Agenda item

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, due to the cancellation of the November Full Council meeting, both the November Golden Motion and December Golden Motion will be considered at this meeting.

 

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

 

NOVEMBER GOLDEN MOTION (LABOUR PARTY): HEALTH NEEDS ASSESSMENT

 

This council notes:

• Bristol’s population is set to reach 550,000 by 2050.

• The rise in population will affect more areas of the city than others. Notable examples include: Bedminster, where 7,700 homes are set to be built; Hillfields and Fishponds, where at least 1,500 homes are being built as part of the Atlas Place development; Hengrove, where the council-owned housing developer Goram Homes is building 1,400 homes; and the city centre.

• A rise in population will cause increased demand for health services in Bristol and across the West of England.

• The Bristol, North Somerset and South Gloucestershire (BNSSG) Integrated Care Board (ICB), a statutory NHS organisation is responsible for developing a plan for meeting the health needs of the population, managing the NHS budget and arranging for the provision of health services in the BNSSG sub-region of the Southwest.

• There is a particular shortfall in dentistry provision in Bristol, with very few dentists taking on new NHS patients.

• A 2009 needs assessment recommended both a minor injuries unit at Cossham Hospital and a community hospital at Frenchay. Neither of these facilities have yet been built.

 

This council believes:

• The UK’s health services have been failed by thirteen years of government austerity and spending restraint. Despite this, the NHS in Bristol is doing commendable work, but it needs increased, sustained funding to meet the needs of a growing population.

• Likewise, NHS staff in Bristol deserve our utmost thanks and appreciation. Doctors and nurses deserve a decent pay rise after thirteen years of wage restraint.

• The Government has a responsibility to ensure all healthcare services are well-funded. While the Government is responsible for funding health services, the ICB has a duty to ensure that Bristol’s population has adequate access to healthcare.

• Hospital provision in the eastern and north-eastern fringes in Bristol could be improved. Cossham and Frenchay hospitals are both likely to need additional capacity and facilities. However, the promised Minor Injuries Unit and Community Hospital facilities respectively may not now be appropriate, so a review is needed to see what other types of healthcare facility are needed to meet current population requirements.

• Additional healthcare facilities – including General Practitioners and Dentists – as well as hospital facilities, will be needed to keep up with Bristol’s growing population. Areas of high population growth such as Bedminster and Hillfields and neighbouring wards will need expanded healthcare infrastructure. The Integrated Care Board should work closely with the Council and its partners to ensure residents get the healthcare services they will need.

 

This Council resolves to:

• Work with BNSSG ICB to carry out an analysis including consultation of local residents and VCSE delivery partners to survey what form of additional health infrastructure is required to meet need, and to understand how this might most effectively be delivered.  For example,  General Practices, Dentists, etc. taking account of changing life patterns, digital innovations, population demographics, and the opportunities to implement and integrate progressive delivery models such as Mental Health Integrated Network Teams (MINTS) and Women’s Health Hubs for better health outcomes

• As a member of the Integrated Care Board that the Council formally asks the ICB to carry out a strategic needs assessment of health care provision and bring that report back to Full Council, the Health and wellbeing board and the Health Scrutiny Committee.

• To prepare a plan which takes account of the BNSSG Strategic Needs assessment and local authority JSNA and population modelling data

• Act on recommendations of the strategic health care needs assessment and plan and work closely with the local authority to implement its recommendations.

• That the Council lobby the Government for funding to see the ICB’s recommendations implemented.

 

To be moved by Cllr Ellie King

 

Date of submission: 2nd November 2023

 

--

 

DECEMBER GOLDEN MOTION (LIBERAL DEMOCRATS PARTY): USE OF CAZ MONIES

 

Full Council notes:

 

1. Bristol’s Clean Air Zone was introduced on 28 November 2022 with the express intention of reducing the levels of NO2 recorded in the City.

2. That the Council has issued a Press Release stating that they have received a positive report from the Joint Air Quality Unit although this report is not yet public.

3. That in the Statement of Accounts for the year to the end of March 2023, a sum of £7.4m is noted as having been allocated to the Operational Reserve in 2022-23.

4. That, other than this figure, no data pertaining to the collection rate, fines issued, or monies raised, has been released.

5. That the administration has advised that a report on the first year of the zone’s operation, containing both performance and financial data, will be brought to Cabinet on 23 January 2024.

6. That the Council’s Budget Consultation Information Guide outlined proposals to use over £8.9m of Clean Air Zone monies to replace existing expenditure, including a £6.3m contribution to the transport levy paid to WECA.

7. That the Full Business Case for the CAZ noted that “Defra’s Clean Air Zone Framework (May 2017) prevents Local Authorities from setting a charge as a revenue raising measure, but any charging scheme will need to be set at a level to produce a change in behaviour.”

8. That the Full Business Case further stated that “The Transport Act 2000 requires any excess revenue that may arise from charges above the costs of operation to be re-invested to facilitate the achievement of local transport policies. These should aim to improve air quality and support the delivery of the ambitions of the zone.”

9. That revenue from the scheme is anticipated to fall as compliance rises.

10. That once the objectives of the scheme have been met, there will be local discretion as to whether it should be discontinued.

 

Full Council believes:

 

1. That revenue raised through the CAZ, and the projects it is spent on, should be clearly and transparently reported to the relevant meetings of this authority, subject to appropriate scrutiny, and be open to public examination.

2. That the majority of funds raised through the CAZ should be spent on additional projects to promote active travel and the use of a public transport rather than replacing core spending.

3. That the diminishing nature of CAZ revenue makes it unsuitable for funding regular expenditure within the Council’s control as when this falls and/or ceases, the regular funding will have to be raised / reallocated from other sources.

 

Full Council resolves:

 

1. To request the administration publishes full data on the performance of the scheme, as promised, as soon as possible.

2. To request the administration brings forward a budget that utilises the majority of CAZ funds to deliver new projects designed to increase the proportion of journeys undertaken by walking or wheeling, cycling, or public transport.

 

Motion to be moved by: Cllr Clark

 

Date of submission: 30th November 2023

 

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 30 minutes time limit for motions.  Following a vote it was agreed to proceed up until a 60 minute limit.

Motion 1

 

Councillor Ellie King moved the following motion:

 

GOLDEN MOTION (LABOUR PARTY): HEALTH NEEDS ASSESSMENT

 

This council notes:

• Bristol’s population is set to reach 550,000 by 2050.

• The rise in population will affect more areas of the city than others. Notable examples include: Bedminster, where 7,700 homes are set to be built; Hillfields and Fishponds, where at least 1,500 homes are being built as part of the Atlas Place development; Hengrove, where the council-owned housing developer Goram Homes is building 1,400 homes; and the city centre.

• A rise in population will cause increased demand for health services in Bristol and across the West of England.

• The Bristol, North Somerset and South Gloucestershire (BNSSG) Integrated Care Board (ICB), a statutory NHS organisation is responsible for developing a plan for meeting the health needs of the population, managing the NHS budget and arranging for the provision of health services in the BNSSG sub-region of the Southwest.

• There is a particular shortfall in dentistry provision in Bristol, with very few dentists taking on new NHS patients.

• A 2009 needs assessment recommended both a minor injuries unit at Cossham Hospital and a community hospital at Frenchay. Neither of these facilities have yet been built.

 

This council believes:

• The UK’s health services have been failed by thirteen years of government austerity and spending restraint. Despite this, the NHS in Bristol is doing commendable work, but it needs increased, sustained funding to meet the needs of a growing population.

• Likewise, NHS staff in Bristol deserve our utmost thanks and appreciation. Doctors and nurses deserve a decent pay rise after thirteen years of wage restraint.

• The Government has a responsibility to ensure all healthcare services are well-funded. While the Government is responsible for funding health services, the ICB has a duty to ensure that Bristol’s population has adequate access to healthcare.

• Hospital provision in the eastern and north-eastern fringes in Bristol could be improved. Cossham and Frenchay hospitals are both likely to need additional capacity and facilities. However, the promised Minor Injuries Unit and Community Hospital facilities respectively may not now be appropriate, so a review is needed to see what other types of healthcare facility are needed to meet current population requirements.

• Additional healthcare facilities – including General Practitioners and Dentists – as well as hospital facilities, will be needed to keep up with Bristol’s growing population. Areas of high population growth such as Bedminster and Hillfields and neighbouring wards will need expanded healthcare infrastructure. The Integrated Care Board should work closely with the Council and its partners to ensure residents get the healthcare services they will need.

 

This Council resolves to:

• Work with BNSSG ICB to carry out an analysis including consultation of local residents and VCSE delivery partners to survey what form of additional health infrastructure is required to meet need, and to understand how this might most effectively be delivered.  For example,  General Practices, Dentists, etc. taking account of changing life patterns, digital innovations, population demographics, and the opportunities to implement and integrate progressive delivery models such as Mental Health Integrated Network Teams (MINTS) and Women’s Health Hubs for better health outcomes

• As a member of the Integrated Care Board that the Council formally asks the ICB to carry out a strategic needs assessment of health care provision and bring that report back to Full Council, the Health and wellbeing board and the Health Scrutiny Committee.

• To prepare a plan which takes account of the BNSSG Strategic Needs assessment and local authority JSNA and population modelling data

• Act on recommendations of the strategic health care needs assessment and plan and work closely with the local authority to implement its recommendations.

• That the Council lobby the Government for funding to see the ICB’s recommendations implemented.

 

The motion was seconded by Councillor Brenda Massey

 

Following debate, upon being put to the vote, the motion was CARRIED (37 For, 1 against, 11 abstentions) and it was

 

RESOLVED:

 

This council notes:

• Bristol’s population is set to reach 550,000 by 2050.

• The rise in population will affect more areas of the city than others. Notable examples include: Bedminster, where 7,700 homes are set to be built; Hillfields and Fishponds, where at least 1,500 homes are being built as part of the Atlas Place development; Hengrove, where the council-owned housing developer Goram Homes is building 1,400 homes; and the city centre.

• A rise in population will cause increased demand for health services in Bristol and across the West of England.

• The Bristol, North Somerset and South Gloucestershire (BNSSG) Integrated Care Board (ICB), a statutory NHS organisation is responsible for developing a plan for meeting the health needs of the population, managing the NHS budget and arranging for the provision of health services in the BNSSG sub-region of the Southwest.

• There is a particular shortfall in dentistry provision in Bristol, with very few dentists taking on new NHS patients.

• A 2009 needs assessment recommended both a minor injuries unit at Cossham Hospital and a community hospital at Frenchay. Neither of these facilities have yet been built.

 

This council believes:

• The UK’s health services have been failed by thirteen years of government austerity and spending restraint. Despite this, the NHS in Bristol is doing commendable work, but it needs increased, sustained funding to meet the needs of a growing population.

• Likewise, NHS staff in Bristol deserve our utmost thanks and appreciation. Doctors and nurses deserve a decent pay rise after thirteen years of wage restraint.

• The Government has a responsibility to ensure all healthcare services are well-funded. While the Government is responsible for funding health services, the ICB has a duty to ensure that Bristol’s population has adequate access to healthcare.

• Hospital provision in the eastern and north-eastern fringes in Bristol could be improved. Cossham and Frenchay hospitals are both likely to need additional capacity and facilities. However, the promised Minor Injuries Unit and Community Hospital facilities respectively may not now be appropriate, so a review is needed to see what other types of healthcare facility are needed to meet current population requirements.

• Additional healthcare facilities – including General Practitioners and Dentists – as well as hospital facilities, will be needed to keep up with Bristol’s growing population. Areas of high population growth such as Bedminster and Hillfields and neighbouring wards will need expanded healthcare infrastructure. The Integrated Care Board should work closely with the Council and its partners to ensure residents get the healthcare services they will need.

 

This Council resolves to:

• Work with BNSSG ICB to carry out an analysis including consultation of local residents and VCSE delivery partners to survey what form of additional health infrastructure is required to meet need, and to understand how this might most effectively be delivered.  For example,  General Practices, Dentists, etc. taking account of changing life patterns, digital innovations, population demographics, and the opportunities to implement and integrate progressive delivery models such as Mental Health Integrated Network Teams (MINTS) and Women’s Health Hubs for better health outcomes

• As a member of the Integrated Care Board that the Council formally asks the ICB to carry out a strategic needs assessment of health care provision and bring that report back to Full Council, the Health and wellbeing board and the Health Scrutiny Committee.

• To prepare a plan which takes account of the BNSSG Strategic Needs assessment and local authority JSNA and population modelling data

• Act on recommendations of the strategic health care needs assessment and plan and work closely with the local authority to implement its recommendations.

• That the Council lobby the Government for funding to see the ICB’s recommendations implemented.

 

--

 

Motion 2

 

Councillor Jos Clark moved the following motion:

 

GOLDEN MOTION (LIBERAL DEMOCRATS): USE OF CAZ MONIES

 

Full Council notes:

 

1. Bristol’s Clean Air Zone was introduced on 28 November 2022 with the express intention of reducing the levels of NO2 recorded in the City.

2. That the Council has issued a Press Release stating that they have received a positive report from the Joint Air Quality Unit although this report is not yet public.

3. That in the Statement of Accounts for the year to the end of March 2023, a sum of £7.4m is noted as having been allocated to the Operational Reserve in 2022-23.

4. That, other than this figure, no data pertaining to the collection rate, fines issued, or monies raised, has been released.

5. That the administration has advised that a report on the first year of the zone’s operation, containing both performance and financial data, will be brought to Cabinet on 23 January 2024.

6. That the Council’s Budget Consultation Information Guide outlined proposals to use over £8.9m of Clean Air Zone monies to replace existing expenditure, including a £6.3m contribution to the transport levy paid to WECA.

7. That the Full Business Case for the CAZ noted that “Defra’s Clean Air Zone Framework (May 2017) prevents Local Authorities from setting a charge as a revenue raising measure, but any charging scheme will need to be set at a level to produce a change in behaviour.”

8. That the Full Business Case further stated that “The Transport Act 2000 requires any excess revenue that may arise from charges above the costs of operation to be re-invested to facilitate the achievement of local transport policies. These should aim to improve air quality and support the delivery of the ambitions of the zone.”

9. That revenue from the scheme is anticipated to fall as compliance rises.

10. That once the objectives of the scheme have been met, there will be local discretion as to whether it should be discontinued.

 

Full Council believes:

 

1. That revenue raised through the CAZ, and the projects it is spent on, should be clearly and transparently reported to the relevant meetings of this authority, subject to appropriate scrutiny, and be open to public examination.

2. That the majority of funds raised through the CAZ should be spent on additional projects to promote active travel and the use of a public transport rather than replacing core spending.

3. That the diminishing nature of CAZ revenue makes it unsuitable for funding regular expenditure within the Council’s control as when this falls and/or ceases, the regular funding will have to be raised / reallocated from other sources.

 

Full Council resolves:

 

1. To request the administration publishes full data on the performance of the scheme, as promised, as soon as possible.

2. To request the administration brings forward a budget that utilises the majority of CAZ funds to deliver new projects designed to increase the proportion of journeys undertaken by walking or wheeling, cycling, or public transport.

 

Councillor Andrew Brown seconded the motion.

 

Following debate, upon being put to the vote, the motion was CARRIED (47 For, 0 against, 0 abstentions) and it was

 

RESOLVED:

 

GOLDEN MOTION (LIBERAL DEMOCRATS): USE OF CAZ MONIES

 

Full Council notes:

 

1. Bristol’s Clean Air Zone was introduced on 28 November 2022 with the express intention of reducing the levels of NO2 recorded in the City.

2. That the Council has issued a Press Release stating that they have received a positive report from the Joint Air Quality Unit although this report is not yet public.

3. That in the Statement of Accounts for the year to the end of March 2023, a sum of £7.4m is noted as having been allocated to the Operational Reserve in 2022-23.

4. That, other than this figure, no data pertaining to the collection rate, fines issued, or monies raised, has been released.

5. That the administration has advised that a report on the first year of the zone’s operation, containing both performance and financial data, will be brought to Cabinet on 23 January 2024.

6. That the Council’s Budget Consultation Information Guide outlined proposals to use over £8.9m of Clean Air Zone monies to replace existing expenditure, including a £6.3m contribution to the transport levy paid to WECA.

7. That the Full Business Case for the CAZ noted that “Defra’s Clean Air Zone Framework (May 2017) prevents Local Authorities from setting a charge as a revenue raising measure, but any charging scheme will need to be set at a level to produce a change in behaviour.”

8. That the Full Business Case further stated that “The Transport Act 2000 requires any excess revenue that may arise from charges above the costs of operation to be re-invested to facilitate the achievement of local transport policies. These should aim to improve air quality and support the delivery of the ambitions of the zone.”

9. That revenue from the scheme is anticipated to fall as compliance rises.

10. That once the objectives of the scheme have been met, there will be local discretion as to whether it should be discontinued.

 

Full Council believes:

 

1. That revenue raised through the CAZ, and the projects it is spent on, should be clearly and transparently reported to the relevant meetings of this authority, subject to appropriate scrutiny, and be open to public examination.

2. That the majority of funds raised through the CAZ should be spent on additional projects to promote active travel and the use of a public transport rather than replacing core spending.

3. That the diminishing nature of CAZ revenue makes it unsuitable for funding regular expenditure within the Council’s control as when this falls and/or ceases, the regular funding will have to be raised / reallocated from other sources.

 

Full Council resolves:

 

1. To request the administration publishes full data on the performance of the scheme, as promised, as soon as possible.

2. To request the administration brings forward a budget that utilises the majority of CAZ funds to deliver new projects designed to increase the proportion of journeys undertaken by walking or wheeling, cycling, or public transport.