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

 

Golden Motion (Liberal Democrat)

 

TAKING BACK PUBLIC CONTROL OF OUR BUSES

 

Full Council notes that:

1.         A comprehensive bus service, providing a reliable and economical means of travel to all parts of the city for work, child support, health care, leisure, and other purposes is of vital importance to the city’s residents.

2.         There are multiple economic and social benefits of maintaining an effective and accessible bus service including

a.         providing a reliable means of travel for commuters and consumers contributing to the local economy.

b.         allowing those who would otherwise be isolated more freedom to access safe and social ways to participate in community and city life, improving their wellbeing and aiding independent living. This includes, but is not restricted to, those with physical or other disabilities, the elderly, and those on low incomes.

c.         reducing traffic, congestion, and air pollution through the removal of private vehicles from the roads.

3.         The Bus Services Act 2017 allows for alternative models to the provision of bus services where these were previously required to be operated solely by private companies whose working relationship with local authorities was strictly limited. The revised options are Enhanced Partnership, Advanced Quality Partnerships, and Bus Franchising.

4.         Bus Franchising offers the opportunity for public direction of innovation of fares, routes, and bus quality.

5.         Bus Franchising is being implemented or explored by a number of city and regional authorities across the country including the Greater Manchester Combined Authority.

 

Full Council believes that

1.         There are significant speed and cost advantages in implementing a more comprehensive mass transit solution based on buses as opposed to alternatives that are dependent on costly and disruptive infrastructure.

2.         Implementing bus franchising would provide the opportunity to comprehensively re-think and re-design how the bus service can best serve our citizens, the city, and the region.

3.         Services provided under a franchising model would be better designed to meet the needs of the city rather than those of the bus operator(s).

4.         Bus Franchising could provide the improvements and innovation required to achieve modal shift, increasing bus usage and reducing private car journeys.

5.         Bus Franchising would strengthen the West of England Combined Authority’s position in discharging its responsibilities for planning and transport across the region.

6.         The West of England Combined Authority’s previous dismissal of franchising in favour of developing an Enhanced Partnership was not the result of a comprehensive review of its potential benefits.

7.         The Enhanced Partnership model is compromised by the power of veto that the region’s major bus provider will have over decision-making.

 

Full Council resolves to

1.         Instruct the Chief Executive to write to the WECA Mayor requesting that he commissions a comprehensive feasibility study of all aspects of adopting and financing a system of franchising bus services in the region. The commission should also consider how the existing knowledge and experience of each member Authority could also be maximised in the consultation and design of such an approach.

2.         Request that the Mayor seeks consensus from the leaders of the other WECA authorities, and the WECA Mayor, in order to facilitate the delivery of a feasibility study as soon as possible.

 

Motion proposed by: Councillor Andrew Brown (Liberal Democrats)

Motion submitted: 1st December 2022

 

 

 

Silver Motion (Conservative)

 

MAKING BRISTOL A CPR-FRIENDLY CITY

 

“This Council was saddened to learn of the sudden death – by cardiac arrest - of Sam Polledri in Millennium Square last February.  It was even more tragic to discover that this loss might have been averted if there had been public access to a defibrillator and general knowledge on how to use such a machine.

 

Consequently, Council welcomes the training now being given to Members on CPR and defibrillation by the Great Western Air Ambulance Charity to highlight this issue.  However, a great deal more can and must be done.

 

In order to make Bristol a leading local authority in this field, and mirroring the work already undertaken in Swansea, Council calls on the Mayor to support and help develop the following proposals:

 

(i)         Support and collaborate in a partnership as exists in Swansea with a charitable partner who can fundraise and organise the installation and maintenance of public access defibrillators and raise public awareness around their use

(ii)        Request that the Licensing Committee explore the option of making basic CPR/Defib skills a condition for granting drivers a license to operate a taxi in Bristol

(iii)       Ask the Local Plan Working Group to examine whether new building developments above a pre-determined size should be required to also include an accessible defibrillator

(iv)       Work with One City partners to make available basic CPR and / or defibrillator training in our local schools, colleges, and universities

(v)        Agree to install a defibrillator – available 24/7 – outside City Hall to not only provide an additional life-saving resource but also demonstrate a genuine commitment to this worthwhile cause.”

 

Motion to be moved by: Cllr Steve Smith (Conservative)

Date of submission: 28th November 2022

Minutes:

Following a short adjournment, it was then moved by the Lord Mayor that standing order CPR2.1(xi) be suspended to allow the meeting to go past the 2 hour 30 minute time limit.  Following a vote, it was agreed to proceed for an additional 30 minutes.

Motion 1 – Golden Motion: Taking Back Public Control of Our Buses

 

Councillor Andrew Brown moved the following motion:

 

Full Council notes that:

1.         A comprehensive bus service, providing a reliable and economical means of travel to all parts of the city for work, child support, health care, leisure, and other purposes is of vital importance to the city’s residents.

2.         There are multiple economic and social benefits of maintaining an effective and accessible bus service including

a.         providing a reliable means of travel for commuters and consumers contributing to the local economy.

b.         allowing those who would otherwise be isolated more freedom to access safe and social ways to participate in community and city life, improving their wellbeing and aiding independent living. This includes, but is not restricted to, those with physical or other disabilities, the elderly, and those on low incomes.

c.         reducing traffic, congestion, and air pollution through the removal of private vehicles from the roads.

3.         The Bus Services Act 2017 allows for alternative models to the provision of bus services where these were previously required to be operated solely by private companies whose working relationship with local authorities was strictly limited. The revised options are Enhanced Partnership, Advanced Quality Partnerships, and Bus Franchising.

4.         Bus Franchising offers the opportunity for public direction of innovation of fares, routes, and bus quality.

5.         Bus Franchising is being implemented or explored by a number of city and regional authorities across the country including the Greater Manchester Combined Authority.

 

Full Council believes that:

1.         There are significant speed and cost advantages in implementing a more comprehensive mass transit solution based on buses as opposed to alternatives that are dependent on costly and disruptive infrastructure.

2.         Implementing bus franchising would provide the opportunity to comprehensively re-think and re-design how the bus service can best serve our citizens, the city, and the region.

3.         Services provided under a franchising model would be better designed to meet the needs of the city rather than those of the bus operator(s).

4.         Bus Franchising could provide the improvements and innovation required to achieve modal shift, increasing bus usage and reducing private car journeys.

5.         Bus Franchising would strengthen the West of England Combined Authority’s position in discharging its responsibilities for planning and transport across the region.

6.         The West of England Combined Authority’s previous dismissal of franchising in favour of developing an Enhanced Partnership was not the result of a comprehensive review of its potential benefits.

7.         The Enhanced Partnership model is compromised by the power of veto that the region’s major bus provider will have over decision-making.

 

Full Council resolves to:

1.         Instruct the Chief Executive to write to the WECA Mayor requesting that he commissions a comprehensive feasibility study of all aspects of adopting and financing a system of franchising bus services in the region. The commission should also consider how the existing knowledge and experience of each member Authority could also be maximised in the consultation and design of such an approach.

2.         Request that the Mayor seeks consensus from the leaders of the other WECA authorities, and the WECA Mayor, in order to facilitate the delivery of a feasibility study as soon as possible.

 

The motion was seconded by Councillor Andrew Varney.

 

Councillor Tim Rippington then moved the following amendment:

 

‘That the motion be amended to read as follows:

 

Full Council notes that:

 

1.         A comprehensive bus service, providing a reliable and economical means of travel to all parts of the city for work, child support, health care, leisure, and other purposes is a vital part of any city’s integrated transport network and of great importance to the city’s residents.

 

2.         There are multiple economic and social benefits of maintaining an effective and accessible bus service including

 

a.         providing a reliable means of travel for commuters and consumers contributing to the local economy.

 

b.         allowing those who would otherwise be isolated more freedom to access safe and social ways to participate in community and city life, improving their wellbeing and aiding independent living. This includes, but is not restricted to, those with physical or other disabilities, the elderly, and those on low incomes.

 

c.         reducing traffic, congestion, and air pollution through the removal of private vehicles from the roads.

 

3.         The Bus Services Act 2017 prohibits ‘relevant authorities’, such as councils and combined authorities, from establishing municipal (publicly owned) bus companies. However, it allows for some alternative models to the provision of bus services where these were previously required to be operated solely by private companies whose working relationship with local authorities was strictly limited. The revised options are Enhanced Partnership, Advanced Quality Partnerships, and Bus Franchising.

 

4.         Bus Franchising offers the opportunity for public direction of innovation of fares, routes, and bus quality.

 

5.         Bus Franchising is being implemented or explored by a number of city and regional authorities across the country including the Greater Manchester Combined Authority.

 

6.         Franchising the region’s bus network and building the necessary infrastructure to facilitate a reliable, efficient bus service will be costly and time consuming – Greater Manchester’s franchising scheme will take eight years to materialise. Therefore, further measures are needed to address the bus crisis in the immediate term. Bristol City Council should support WECA in this endeavour wherever possible.

 

Full Council believes that:

 

7.         As a key public service, bus services should ideally be publicly owned and publicly run. The Government should overturn the ban on councils and combined authorities establishing municipal bus companies.

 

8.         Pending any new government overturning the current legislation, Bus Franchising could provide some of the improvements and innovation required to achieve modal shift, increasing bus usage and reducing private car journeys.

 

9.         Implementing bus franchising would provide the opportunity to comprehensively re-think and re-design how the bus service can best serve our citizens, the city, and the region.

 

10.       Services provided under a franchising model would be better designed to meet the needs of the city rather than those of the bus operator(s).

 

11.       Bus Franchising would strengthen the West of England Combined Authority’s position in discharging its responsibilities for planning and transport across the region.

 

12.       The West of England Combined Authority’s previous dismissal of franchising in favour of developing an Enhanced Partnership was not the result of a comprehensive review of its potential benefits. The Enhanced Partnership model is compromised by the power of veto that the region’s major bus provider will have over decision-making.

 

13.       While a franchised bus service presents a considerable number of upsides, a publicly owned, municipal bus company is preferable, as it offers the same benefits but allows profits to be directly reinvested into the service. This is in contrast to a franchised system, where profits are paid to private shareholders.

 

Full Council resolves to:

 

1.         Call on Party Group Leaders to write to the Government to ask it overturns the 2017 ban on councils and combined authorities establishing municipal bus companies.

 

2.         Instruct the Chief Executive to write to the WECA Mayor requesting that he commissions a comprehensive feasibility study of all aspects of adopting and financing a system of franchising bus services in the region. The commission should also consider how the existing knowledge and experience of each member Authority could also be maximised in the consultation and design of such an approach.

 

3.         Should the government overturn the ban on the establishment of municipal bus companies, Bristol City Council resolves to work with WECA to commission a feasibility study for a publicly owned bus network. If it is found to be feasible, WECA should prioritise establishing a publicly owned bus network over a franchised network. This view should be reflected in the Chief Executive’s letter to the WECA Mayor.

 

4.         Request that the Mayor seeks consensus from the leaders of the other WECA authorities, and the WECA Mayor, in order to facilitate the delivery of a feasibility study as soon as possible.

 

The amendment was seconded by Councillor Fabian Breckels.

 

Following debate, upon being put to the vote, the amendment was CARRIED (41 For, 15 Against, 1 Abstention).

 

The Lord Mayor then invited a debate on the Motion as Amended.

 

Following final remarks, upon being put to the vote, the Motion as Amended was CARRIED (40 For, 14 Against, 2 Abstention) and it was

 

RESOLVED:

 

Full Council notes that:

 

1.         A comprehensive bus service, providing a reliable and economical means of travel to all parts of the city for work, child support, health care, leisure, and other purposes is a vital part of any city’s integrated transport network and of great importance to the city’s residents.

 

2.         There are multiple economic and social benefits of maintaining an effective and accessible bus service including

 

a.         providing a reliable means of travel for commuters and consumers contributing to the local economy.

 

b.         allowing those who would otherwise be isolated more freedom to access safe and social ways to participate in community and city life, improving their wellbeing and aiding independent living. This includes, but is not restricted to, those with physical or other disabilities, the elderly, and those on low incomes.

 

c.         reducing traffic, congestion, and air pollution through the removal of private vehicles from the roads.

 

3.         The Bus Services Act 2017 prohibits ‘relevant authorities’, such as councils and combined authorities, from establishing municipal (publicly owned) bus companies. However, it allows for some alternative models to the provision of bus services where these were previously required to be operated solely by private companies whose working relationship with local authorities was strictly limited. The revised options are Enhanced Partnership, Advanced Quality Partnerships, and Bus Franchising.

 

4.         Bus Franchising offers the opportunity for public direction of innovation of fares, routes, and bus quality.

 

5.         Bus Franchising is being implemented or explored by a number of city and regional authorities across the country including the Greater Manchester Combined Authority.

 

6.         Franchising the region’s bus network and building the necessary infrastructure to facilitate a reliable, efficient bus service will be costly and time consuming – Greater Manchester’s franchising scheme will take eight years to materialise. Therefore, further measures are needed to address the bus crisis in the immediate term. Bristol City Council should support WECA in this endeavour wherever possible.

 

Full Council believes that:

 

7.         As a key public service, bus services should ideally be publicly owned and publicly run. The Government should overturn the ban on councils and combined authorities establishing municipal bus companies.

 

8.         Pending any new government overturning the current legislation, Bus Franchising could provide some of the improvements and innovation required to achieve modal shift, increasing bus usage and reducing private car journeys.

 

9.         Implementing bus franchising would provide the opportunity to comprehensively re-think and re-design how the bus service can best serve our citizens, the city, and the region.

 

10.       Services provided under a franchising model would be better designed to meet the needs of the city rather than those of the bus operator(s).

 

11.       Bus Franchising would strengthen the West of England Combined Authority’s position in discharging its responsibilities for planning and transport across the region.

 

12.       The West of England Combined Authority’s previous dismissal of franchising in favour of developing an Enhanced Partnership was not the result of a comprehensive review of its potential benefits. The Enhanced Partnership model is compromised by the power of veto that the region’s major bus provider will have over decision-making.

 

13.       While a franchised bus service presents a considerable number of upsides, a publicly owned, municipal bus company is preferable, as it offers the same benefits but allows profits to be directly reinvested into the service. This is in contrast to a franchised system, where profits are paid to private shareholders.

 

Full Council resolves to:

 

1.         Call on Party Group Leaders to write to the Government to ask it overturns the 2017 ban on councils and combined authorities establishing municipal bus companies.

 

2.         Instruct the Chief Executive to write to the WECA Mayor requesting that he commissions a comprehensive feasibility study of all aspects of adopting and financing a system of franchising bus services in the region. The commission should also consider how the existing knowledge and experience of each member Authority could also be maximised in the consultation and design of such an approach.

 

3.         Should the government overturn the ban on the establishment of municipal bus companies, Bristol City Council resolves to work with WECA to commission a feasibility study for a publicly owned bus network. If it is found to be feasible, WECA should prioritise establishing a publicly owned bus network over a franchised network. This view should be reflected in the Chief Executive’s letter to the WECA Mayor.

 

4.         Request that the Mayor seeks consensus from the leaders of the other WECA authorities, and the WECA Mayor, in order to facilitate the delivery of a feasibility study as soon as possible.

 

 

Motion 2 – Silver Motion: Making Bristol a CPR Friendly City

 

Councillor Steve Smith moved the following motion:

“This Council was saddened to learn of the sudden death – by cardiac arrest - of Sam Polledri in Millennium Square last February.  It was even more tragic to discover that this loss might have been averted if there had been public access to a defibrillator and general knowledge on how to use such a machine.

 

Consequently, Council welcomes the training now being given to Members on CPR and defibrillation by the Great Western Air Ambulance Charity to highlight this issue.  However,  a great deal more can and must be done.

 

In order to make Bristol a leading local authority in this field, and mirroring the work already undertaken in Swansea,  Council calls on the Mayor to support and help develop the following proposals:-

 

(i)         Support and collaborate in a partnership as exists in Swansea with a charitable partner who can fundraise and organise the installation and maintenance of public access defibrillators and raise public awareness around their use

(ii)        Request that the Licensing Committee explore the option of making basic CPR/Defib skills a condition for granting drivers a license to operate a taxi in Bristol

(iii)       Ask the Local Plan Working Group to examine whether new building developments above a pre-determined size should be required to also include an accessible defibrillator

(iv)       Work with One City partners to make available basic CPR and / or defibrillator training in our local schools, colleges, and universities

(v)        Agree to install a defibrillator – available 24/7 – outside City Hall to not only provide an additional life-saving resource but also demonstrate a genuine commitment to this worthwhile cause.”

 

Councillor Graham Morris seconded the motion.

 

Following debate, upon being put to the vote, the motion was CARRIED (58 for, 0 Against, 0 Abstentions) and it was

 

RESOLVED:

 

“This Council was saddened to learn of the sudden death – by cardiac arrest - of Sam Polledri in Millennium Square last February.  It was even more tragic to discover that this loss might have been averted if there had been public access to a defibrillator and general knowledge on how to use such a machine.

 

Consequently, Council welcomes the training now being given to Members on CPR and defibrillation by the Great Western Air Ambulance Charity to highlight this issue.  However,  a great deal more can and must be done.

 

In order to make Bristol a leading local authority in this field, and mirroring the work already undertaken in Swansea,  Council calls on the Mayor to support and help develop the following proposals:-

 

(i)         Support and collaborate in a partnership as exists in Swansea with a charitable partner who can fundraise and organise the installation and maintenance of public access defibrillators and raise public awareness around their use

(ii)        Request that the Licensing Committee explore the option of making basic CPR/Defib skills a condition for granting drivers a license to operate a taxi in Bristol

(iii)       Ask the Local Plan Working Group to examine whether new building developments above a pre-determined size should be required to also include an accessible defibrillator

(iv)       Work with One City partners to make available basic CPR and / or defibrillator training in our local schools, colleges, and universities

(v)        Agree to install a defibrillator – available 24/7 – outside City Hall to not only provide an additional life-saving resource but also demonstrate a genuine commitment to this worthwhile cause.”

Supporting documents: