard Eddy, Conservative Group

Date submitted: 21st December 2020

 

10.  Growing Provision of allotments across the City

“This Council recognises the long established benefits derived from the provision of small agricultural holdings and allotments to individuals and families.  These sites give people the chance to take productive exercise and grow cheap food but, also, are valued for other reasons such as providing educational opportunities, help to build communities and offer some protection to the local environment.

 

Council notes the commitment previously given by the Mayor to have community gardens and allotments in every ward’ but is anxious to ensure that such rhetoric translates into action.

 

At present, the Authority has 497 vacancies with a waiting list of 5665 people. Council is concerned that much suitable land held by the Authority for this purpose is either underutilised or could be de-registered for development, ironically, when there is likely to be a growing desire and demand to maintain an allotment.

 

Accordingly, Council calls on the Mayor to pledge to preserve, protect and promote existing sites; to increase the size of this network; extend the number which are accorded (limited) ‘statutory’ protection under current legislation; and ensure that all those who want access to a plot, are able to do so.”

 

Motion to be moved by: Councillor Graham Morris, Conservative Group

Date submitted: 21st December 2020

 

 

11.  Enhanced Protection of the Green Belt

 

 “This Council welcomes the Government’s recent recognition of the public consultation which has been received to the first stage of its reform of the Planning system.  Of particular importance is the proposed strengthening of the status afforded to the statutory Green Belt following the efforts of such bodies as the Campaign for the Protection of Rural England.

 

Council is especially pleased to learn of the increased emphasis placed on redevelopment of ‘brownfield’ and previously-used sites in urban centres, rather than ‘eating’ into our surrounding fields, farmland and countryside.

 

Partly in response to this announcement but also to reflect the substantial level of local opposition shown in public consultation, Council resolves to amend its draft Bristol Local Plan to delete the proposed de-registration of Green Belt protection within the South Bristol Link Road, in Bedminster Down and Highridge.

 

One practical consequence of this change will be the deletion of the proposed planned approval for the construction of 200 properties near Yew Tree Farm and 150 properties near Elsbert Drive.”

 

Motion to be moved by: Councillor Kevin Quartley, Conservative Group

Date submitted: 21st December 2020

 

 

12.              The government’s White Paper ‘Planning for the Future’

 

This Council:

·         appreciates the merit of the present hierarchy of planning in the UK. Where it works well the system allows for local neighbourhood plans and for consultation and engagement with the preparation of Local Plans and the Sub-Regional joint Spatial Plan

·         accepts the need for such plans to be approved, and sometimes overruled, by central government to comply with overall national criteria

·         acknowledges the necessity for certain infrastructure works to be subject to  special Permitted Development rules where government restricts local consultation and democracy for strategic reasons

·         recognises the value of transparency and fairness throughout  the planning system so that citizens voices can be heard amid the wider assembly of guidance for the justification for new development and how this can or cannot be reasonably accommodated within suitable  local policy frameworks formed from national guidance and approved for use by central government

·         supports the high target it has set for new housebuilding in and around Bristol to sustain its local growth and is generally satisfied with the way it has administered the present planning system to approve a high percentage of developers planning applications.

 

Council further notes that the Government Planning White Paper ‘Planning for the Future‘ dated 6th August 2020 proposes:

 

·         Local Plans are to be produced under government direction and with targets set nationally, even extending to local areas

·         that areas are to be classified as Growth, Renewal or Protected with designated Conservation Areas not automatically ‘protected’.

·         No planning consent will be required in Growth areas and only minimal checks will be required in Renewal areas.

·         Domestic houses will be allowed up to two storey extensions with no approvals or objection from neighbours

·         local planning committees will be effectively abolished or rendered toothless so inappropriate siting, quality, design and other impacts will no longer be capable of challenge

·         buildings can be removed and replaced with poor quality housing without checks on reasonable space standards or even natural light so sanctioning worsening public health for volume housing and the creation of ‘modern slums’  *

·         The present overall development tax, the Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) is to be nationally restructured so that it no longer reflects a locally-fair contribution; the individual development mitigation arrangements (S106), are to be abolished.

·         no alternative is indicated to replace the affordable housing (currently 26,800 nationally or 50% of the affordable housing built last year) which was achieved through S106 arrangements, that are to be abandoned

·         the size of development that requires a proportion of affordable housing is to be downgraded from 10 to 50 units which will seriously reduce the best source of essential affordable housing

 

Council regrets:

·         the proposals do not address the fundamental acknowledged blocks, stemming from land  valuation, finance and tenure limitations, particularly prevalent in the UK, to increasing the supply of housing, particularly affordable housing

·         the government’s belief that the planning system is the cause of delay in building new housing whereas instead it is the way that housebuilding is financed within this country that encourages developers to use planning permissions as a means of adding value over time

·         the proposals restrict rather than enhance the present opportunities to provide much-needed affordable housing  of an acceptable standard

·         there is no acknowledgement, or attempt to resolve, the ‘log-jam’ to building which is the hoarding of planning permissions by developers due to the unrealistic relationship of land price to sales value and the reluctance of financiers to embrace large-scale rented development

·         the escalation in Permitted Development Rights with its removal of sensible controls and enforcement over development that has already exposed poor quality and reduced numbers of affordable housing

·         the proposals presage a very different relationship across the country between local and national government and a compact with the people with a clear loss of local and regional democracy

·         this democracy and community support built in to the present system is being sacrificed because of a misapprehension that the current seven year cycle of Local Plans, derived from government timetables, is a block to development rather than a  constantly evolving resource

·         the proposals ignore the hard-to-improve results from the system at present: 90% of all developments are approved within the current planning system; 65% of refusals that go to appeal are turned down by the inspector

·         nationally 1, 000, 000 homes granted planning permission in the last 10 years are still unbuilt despite, in some cases, having been required to be resubmitted for approval three times. This is twice the five years quoted by the Minister as the delay caused by the planning system “”to getting a spade in the ground”

·         The proposals make no attempt to address this virtually automatic serial re-approval with no penalty or requirement to complete the permitted development within the period of the permission

·         the Local Government Association, the Town and Country Planning Association, the Royal Town Planning Institute, the Royal Institute of British Architects should all have seen the need to condemn the proposals

 

 

Council resolves to request the Mayor:

·         to make early representations to government along with other members of the Core Cities Group and fellow planning authorities within WECA, leading the way for other councils around the country expressing concerns about the removal of local democratic control promised by previous governments as part of the benefits of adopting a mayoral system

·         to instruct officers to prepare a strong response to the consultation across the areas of governance, democracy, local knowledge, quality control and reduction in affordable housing delivered, and any others that become apparent during this process

·         to advertise the consultation and invite representations from the Bristol public to the government

·         to strive to maintain the consensus within this council to explore creative opportunities for maximising the delivery of sustainable housing, independently and with others, affordable by all our citizens whatever their need and circumstance.

 

Notes:  * a government commissioned study published in July 2020 (carried out by University College, London and the University of Liverpool) has shown that poorer quality homes are being created from Permitted Development than through the existing planning system. They are less likely to achieve national space standards, are more likely to be deficient with natural daylight

 

Motion to be moved by: Cllr. Anthony Negus, LibDem Councillor

Date Submitted: 26th November 2020

 

 

13.              New Secondary School in Knowle

 

Secondary School places in South Bristol are in short supply and the situation will get worse over the next couple of years.  The problem becomes even more challenging as the public transport is woeful and travelling from Knowle to Brislington or Bedminster Down is very challenging for pupils. 

 

After gap of 20 years with no secondary provision in the area, we now have a solution with the new school being built on part of the old Merrywood School site.  The other part of the site will be given over to a great new community facility costing around £6M

 

This Council thanks the trustees of “The Park” Local Opportunity Centre for doing such a great job of providing community facilities over the last 20 years on the old school site and working so hard on the imaginative new plan.

 

Government, Oasis, funders and the community are to be thanked also and we must recognise that Officers and Cabinet Members gave full backing to this scheme (despite a couple of frankly silly objections).

 

This Council asks for one further contribution, with the present timetable a couple of the most critical years will not benefit from the new school.   We ask that the school is set up earlier in temporary accommodation from September 2021.

 

Council notes that the site is, unlike the Temple Meads new site, large and open and that the failure of the plans for early opening at Temple Meads will put even more pressure on numbers over the next 2 years in East and South Bristol.

 

Motion to be moved by: Cllr Gary Hopkins, Knowle Ward (Lib Dem)

Date of submission: 26th November 2020

 

 

14.              No Supermarkets Compact

 

This Council notes that retail and distribution workers have been at the front line of the Covid-19 crisis, facing a high-pressured environment and that supermarkets have made many adaptions to keep the city running during the lockdown.  This commitment and innovation could be extended to deliver greater permanent benefits.

The Council notes a number of challenges within the retail and distribution sector that hamper the city’s sustainability aspirations. These challenges include, but not exclusively:

        extensive usage of a wide range of packaging materials

        continuing use of materials, particularly plastics, with poor recycling outcomes

        excessive levels of wastage, particularly of food

        increasing heavy vehicular distribution-miles, both cross-countries and within the city

The Council regrets that it lacks the regulatory powers to control the negative outcomes from some large commercial organisations in the city and the resources required to resolve and mitigate some of these issues.

This Council notes the announcements and actions by more conscientious firms to address some of these issues to reduce their costs and be more responsible.

This Council notes the unacceptable level of food poverty in our city.

 This Council notes the increasing challenges around goods delivery vehicles in our city and the use of freight consolidation which is attempting to reduce the volume of traffic and improve air quality.

This Council notes that a successful plan to deliver carbon neutrality by 2030 will require committed leadership to inspire common purpose in everyone and across all groups in our city

This Council notes that much customer packaging places volume and disposal demands on the city’s waste services, while their bulk packaging is also unsustainable though disposed through commercial operators.

This Council notes that a proposal to address these issues is supported by research and a dossier of detailed responses from all of the eight major supermarkets, which has been prepared by a BCC scrutiny committee and was commended by a committee of the Core Cities team.

The Council resolves to thank our retail and distribution workers.

A focused and co-operative approach might deliver multiple benefits, including a:

        reduction in the use of plastic

        reduction in food waste

        reduction in delivery-miles

        rewarding sustainable practice

        getting out our sustainability message though big players to the shopping public

        tackling at source some resulting issues currently funded through the public purse

The Council resolves to set up a working group to engage with key stakeholders, including supermarkets, councillors and trade unions, to resolve these challenges.

Council therefore resolves to launch the first core-city co-operative initiative of its kind:

Council resolves that this working group will explore a Supermarkets Charter with the major chains in Bristol where the City council sets a small number of key criteria that will benefit the city and promotes a ‘Kitemark’- type scheme awarding recognition as each is achieved. This would recognise good practice in a competitive market increasingly sensitive to improving sustainability, and enable customers to make informed choices, with the ‘Kitemark’ displayed on their premises and promotional literature.

Such a scheme would be a simple and highly visible way of advancing our sustainability ambitions. It would be co-operative, competitive and catalytic while fair and sustainable. It would be a cost-effective way for this city to offer mutual solutions to long-standing common problems. It would be a bold advance in the crucial community engagement measures to deliver real-life sustainability, closer to source. We request the Mayor to take this forward through the most appropriate structures.

 

Motion to be presented by: Cllr. Anthony Negus (Cotham, LibDem councillor)

Submitted: 26th November 2020

 

 

15.               Air Pollution Motion to Full Council

 

Full Council notes that:

 

The death of nine year old Ella Kissa-Debrah in London has been directly linked to air pollution by a coroner’s inquest, the first ruling of its kind in the UK. She was exposed to excessive nitrogen dioxide levels in excess of EU and national guidelines, and particulate levels above World Health Organisation guidelines, principally as a result of vehicle emissions. In a report investigating her death, it was found there was a “real prospect that without unlawful levels of air pollution, Ella would not have died”.

 

Full Council believes that:

 

UK cities’ clean air policies must now change urgently in response to this, to ensure that children and others vulnerable to poor air quality are saved from premature death. Cities have a massive role to play in this and Bristol can lead the way with innovative approaches.

 

The Council’s Clean Air Zone is one such step forward, and Bristol has opportunities to put in place an effective and innovative plan to reduce emissions from vehicles. Legal compliance should be the minimum aim of this scheme and the Council should press for Bristol to lead the way in bringing our air to healthy levels that are safe for children living in congested areas in both the short and long term.

 

Full Council:

 

·         Expresses sympathy with the family of Ella, and of those that have lost loved ones due to air pollution-related deaths;

·         agrees with the Mayor of London’ s view that this represents a ‘landmark moment’ and highlights how air pollution is now a major public health issue and should be treated with the highest priority by all cities across the UK;

·         Notes the Mayor’s and Council’s commendable work in this area, through the pedestrianisation of the Old City, the consultation on a Clean Air Zone, investment in electric vehicle charging points, and the unprecedented investment in active travel.

·         Notes that reaching both our air quality and carbon emissions is considerably more difficult in the absence of a mass transit scheme, and Full Council reiterates its support for one.

·         Calls on the Mayor and Cabinet member to push for stronger measures to improve air quality in Bristol, backed up with financial assistance from the Government to implement these measures. 

·         Call on Government to give Bristol the powers and resources to implement measures that may include, but are not limited to, enforcing bans on wood-burners, and the banning of burning garden waste at inner-city allotments.

·         Calls on both the Mayor and national Government to explore innovative ways to improve our air quality in Bristol.

Motion to be presented by: Cllr. Wellington, Labour Group

Submitted: 26th November 2020

 

Supporting documents: