Council and democracy
Home > Council and Democracy > Agenda and minutes
Venue: Council Chamber, The Guildhall, Market Square, Cambridge, CB2 3QJ
Contact: Democratic Services Committee Manager
No. | Item | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Minutes: The minutes of the 26 May 2022 were
confirmed as a correct record and signed by the Mayor. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
Mayor's announcements Minutes: Commented that it was a privilege to attend
so many jubilee events across the city. Members were reminded that the annual Mayor’s
Day Out to Great Yarmouth was taking place on Tuesday 16 August and that the
Harvest Festival Civic Service would be taking place on Sunday 2 October at
10am at Great St. Mary’s Church. Members observed a minute’s silence to mark
the passing of former East Chesterton City Councillor Michael Bond.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
Under paragraph 4.2.1 of the Council Procedure Rules, the Mayor used their discretion to alter the order of the agenda items so that item 22/29/CNLd was considered at the end of the meeting. However, for ease of the reader, these minutes will follow the order of the published agenda. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
Public questions time PDF 105 KB Minutes: Members of the public asked a number of
questions, as set out below. Question 1 At the 2022 Annual Meeting, it was stated that Cambridge City Council is
“absolutely committed to delivering on a site” to meet the needs of nomadic
Gypsies and Travellers, who currently have no choice but to resort to
unauthorised stopping in Cambridge, leading to repeated evictions. This is
despite the centuries of historical ties that Gypsies and Travellers have to
Cambridge, such as the much-loved Midsummer Fair. The promise of a site is a significant step forward in this council’s
commitment to upholding GRT rights. However, vital questions remain unanswered. - Is this site intended to provide permanent pitches or temporary
stopping places? - What progress has been made in setting up the cross-party group
promised by Cllr Healy at the Annual Meeting? - What steps have been taken by this council to work together with Cambridge
County Council and South Cambridgeshire District Council? Executive Councillor for Equalities, Anti-Poverty and Wellbeing response: Midsummer Fair had been a fantastic event following the pandemic, which
a number of Councillors including the Mayor had
attended. The Council had worked with the Showman’s Guild to ensure that
Midsummer Fair was a welcoming event. Noted that there had been no unauthorised
encampments during Midsummer Fair. Had committed during the Council’s AGM to
the provision of a transient site but was still awaiting the findings of the Gypsy
Traveller Accommodation Needs Assessment (GTANA). Once the GTANA was available
an assessment of need could be made and reflected in the Local Plan. A cross
authority officer working group had been set up which was looking at potential
negotiated stopping sites and permanent sites. Would be happy to speak further
outside of the meeting. Supplementary question The member of the public commented that they did not place a lot of
faith in the GTANA in terms of identifying the people passing through as noted
that there could be some resistance to participating in the study when unknown
officials came on to unauthorised encampment sites. Noted that there were few City Council Officer’s speaking with the travelling
community themselves. Noted that little or no progress had been made on the
provision of a negotiated stopping place over the last 2 years. Expressed
concern that the Police Crime Sentencing and Courts Bill had now become law.
Questioned what plans were being put in place for the travelling community over
the summer period. Executive Councillor for Equalities, Anti-Poverty and Wellbeing response: Understood that officers had been meeting with the travelling community
although this could be County Council officers as part of the multiagency
approach. The GTANA would set out the minimum level of provision required, the Council could decide the more provision was
needed than that detailed in the GTANA. The GTANA was a starting point. Regular
meetings between the cross authority working group were taking place to look at
potential negotiated stopping places. Question 2 Last week, the consequences of the Police, Crimes, Sentencing and Courts
Act (PCSC Act) was demonstrated when multiple vans of riot police were sent to
evict a group of Travellers in Milton Keynes. According to news reports, this
came despite the known presence of children at the encampment, and the fact
that “there was little trouble” from those residing at the site, who left
voluntarily. Four vehicles were impounded in this incident, potentially leaving
families without homes. Like Milton Keynes, Cambridge has no transit pitches for authorised
stopping. Cambridge City Council has stated that it does not intend to bring
criminal proceedings under the PCSC Act against those who stop on council land
without authorisation, while refusing to commit to a moratorium on evictions in
the absence of adequate authorised stopping provisions. As this Council stated in its July 2021 ‘Motion on [the] Policing Bill’:
“No family willingly stops somewhere they are not welcome.” Those who stop on
council land without authorisation do so because they have nowhere else to go.
This will continue to be the case once they have been evicted, and there is no
guarantee that the landowner of their next encampment will take the same moral
stance against prosecution. It is therefore not a matter if, but when this
council’s actions will lead to criminal proceedings under the PCSC Act. This does not have to be the case. At the 2022 Annual Meeting, Cllr
Healy expressed a desire that this council explore options for negotiated
stopping in Cambridge. It is increasingly clear that this provision cannot come
soon enough. What steps have been taken towards provision of negotiated stopping in
Cambridge? What progress has been made with regards to: - Working with Cambridgeshire County Council to provide negotiated
stopping on Park&Ride sites? - Working with the Churches Network to provide negotiated stopping on
church land? Executive Councillor for Equalities, Anti-Poverty and Wellbeing response: The cross-council officer working group was working with other local
authorities and the County Council to consider options for negotiated stopping
places. Park and Ride sites were being looked at for this purpose. Did not
believe that discussions had taken place with the Church’s Network and
undertook to follow this up. Executive Councillor for Recovery, Employment and Community Safety
response: Commented that the Council had supported a motion a year ago against the
provisions contained within the Police Crime Sentencing and Courts Bill. The
ultimate solution would be found by joint working with other local councils
looking at permanent
stopping sites. Reassured the member of the public that the work at looking to
provide stopping places was being undertaken. She was working with the Police
and had also brought the issue up with the Police and Crime Commissioner who
had committed to meeting with the Gypsy Roma Traveller Community. Supplementary Question Noted that nationally the Police did not support the Police Crime
Sentencing and Courts Bill and that this had since passed through Parliament
with little opposition or changes. Expressed concerns that the new laws created
a criminal offence. Noted that during the summer this was the time that the
travelling community required stopping places and that an update on the
situation at the next Council meeting in October may be too late. The Mayor noted that the issue could be
discussed with the Executive Councillors in advance of the next council meeting
in October. Question 3 Represented UCU and Justice4CollegeSupervisors to discuss the payment of
those who teach undergraduates for the colleges at the University of Cambridge.
The Council was a living wage accredited employer, but only 1/31 of the
Cambridge Colleges were. Believed that many of the people who provided
undergraduate supervision were paid below the living wage and potentially below
the minimum wage. It takes only 2 hours and 20 minutes of preparation for one
contact hour to go below the living/minimum wage, something Cambridge UCU
surveys suggested was prevalent. What actions has the Council taken in the past
3 years to investigate below minimum wage pay by the colleges and what actions
will it take going forward? Executive Councillor for Recovery,
Employment and Community Safety response: The Council was accredited with the living wage and wanted to make
Cambridge a living wage place where every organisation and business pays the
living wage. Noted that it was an expensive city to live in especially during
the cost of living crisis, people often had to spend
half of their wages on rent. Sympathised where colleges were not supporting
their staff. Had spoken at rallies and the local MP had spoken on this issue.
Expressed concern that people were still paid under the living wage and did not
have contracts or job security. Noted that the University Unite Branch were
working on a campaign for a 20% pay rise. Had spoken with some colleges about
the living wage since becoming Executive Councillor. The Living Wage Foundation
were going to announce the new living wage earlier in September as a result of
the cost of living crisis. Wanted fair wages and Union
recognition. Supplementary question Wanted to follow up with a question regarding the rate of inflation of
the living wage. The rate of inflation used to sit around double digits. The
colleges had offered a 4.5% pay rise but felt this was a pay cut in real terms.
Had been below inflation since 2009 and were £5 poorer per 1hour contact time.
Asked what the living wage inflationary rise would be
and this figure could be used for their own campaigning. Executive Councillor for Recovery, Employment and Community Safety
response: Did not know what the living wage figure would be until the Living Wage
Foundation announced it. This was expected in September and was based on a number of factors. Would follow the matter up with the
member of the public outside of the meeting. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
To consider the recommendations of the Executive for adoption |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
Housing Revenue Account (HRA) Outturn Report 2021/22 (Executive Councillor for Housing) PDF 172 KB Additional documents: Minutes: Resolved (by 19 votes to 0) to: Approve carry forward requests of £22,055,000 in HRA and General
Fund Housing capital budgets and associated resources from 2021/22 into 2022/23
and beyond to fund re-phased net capital spending, as detailed in appendix D of
the officer’s report and the associated notes to the appendix. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
Additional documents: Minutes: i)
Approve the report
with the Council’s actual Prudential and Treasury Indicators for 2021/22. ii)
Approve a loan of £50,000 to Cherry Hinton
Community Benefit Society for their contribution to the building costs of the
Cherry Hinton Hub. Subsequent to the
committee meeting, the Strategic Project Manager for Community Services
reported that the loan was not now being progressed. The Strategy and Resources Committee Minute
will also be amended to reflect this. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
Additional documents: Minutes: Resolved (by 22 votes to 0) to: ii.
Approve additional budget in 2022/23
of £22k for Arboriculture and £12k for Project Delivery funded from reserves,
as detailed in Paragraphs 3.6 and 3.7 in the officer’s report. iii.
Approve carry forward requests of
£71,909,000 of capital resources from 2021/22 to 2022/23 to fund rephased net
capital spending, as detailed in Appendix D of the officer’s report. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
The report contains exempt
information during which the public is likely to be excluded from the meeting
subject to determination by Council following consideration of a public
interest test. This exclusion would be made under paragraph 3 of Part 1
of Schedule 12A of the Local Government Act 1972. Additional documents:
Minutes: Council resolved
to exclude members of the public from the meeting on the grounds that, if they were
present, there would be disclosure to them of information defined as exempt
from publication by virtue of paragraph 3 of Part 1 of Schedule
12A of the Local Government Act 1972. Resolved (by 25 votes to 0) to: Approve
a budget of £33.94 million for a loan to the Cambridge Investment Partnership
to cover land acquisition for the scheme explained in the officer’s
confidential report. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
Minutes: |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
To deal with oral questions Minutes: Question 1 Councillor Holloway to the Executive
Councillor for Housing Can the Exec Cllr
for Housing please give an update on homelessness numbers in the city? Executive
Councillor response In 2021/22 the
number of homeless exceptions was 101, this contrasted with 56 in 2020/21 and
90 in 2019/20. The lower figure in 2020/21 may be due to covid restrictions. In
2021/22 the number of new lettings to people on the housing needs register was
507, which could be contrasted with 534 in 2020/21 and 541 in 2019/20. During
April – June 2022, the Housing Advice Team received 302 enquiries from people needing
housing advice. The most common reason that people were contacting housing
advance was that their private sector tenancy was ending. The second most
common reason was that they were living with a family member / friend who had
asked them to leave. These two reasons
were the two most common causes for homelessness for the past couple of
years. During this period the most
common reason was that the private let was coming to end was that the private
sector landlord wanted to sell their property. Officers were monitoring this to
see whether it was becoming a trend. Question 2
Councillor Bennett to the Executive Councillor Cambridge Water
has asked all customers to help save water by avoiding using hoses to water
plants or clean cars, recycling water wherever possible, and taking shorter
showers. It is questionable how many
Cambridge residents will either see or respond to this request. The water
company maintains that there is no need for a temporary use ban (TUB) in the near future.
However, one of their senior staff reported earlier this month that
heavy recent use of water has already led to some issues with low water pressure
for some customers. The company has stated that they are now taking more water
from the environment, which is no doubt contributing to the low levels of water
in the Cam and associated chalk streams. Would the Council
work with Cambridge Water to get a TUB implemented as a matter of urgency,
since there is no evidence that the water situation will improve in the near future.
As we pointed out last year in our response to the consultation on
Cambridge Water’s Drought Plan, the triggers for implementing TUBs are
completely inadequate in this time of rapid global heating. Executive
Councillor response In preparing a
response they re-read the final report from the Water Crisis Forum held in
2019, which was a cross party and cross boundary event which allowed local
councillors to ask questions of representatives from Cambridge Water, the
Environment Agency, Cam Valley Forum and others. It
also involved local groups and school children.
The Forum explained how draught plans were activated, how there was
increased monitoring across sites, increased water efficiency and meetings with
the National Draught group. The responsibility of the water company remains in
times of draught. Even if a draught is acknowledged (as in 2019) the water
authority obligation is to supply customers with water having regard to the
environment. The Water Companies also said at the time that they had a duty not
to cause panic amongst the public. The City Council is not in a situation to be
able to insist upon the implementation of measures by the Water
Undertaker. Question 3
Councillor Gawthrope Wood to the Executive Councillor for Open Spaces, Food
Justice and Community Development The learner pool
in King’s Hedges has been a valuable resource for the North Cambridge community
for decades, teaching generations of local children to swim. It closed
temporarily during the pandemic, and remains closed.
Can the Executive Councillor please give us an update on plans to reopen the
pool? Executive
Councillor response Noted that this was
an important issue for people in north Cambridge. There had been issues for GLL
in staffing the pool, which meant they had been unable to run the school lesson
programme. Successive recruitment rounds had been unsuccessful. The local MP
had noted there was a national shortage of swimming teachers in the Commons.
Was pleased to report that there had been progress recently. Officers had met
with GLL that week. It was hoped that general sessions would open over the
summer holidays with a view to lessons starting in September. GLL would have
engineers at the pool next week to start filling the pool to test the
equipment. Was on track for a partial re-opening over the summer and re-opening
for classes from September. Question 4
Councillor Lee to the Executive Councillor for Planning Policy and
Infrastructure In Queen Edith a
5G phone mast has recently been approved on appeal by the planning inspector. Appreciated
that to some extent prior approval means planning has less room for manoeuvre,
but this means that telecommunications companies can and do place equipment
with little thought and even less consultation. No-one is objecting to the
phone mast itself or the need for infrastructure, but the mast dangerously
obscures pedestrians using the zebra crossing from drivers, and this ridiculous
situation could have been avoided by engagement with the local community
including ward councillors who could have proposed a site not even 20m away.
This contributes to an unnecessarily fractious relationship between planning, communities and companies. Could the Executive Councillor
for Planning and Infrastructure write to the government to outline concerns and
push for reform that would require more consultation with communities as to
where infrastructure is placed? Executive
Councillor response Shared Councillor
Lee’s concerns. With the support of the Cambridgeshire and Peterborough
Combined Authority and the Connecting Cambridgeshire programme, the Shared
Planning Service had begun a project seeking to proactively engage with the 5G
rollout programme in Cambridgeshire to enable earlier dialogue and reduction in
avoidable planning appeals. Expected to be able to report on the programme in
the coming months. Would explore within the parameters of the planning regime
how early input into the process might be increased. Would write to the
appropriate Minister. Question 5
Councillor Sarah Baigent to the Executive Councillor for Housing Can the Exec Cllr
for Housing please give an update on how many Ukrainian refugees have been
housed in the city, and any associated issues? Executive
Councillor response The total number
of Ukrainian people welcomed to the city was 372 as of 20 July, this number was
broken down as follows. 357 guests had arrived via the Homes for Ukraine visa
scheme and there were 230 host households who were supporting their
resettlement in Cambridge city. Was expecting 531 guests over the course of the
scheme. 15 people had arrived on the family visa scheme. From the Housing
perspective 21 homeless enquiries had been received. There were 13 active
homeless applications and 12 were in temporary accommodation. Of the 21
enquiries 6 are from the Homes for Ukraine and 15 were from the Ukraine families scheme. There were 3 households in the designated
Ukraine accommodation at Crossways. There was 1 pending re-match to South Cambs
and 1 host pending return from holiday. There was concern around homelessness
and temporary accommodation pressures. Continued to welcome a
number of new guests each week (around 10) on the Homes for Ukraine
scheme. Question 6
Councillor Nethsingha to the Executive Councillor for Open Spaces, Food Justice
and Community Development As many in this
Chamber will know, a planning application has been submitted by Queens’ College
for a major redevelopment of the Owlstone Croft site
in Newnham. This site runs next to the
Paradise Nature Reserve, which is a hugely important area of our city for
biodiversity. I and many residents do
not believe that the assessment of the environmental impact that the proposals
may have on the Paradise Reserve have been sufficiently carefully assessed,
given the importance of the reserve and the delicacy of the environment. Could the Executive Councillor for
Environment tell me whether she is aware of the concerns which have been raised
about the impact on the reserve, whether she has visited the reserve to see how
significant the loss of trees would be?
If she has not visited the reserve would she be
willing to meet with me and residents of the area to look at the impact of the
proposed development. Executive
Councillor response The application
had been considered by the Streets and Open Spaces Team as well as the
statutory consultees and the Executive Councillors (it covered 3 x Executive
Councillor portfolios) who were fully aware of the development and potential
impact. Had been in touch with Friends of the Paradise Nature Reserve and had
heard how passionate they and others were about the space, it was a beautiful
space and crucial to the city’s biodiversity. One of the first things they did
as an Executive Councillor was to walk round all the city’s local nature
reserves as they wanted to understand them better. Had had a meeting arranged
with the Friends organisation but unfortunately this had to be cancelled. Had visited the site on several occasions and
had considered the impacts. Question 7
Councillor Divkovic to the Leader What is your
message to the Conservative leadership contestants from Cambridge? Executive
Councillor response Wanted the
contestants to take decisive and effective action to deal with the huge issues
being faced including the cost of living crisis, the
climate and biodiversity emergencies, the impact of Brexit and the Covid-19
pandemic. Felt the prime minister needed to show real hands
on leadership. They needed to listen and value local government. The
Council was still waiting to be properly compensated for the additional work
taken on during the pandemic, which was on top of years of chronic
under-funding. Noted that there should be proper central government funding for
a decent pay settlement for council workers who had worked tirelessly during
the pandemic. Question 8
Councillor Copley to the Executive Councillor for Environment, Climate Change
and Biodiversity In the context of
Tuesday’s record breaking temperatures, we have seen
how the deadly temperatures that have been affecting those in the Global South
as a direct result of the climate crisis are now directly affecting residents
of Cambridge as well. These impacts are
not felt equally across the city - some residents are able to go to air conditioned workplaces or remain relatively cool due to
having well insulated homes built to high specifications, and other residents
have been exposed to extreme temperatures in their homes due to them not having
been built to be resilient to extreme heat. What work has the
city council done to date to assess the climate resilience of existing homes in
the City (including council homes) from the risk of
overheating, and to put in places changes to protect residents from extreme
heatwaves? As we all know, these will become increasingly common and intense
with ongoing climate breakdown. Executive
Councillor response The Council
recognised in addition to reducing carbon emissions, Cambridge needed to ensure
it adapts to the impacts of the climate crisis including increased hot summers,
overheating, water shortages, draughts and floods.
Overheating in homes was a nationwide issue and needed action and significant
funding from Government to address it. Building Regulations required an
assessment of the level of overheating risk in all new homes. No national level
regulations had been developed for existing homes although the Government’s
independent advisory body – the Committee on Climate Change were calling for
this. Overheating in new council homes was considered as part of the design
work and was also a consideration as part of the planning process. The council
would use government funding to support improvements to private owners and the
council was also investing in improvements to its council homes. Some of this
work would contribute to climate resilience but further steps were required. Question 9
Councillor Herbert to the Executive Councillor for Open Spaces, Food Justice
and Community Development Can the Executive
Councillor give an update on the management of this year’s Midsummer Fair and, in particular, both the clean-up operation and any plans
for next year’s event? Executive
Councillor response There were a number of elements in this year’s plan. There was a hub at
Wesley Church. There were toilets and litter bins on Midsummer Common. There
was additional cleaning on Sunday morning, and they thanked the Operations Team
for their hard work. There was Police support for traffic enforcement. A rapid
response Team was on hand to deal with washing down and deep cleaning as
needed. A Licensing Officer was around to deal with the supply and sale of
alcohol. The Communications Team managed social media messages. The foot bridge
at the Fort St George was closed and there was
additional police in the area. The council spent 169 working hours on litter
collections over the 4-day period. Costs came to £9246 which was recovered from
the Showman’s Guild. Would follow up what the additional fee for waste disposal
was. Despite the extensive clean-up
operation there were several reports about broken glass on the common and extra
response teams were sent out to clear it away. As it’s an extensive area and
without specific locations it was difficult to know where all the glass was,
but officers continued to respond to reports as they came in. The council remined
committed to supporting the fair and working with the Gypsy Roma Traveller
community and the local community to ensure that next year’s fair could be the
best that it could be. The following oral
questions were tabled but owing to the expiry of the period
of time permitted, were not covered during the meeting. The Mayor asked Executive Councillors if a written response
could be provided to those questions that had not been covered. Question 10 Councillor
Payne to the Executive Councillor for Housing Can the Exec Cllr
update us on the council's actions so far and its future
plans to address the backlog of council house repairs and maintenance? Question 11
Councillor Bick to the Executive Councillor for Finance, Resources and
Transformation Councillor Davey
told the BBC last month that there were lessons to be learned from the
marketing of Ironworks and Timberworks homes to offshore property investors.
What are they? Question 12
Councillor Thittala to the Executive Councillor for Housing Can the Exec Cllr
for Housing please update us on the current state of progress with a) repairs
and b) voids? Question 13
Councillor Carling to the Executive Councillor for Recovery, Employment and
Community Safety In pre-covid 2019,
the Children’s Commissioner reported that Cambridge was the fourth worst
performing area in the country for young people on Free School Meals. How is
the Council supporting young people from disadvantaged backgrounds through
education and into the job market? Question 14
Councillor Howard to the Executive Councillor for Finance, Resources and
Transformation Residents who are
not able to pay their council tax on time are sent a reminder, after which they
will be sent a court summons via magistrates court
(see link below). In the context of a cost of living
crisis, and when the threat of legal action is likely to cause immense anxiety,
does the Executive Councillor agree that this punitive approach is incorrect,
and that the next immediate step should be to make contact with the resident
and offer them assistance with the cost of living crisis and / or a payment
plan? Reference: https://www.cambridge.gov.uk/council-tax-reminders-and-recovery-action Question 15
Councillor Hauk to the Executive Councillor for Open Spaces, Food Justice and
Community Development How are you
supporting community development in our new areas around the city such as in my
ward of Trumpington? Question 16
Councillor Porrer to the Executive Councillor for Recovery, Employment and
Community Safety Could the Exec
Cllr please update council on progress on purchasing noise cameras to deter the
increasing unsafe anti-social behaviour, particularly at night, of scooters,
mopeds, motorcycles and cars racing around the city
streets, which is causing disruption to so many of our residents across the
city. Question 17
Councillor Pounds to the Executive Councillor for Recovery, Employment and
Community Safety Can the Executive
Cllr for Finance and Resources update us on progress relating to the City
Council building Council Homes with the Cambridge Investment Partnership Secondary
Questions Question 1 Councillor
Copley to the Executive Councillor for Open Spaces, Food Justice and Community
Development A contract was signed for the Big
Wheel on Parker’s Piece in 2021, representing privatisation of part of Parker’s
Piece. Would the council provide a list
consisting of the name of the item about which a contract has been signed, and
the park or open space that it relates to for items which fulfil all of:
Question 2 Councillor Howard to the
Executive Councillor for Planning Policy and Infrastructure In the context of record
breaking temperatures, the positive impact of mature trees on streets in
the city has been apparent to anyone fortunate enough to walk under or live
near them. In the context of future heatwaves, is the cityscape being modelled
from the context of a globally heated world, and tree selection taking place to
mean that we have the greatest possible tree canopy cover on roads and streets
in the city, when we will need it most? Question 3 Councillor Bennett to the
Executive Councillor for Equalities, Anti-Poverty and Wellbeing What is the reason for the ongoing delay
to the publication of the GTANA (Gypsy/Traveller Accommodation Need
Assessment)? Question 4 Councillor Divkovic to the
Executive Councillor for Recovery Employment and Community Safety. Can the Executive Councillor outline
what steps are being taken to reduce cycle crime? Question 5 Councillor Holloway to the Executive Councillor for Equalities Anti-Poverty and
Wellbeing What is the present situation in
relation to our Ukraine programme – what are the numbers of guests welcomed,
what support are we providing to guests and hosts and what happens at the end
of the 6-month period? Question 6 Councillor Pounds to the
Executive Councillor for Equalities Anti-Poverty and Wellbeing I’ve
heard that the County council are intending to put the old Mill Road library up
for sale shortly, what would be the process for a city council community
consultation on this, since it is an asset of community value? |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
To consider the following notices of motion, notice of which has been given by: |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
Councillor Robertson - Fireworks and Pets as Prizes This Council notes: Effects of Loud Fireworks on Animals 1. Studies have found fireworks to be
the most common cause for fear responses in dogs¹, and it is estimated that 45
percent of dogs show signs of fear when they hear fireworks². A New Zealand
survey recorded 79 percent of horses as either anxious or 2. Although there is limited direct
evidence, it is also likely that fireworks and their debris will cause
disturbance to wildlife, and are likely to cause suffering or distress,
depending on the distance from the explosive and the noise level. 3. The RSPCA believes that a
licensing system would help with better enforcement of the law by allowing
enforcement bodies to know where licensed events are being held so they can
focus on locations and incidents elsewhere. 4. This phobia can be treated (in
dogs at least) in the long term but owners need to prepare themselves and their
pets sooner, rather than just before the fireworks are let off. There is a need
to raise awareness about the impact of fireworks on animals to the wider public
to encourage them to be more considerate of those with pets, horses and
livestock as well as local wildlife ¹ Blackwell,
E., Bradshaw, J., & Casey, R. (2013). Fear responses to noises in domestic
dogs: Prevalence, risk Pets as prizes 5. That the RSPCA a. receives reports of pets given as
prizes via fairgrounds, social media and other channels in England – and notes
the issue predominantly concerns
goldfish b. is concerned for the welfare of
those animals c. recognises that many cases of
pets being as prizes may go unreported each year d. supports a move to ban the giving
of live animals as prizes, in any form. 6.
That the city council has an existing policy that
does not permit the use of live creatures as prizes at any event
including circuses and funfairs on the Council’s parks and open spaces,
A.
To encourage
the organisers of all public firework displays within the local authority
boundaries to be advertised in advance of the event, allowing residents to take
precautions for their animals and vulnerable people B.
To
actively promote a public awareness campaign about the impact of fireworks on
animal welfare and vulnerable people – including the precautions that can be
taken to mitigate risks. C.
To write
to the UK Government urging them to introduce legislation to limit the maximum
noise level of fireworks to 90dB for those sold to the public for private
displays. D. To encourage local suppliers ... view the full agenda text for item 22/31/CNLa Minutes: Councillor Collis proposed and
Councillor Dryden seconded the following motion: Effects
of Loud Fireworks on Animals 1.
Studies
have found fireworks to be the most common cause for fear responses in dogs¹,
and it is estimated that 45 percent of dogs show signs of fear when they hear 2.
Although
there is limited direct evidence, it is also likely that fireworks and their
debris will cause disturbance to wildlife, and are likely to cause suffering or
distress, depending on the distance from the explosive and the noise level. 3.
The RSPCA
believes that a licensing system would help with better enforcement of the law
by allowing enforcement bodies to know where licensed events are being held so
they can focus on locations and incidents elsewhere. 4.
This
phobia can be treated (in dogs at least) in the long term but owners need to
prepare themselves and their pets sooner, rather than just before the fireworks
are let off. There is a need to raise awareness about the impact of fireworks
on animals to the wider public to encourage them to be more considerate of
those with pets, horses and livestock as well as local
wildlife ¹ Blackwell, E., Bradshaw, J., & Casey, R. (2013). Fear responses to
noises in domestic dogs: Prevalence, risk Pets as prizes 5.
That the
RSPCA a. receives reports of pets given as
prizes via fairgrounds, social media and other
channels in England – and notes the issue predominantly concerns goldfish b. is concerned for the welfare of
those animals c. recognises that many cases of
pets being as prizes may go unreported each year d. supports a move to ban the giving
of live animals as prizes, in any form. 6.
That the city council has an existing policy that
does not permit the use
of live creatures as prizes at any event including circuses and funfairs on the
Council’s parks and open spaces, The Council agrees to: A.
To encourage
the organisers of all public firework displays within the local authority
boundaries to be advertised in advance of the event, allowing residents to take
precautions for their animals and vulnerable people B.
To actively
promote a public awareness campaign about the impact of fireworks on animal
welfare and vulnerable people – including the precautions that can be taken to
mitigate risks. C.
To write
to the UK Government urging them to introduce legislation to limit the maximum
noise level of fireworks to 90dB for those sold to the public for private
displays. D.
To encourage
local suppliers of fireworks to stock ‘quieter’ fireworks for public display. E.
To encourage
others in Cambridge to also ban the giving of live animals as prizes, in any
form. F.
write
to the UK Government, urging an outright ban on the giving of live animals as
prizes on both public and private land. Councillor Porrer proposed
and Councillor Nethsingha seconded the following amendment to motion (additional
text underlined): This Council notes: Effects of Loud Fireworks on Animals 1. Studies have found fireworks to
be the most common cause for fear responses in dogs¹, and it is estimated that
45 percent of dogs show signs of fear when they hear fireworks². A New Zealand
survey recorded 79 percent of horses as either anxious or 2. Although there is limited direct
evidence, it is also likely that fireworks and their debris will cause
disturbance to wildlife, and are likely to cause suffering or distress,depending on the distance
from the explosive and the noise level. 3. The RSPCA believes that a
licensing system would help with better enforcement of the law by allowing
enforcement bodies to know where licensed events are being held so they can
focus on locations and incidents elsewhere. 4. This phobia can be treated (in
dogs at least) in the long term but owners need to prepare themselves and their
pets sooner, rather than just before the fireworks are let off. There is a need
to raise awareness about the impact of fireworks on animals to the wider public
to encourage them to be more considerate of those with pets, horses
and livestock as well as local wildlife ¹ Blackwell,
E., Bradshaw, J., & Casey, R. (2013). Fear responses to noises in domestic
dogs: Prevalence, risk Pets as prizes 5. That the RSPCA a. receives reports of pets given as
prizes via fairgrounds, social media and other channels in England – and notes
the issue
predominantly concerns goldfish b. is concerned for the welfare of
those animals c. recognises that many cases of
pets being as prizes may go unreported each year d. supports a move to ban the giving
of live animals as prizes, in any form. 6. That the
city council has an existing policy that does not permit the use
of live creatures as prizes at any event including circuses and funfairs on the
Council’s parks and open spaces, The Council agrees to: A.
To encourage
the organisers of all public firework displays within the local authority
boundaries to be advertised in advance of the event, allowing residents to take
precautions for their animals and vulnerable people B.
To actively
promote a public awareness campaign about the impact of fireworks on animal
welfare and vulnerable people – including the precautions that can be taken to
mitigate risks. C.
To write
to the UK Government urging them to introduce legislation to limit the maximum
noise level of fireworks to 90dB for those sold to the public for private
displays. D.
To encourage
local suppliers of fireworks to stock ‘quieter’ fireworks for public display. E.
To investigate the use of fireworks and firework equivalents that reduce
carbon release and reduce noise, and to work with Cambridge University and
colleges and other stakeholders across the city to share this knowledge to
reduce the carbon and acoustic impact of future events. F.
To encourage
others in Cambridge to also ban the giving of live animals as prizes, in any
form. G.
write to
the UK Government, urging an outright ban on the giving of live animals as
prizes on both public and private land. On a show of hands the amendment was lost by 8 votes to 19. Resolved (unanimously) that: Effects of Loud Fireworks on Animals 7. Studies have found fireworks to
be the most common cause for fear responses in dogs¹, and it is estimated that
45 percent of dogs show signs of fear when they hear 8. Although there is limited direct
evidence, it is also likely that fireworks and their debris will cause
disturbance to wildlife, and are likely to cause suffering or distress,
depending on the distance from the explosive and the noise level. 9. The RSPCA believes that a
licensing system would help with better enforcement of the law by allowing
enforcement bodies to know where licensed events are being held so they can
focus on locations and incidents elsewhere. 10.
This
phobia can be treated (in dogs at least) in the long term but owners need to
prepare themselves and their pets sooner, rather than just before the fireworks
are let off. There is a need to raise awareness about the impact of fireworks
on animals to the wider public to encourage them to be more considerate of
those with pets, horses and livestock as well as local
wildlife ¹ Blackwell,
E., Bradshaw, J., & Casey, R. (2013). Fear responses to noises in domestic
dogs: Prevalence, risk Pets as prizes 11.
That the
RSPCA a. receives reports of pets given as
prizes via fairgrounds, social media and other
channels in England – and notes the issue predominantly concerns goldfish b. is concerned for the welfare of
those animals c. recognises that many cases of
pets being as prizes may go unreported each year d. supports a move to ban the giving
of live animals as prizes, in any form. 12.
That the city council has an existing policy that
does not permit the use of live creatures as prizes at any event
including circuses and funfairs on the Council’s parks and open spaces, The Council agrees to: A.
To encourage
the organisers of all public firework displays within the local authority
boundaries to be advertised in advance of the event, allowing residents to take
precautions for their animals and vulnerable people B.
To actively
promote a public awareness campaign about the impact of fireworks on animal
welfare and vulnerable people – including the precautions that can be taken to
mitigate risks. C.
To write
to the UK Government urging them to introduce legislation to limit the maximum
noise level of fireworks to 90dB for those sold to the public for private
displays. D.
To encourage
local suppliers of fireworks to stock ‘quieter’ fireworks for public display. E.
To encourage
others in Cambridge to also ban the giving of live animals as prizes, in any
form. F.
write
to the UK Government, urging an outright ban on the giving of live animals as
prizes on both public and private land. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
Councillor Payne - BBC Look East Cambridge City
Council notes the recent announcement by the BBC to cease production
of the Look East regional news output from Cambridge and
only broadcast a regional news programme based in Norwich. The 2021 census
shows that the East of England has experienced the highest population increase
across the English regions and Wales. Cambridge is a key city in the
region due to its rapid employment growth. Reducing BBC
Look East’s operations to Norwich only will mean vital local stories in
Cambridge, which may have significance across the region, may be
missed. We believe that effective scrutiny is a key to good
democracy and local journalists are a crucial part of this Cambridge City
Council expresses deep concern over the plans and believes that as a growing
area our region requires more, not less, investment in local journalism. Council
therefore agrees 1.
To
ask the Chief Executive to write to the Director General of the BBC to
oppose these cuts to local and regional news. 2.
To
seek support from other local authorities to highlight the growing importance
of our region and that more, not less, local journalism should be focussed on
the area in general. Minutes: Councillor
Payne proposed and Councillor Nethsingha seconded the following motion: Cambridge City
Council notes the recent announcement by the BBC to cease production
of the Look East regional news output from Cambridge and only
broadcast a regional news programme based in Norwich. The 2021
census shows that the East of England has experienced the highest population
increase across the English regions and Wales. Cambridge is a key city in
the region due to its rapid employment growth. Reducing BBC
Look East’s operations to Norwich only will mean vital local stories in
Cambridge, which may have significance across the region, may be
missed. We believe that effective scrutiny is a key to good
democracy and local journalists are a crucial part of this Cambridge City
Council expresses deep concern over the plans and believes that as a growing
area our region requires more, not less, investment in local journalism. Council
therefore agrees 1.
To
ask the Chief Executive to write to the Director General of
the BBC to oppose these cuts to local and regional news. 2.
To
seek support from other local authorities to highlight the growing importance
of our region and that more, not less, local journalism should be focussed on
the area in general. Cambridge City
Council notes the recent announcement by the BBC to cease production
of the Look East regional news output from Cambridge and
only broadcast a regional news programme based in Norwich. Council
also notes with concern the proposed closure of the BBC News Channel that
serves viewers in the UK and the potential impact on the coverage of UK news
stories. As well as the loss of an important space on TV where MPs are able to discuss policies and constituency matters,
local, regional, and non-metropolitan issues will struggle to find room in
future programming, if this closure is allowed to go ahead. We also
note that the BBC has been required to cut its spending by £1bn a year between
2017 and 2022 as a result of a licence fee settlement
imposed by the Government and that this has created significant pressures on
the BBC. The 2021
census shows that the East of England has experienced the highest population
increase across the English regions and Wales. Cambridge is a key city in
the region due to its rapid employment growth. Reducing BBC
Look East’s operations to Norwich only will mean vital local stories in
Cambridge, which may have significance across the region, may be
missed. We believe that effective scrutiny is a key to good
democracy and local journalists are a crucial part of this Cambridge City
Council expresses deep concern over the plans and believes that as a growing
area our region requires more, not less, investment in local journalism. Council
therefore agrees 1. To ask the Chief
Executive to write to the Director General of the BBC to oppose these
cuts to local, 2. To seek support from other local authorities to highlight the growing
importance of our region and that more, not less, local journalism should be
focussed on the area in general. On a show of hands the amendment was carried unanimously. Resolved (unanimously) that: Council also notes with concern the proposed
closure of the BBC News Channel that serves viewers in the UK and the potential
impact on the coverage of UK news stories. As well as the loss of an important
space on TV where MPs are able to discuss policies and
constituency matters, local, regional, and non-metropolitan issues will
struggle to find room in future programming, if this closure is allowed to go
ahead. We also note that the BBC has been required to
cut its spending by £1bn a year between 2017 and 2022 as a
result of a licence fee settlement imposed by the Government and that
this has created significant pressures on the BBC. The 2021 census shows that the East of England
has experienced the highest population increase across the English regions and
Wales. Cambridge is a key city in the region due to its rapid employment
growth. Reducing BBC Look East’s operations to Norwich
only will mean vital local stories in Cambridge, which may have significance
across the region, may be missed. We believe that effective scrutiny
is a key to good democracy and local journalists are a crucial part of this Cambridge City Council expresses deep concern
over the plans and believes that as a growing area our region requires more,
not less, investment in local journalism. Council therefore agrees 1.
To
ask the Chief Executive to write to the Director General of the BBC to
oppose these cuts to local, regional and
national news and expressing support for the Corporation’s attempt to
achieve a full and sustainable funding settlement in future. 2. To seek support from other local authorities to highlight the growing importance of our region and that more, not less, local journalism should be focussed on the area in general. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
Councillor Howard - Private Renters Charter This Council resolves to
update and publish a Private Renters Charter on its website, and in Cambridge
Matters and to review it for updates at 6 month intervals. The Council also resolves
to consult with the Landlords Steering Group and local advisory bodies
including Cambridge ACORN, Citizens Advice Bureau. The purpose of this consultation
is to: ·
agree ways to improve renters’ knowledge of
their rights and encourage new renters to take advice before they sign
agreements to protect their deposits and other rights, not when they encounter
problems, ·
reach out to smaller landlords who are
particularly likely to be using outdated, non compliant and overly onerous
rental agreements and encourage the adoption of kinder, more modern agreements.
·
This could include taking information stands at
Freshers’ Fairs, Cambridge Pride, Job Fairs and the Big Weekend To report back to council
quarterly on progress. Notes: 1
42% of Cambridge households live in private
rented accommodation. 2
Survey after survey reveals low levels of
awareness of renters’ legal rights not just among renters but even landlords. 3
Greater awareness of rights can prevent loss of
deposits and reduce the risk of eviction. 4
A white paper to improve renters rights was
published in June 2022 5
With the current political instability we cannot
predict if or when these proposals may become law. We cannot wait to take
action but we also need to plan to update any action we take if new laws are
enacted. 6
Supporting Cambridge’s private renters is
particularly important because they are the biggest group of households in the
city. 7
Residents
from abroad may be used to more favourable rental regimes in their previous
home countries and may be unprepared for the UK system. 8
Model Private Renters Charters can be found here https://www.norwich.gov.uk/info/20410/norwich_private_renters_charter Minutes: Councillor Howard withdraw Motion 6c under Council Procedure Rule 27. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
Councillor Copley - Rivers, Safe Swimming and Sewage Background Cambridge residents are deeply concerned about water quality and the
impact of wastewater discharge, including untreated sewage, into the River Cam
and its tributaries. Studies by the Cam Valley Forum show that sewage treatment
works run by Anglian Water are the greatest source of faecal pathogens in the
River Cam[1]. These are a major concern in relation to health of those who come into
contact with the water, whether for work or leisure, - swimming in the River is increasingly popular. In addition high
levels of nitrate and phosphate and low levels of dissolved oxygen have a major
negative impact on the ecological health of the river and streams. The main sources of pollution are the numerous small village sewage
works that are often totally overloaded and no longer fit for purpose and have
failed to prevent sewage pollution of the Cam, Rhee and Granta
rivers, upstream and downstream of Cambridge.
Releasing sewage into rivers and streams is no longer an emergency-only
situation occurring as a result of severe storms, but
is a regular occurrence even in ‘normal’ rainfall. While Anglian Water have made long term commitments to making progress
as set out in the notes, there are no plans in place to address the immediate
unacceptable situation. Motion This Council resolves to: 1. Recognise
the challenges facing our rivers and streams due to the cumulative impact of sewage
discharge events. 2. Engage
with the Environment Agency as part of the forthcoming water resources
management planning exercise (see notes) and seek to ensure that investment in
the foul water treatment focuses on reducing discharges from existing treatment
works into the rivers and streams in Cambridgeshire. 3. Organise
a public meeting to discuss sewage discharge, its impacts on the City and priorities for action, inviting the Chief Executive
of Anglian Water plus senior representatives from the Environment Agency and
Natural England and South Cambridgeshire. 4. Ask
Anglian Water for clear information on all the treatment works that have an
impact on the quality of water flowing through Cambridge: whether information
is available to assess the impact of the number or duration of sewage discharges
into the Cam catchment, and if it does have this information to share it
(noting that this can only be requested, not required). Notes: 1. Anglian
Water have stated: “We
agree that storm overflows are no longer fit for purpose, especially as our climate
is changing and extreme weather is more commonplace. Cambridge
Independent 15 May 2022 2. The
company are currently running a consultation and have stated: Our
draft DWMP indicates that over the next 25 years, investment
of up to £3.5 billion is needed to address the future risks highlighted in our
DWMP, as well as fixing some existing problems. And please note, while we
await outputs from the Storm Overflow Action Plan this estimate of investment
doesn’t include the assessment of costs required to meet the new storm
overflow targets 3. Anglian Water’s draft Drainage and Wastewater Management Plan is currently ... view the full agenda text for item 22/31/CNLd Minutes: Councillor Copley proposed and
Councillor Howard seconded the following motion: Background Cambridge residents are deeply concerned about water quality and the
impact of wastewater discharge, including untreated sewage, into the River Cam
and its tributaries. Studies by the Cam Valley Forum show that sewage treatment
works run by Anglian Water are the greatest source of faecal pathogens in the
River Cam[1]. These are a major concern in relation to health of those who come into
contact with the water, whether for work or leisure, - swimming in the River is increasingly popular. In addition high
levels of nitrate and phosphate and low levels of dissolved oxygen have a major
negative impact on the ecological health of the river and streams. The main sources of pollution are the numerous small village sewage
works that are often totally overloaded and no longer fit for purpose and have
failed to prevent sewage pollution of the Cam, Rhee and Granta
rivers, upstream and downstream of Cambridge.
Releasing sewage into rivers and streams is no longer an emergency-only
situation occurring as a result of severe storms, but
is a regular occurrence even in ‘normal’ rainfall. While Anglian Water have made long term commitments to making progress
as set out in the notes, there are no plans in place to address the immediate
unacceptable situation. Motion This Council resolves to: 1. Recognise
the challenges facing our rivers and streams due to the cumulative impact of sewage
discharge events. 2. Engage
with the Environment Agency as part of the forthcoming water resources management
planning exercise (see notes) and seek to ensure that investment in the foul
water treatment focuses on reducing discharges from existing treatment works
into the rivers and streams in Cambridgeshire.
3. Organise
a public meeting to discuss sewage discharge, its impacts on the City and priorities for action, inviting the Chief Executive
of Anglian Water plus senior representatives from the Environment Agency and
Natural England and South Cambridgeshire. 4. Ask
Anglian Water for clear information on all the treatment works that have an
impact on the quality of water flowing through Cambridge: whether information
is available to assess the impact of the number or duration of sewage
discharges into the Cam catchment, and if it does have this information to
share it (noting that this can only be requested, not required). Notes: 1. Anglian
Water have stated: “We
agree that storm overflows are no longer fit for purpose, especially as our
climate is changing and extreme weather is more commonplace. Cambridge
Independent 15 May 2022 2. The
company are currently running a consultation and have stated: Our
draft DWMP indicates that over the next
25 years, investment of up to £3.5 billion is needed to address the
future risks highlighted in our DWMP, as well as fixing some existing problems.
And please note, while we await outputs from the Storm Overflow Action
Plan this estimate of investment doesn’t include the assessment of
costs required to meet the new storm overflow targets 3. Anglian
Water’s draft Drainage and Wastewater Management Plan is currently out for
consultation (30 June - 16 September): https://www.anglianwater.co.uk/about-us/our-strategies-and-plans/drainage-wastewater-management-plan/draft-plan/ .
Final version to be published Spring 2023. The plan itself is here: https://www.anglianwater.co.uk/siteassets/household/about-us/dwmp-draft.pdf Background Cambridge residents are deeply concerned
about water quality and the impact of wastewater discharge, including untreated
sewage, into the River Cam and its tributaries. Studies by the Cam Valley Forum
show that sewage treatment works run by Anglian Water are the greatest source
of faecal pathogens in the River Cam[1]. These are a major concern in relation to
health of those who come into contact with the water, whether for work or
leisure, - swimming in the River is
increasingly popular. In addition high
levels of nitrate and phosphate and low levels of dissolved oxygen have a major
negative impact on the ecological health of the river and streams. The main sources of pollution are the
numerous small village sewage works that are often totally overloaded and no
longer fit for purpose and have failed to prevent sewage pollution of the Cam,
Rhee and Granta rivers, upstream and
downstream of Cambridge. Releasing sewage into rivers and streams is
no longer an emergency-only situation occurring as a result of severe storms, but is a regular occurrence even in ‘normal’
rainfall. While Anglian Water have made long term
commitments to making progress as set out in the notes, there are no plans in
place to address the immediate unacceptable situation. Motion This Council resolves to: 1. Recognise the challenges
facing our rivers and streams due to
the cumulative impact of sewage discharge events. 2. Engage with the Environment
Agency as part of the forthcoming water resources management planning exercise
(see notes) and seek to ensure that investment in the foul water treatment
focuses on reducing discharges from existing treatment works into the rivers
and streams in Cambridgeshire. 3. Organise a public meeting to
discuss sewage discharge, its impacts on the City and
priorities for action, inviting the Chief Executive of Anglian Water plus
senior representatives from the Environment Agency and Natural England and
South Cambridgeshire. 4. Ask Anglian Water for clear
information on all the treatment works that have an impact on the quality of water
flowing through Cambridge: whether information is available to assess the
impact of the number or duration of sewage discharges into the Cam catchment,
and if it does have this information to share it (noting that this can only be
requested, not required). 5. Support the chair of the Environment
Agency’s call to increase the legal accountability of water companies4
by requesting that the government introduce legal targets for intermediate and
ultimately zero discharges, a sewage tax on discharges to contribute to
supportive infrastructure, and increased criminal
liability of company directors; and encourage Cambridge’s local MPs to join us
in advocating this. Notes: 1. Anglian Water have stated: “We agree that storm overflows are no longer
fit for purpose, especially as our climate is changing and extreme weather is
more commonplace. Cambridge Independent 15 May 2022 2. The company are currently
running a consultation and have
stated: Our draft DWMP indicates
that over the next 25 years, investment of up to £3.5 billion is
needed to address the future risks highlighted in our DWMP, as well as fixing
some existing problems. And please note, while we await outputs from the
Storm Overflow Action Plan this estimate of investment doesn’t include the
assessment of costs required to meet the new storm overflow targets 3. Anglian Water’s draft Drainage
and Wastewater Management Plan is currently out for consultation (30 June - 16
September): https://www.anglianwater.co.uk/about-us/our-strategies-and-plans/drainage-wastewater-management-plan/draft-plan/ .
Final version to be published Spring 2023. The plan itself is here: https://www.anglianwater.co.uk/siteassets/household/about-us/dwmp-draft.pdf 4. Environment Agency: Water and Sewerage Companies in England:
Environmental Performance Report 2021: On a show of hands the amendment was carried unanimously. Resolved (unanimously) that: Cambridge
residents are deeply concerned about water quality and the impact of wastewater
discharge, including untreated sewage, into the River Cam and its tributaries.
Studies by the Cam Valley Forum show that sewage treatment works run by Anglian
Water are the greatest source of faecal pathogens in the River Cam[1]. These are a major
concern in relation to health of those who come into contact with the water,
whether for work or leisure, - swimming in the River is
increasingly popular. In addition high
levels of nitrate and phosphate and low levels of dissolved oxygen have a major
negative impact on the ecological health of the river and streams. The main sources
of pollution are the numerous small village sewage works that are often totally
overloaded and no longer fit for purpose and have failed to prevent sewage pollution
of the Cam, Rhee and Granta rivers,
upstream and downstream of Cambridge. Releasing sewage into rivers
and streams is no longer an emergency-only situation occurring as a result of
severe storms, but is a regular occurrence
even in ‘normal’ rainfall. While Anglian
Water have made long term commitments to making progress as set out in the
notes, there are no plans in place to address the immediate unacceptable
situation. Motion This Council
resolves to: 1. Recognise
the challenges facing our rivers and streams due to
the cumulative impact of sewage discharge events. 2. Engage
with the Environment Agency as part of the forthcoming water resources
management planning exercise (see notes) and seek to ensure that investment in
the foul water treatment focuses on reducing discharges from existing treatment
works into the rivers and streams in Cambridgeshire. 3. Organise
a public meeting to discuss sewage discharge, its impacts on the City and priorities for action, inviting the Chief
Executive of Anglian Water plus senior representatives from the Environment
Agency and Natural England and South Cambridgeshire. 4. Ask
Anglian Water for clear information on all the treatment works that have an
impact on the quality of water flowing through Cambridge: whether information
is available to assess the impact of the number or duration of sewage
discharges into the Cam catchment, and if it does have this information to
share it (noting that this can only be requested, not required). 5. Support the
chair of the Environment Agency’s call to increase the legal accountability of
water companies4 by requesting that the government introduce legal
targets for intermediate and ultimately zero discharges, a sewage tax on
discharges to contribute to supportive infrastructure, and
increased criminal liability of company directors; and encourage Cambridge’s
local MPs to join us in advocating this. Notes: 1. Anglian
Water have stated: “We agree that
storm overflows are no longer fit for purpose, especially as our climate is
changing and extreme weather is more commonplace. Cambridge
Independent 15 May 2022 2. The
company are currently running a consultation and have
stated: Our
draft DWMP indicates that over the next 25 years, investment
of up to £3.5 billion is needed to address the future risks highlighted in our
DWMP, as well as fixing some existing problems. And please note, while we
await outputs from the Storm Overflow Action Plan this estimate of investment
doesn’t include the assessment of costs required to meet the new storm
overflow targets 3. Anglian
Water’s draft Drainage and Wastewater Management Plan is currently out for
consultation (30 June - 16 September): https://www.anglianwater.co.uk/about-us/our-strategies-and-plans/drainage-wastewater-management-plan/draft-plan/ . Final
version to be published Spring 2023. The plan itself is here: https://www.anglianwater.co.uk/siteassets/household/about-us/dwmp-draft.pdf 4. Environment
Agency: Water and Sewerage Companies in England: Environmental Performance
Report 2021: [1] Cam Valley Forum 2022 “Response to the Consultation on the Government’s DEFRA Storm Overflow Discharge Reduction Plan” |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
Councillor Carling - Cost of Living Emergency Context: Our residents are facing a
cost-of-living emergency. According to the Office for National Statistics, 88% of adults in the Great
Britain reported an increase in their cost of living in May 2022, due to a range of factors including
rising inflation, increases in energy prices and government tax rises. The cost of living has been
increasing across the UK since early 2021. in April 2022, inflation reached
its highest recorded level, and
the ONS estimates that it is now higher than at any time since around 1982,
affecting the affordability of goods and services for households. Consumer
prices, as measured by the Consumer Prices Index (CPI), were 9.0% higher in
April 2022 than a year before. On 5 May, the Bank of England forecasted
inflation to peak “at slightly over 10% in 2022 Q4, which would be the highest
rate since 1982”. and
predicted that it would remain above 9% up to and including Q1 2023. Energy prices are another important
driver of inflation , with both household energy
tariffs and petrol costs increasing. From April 2021 to April 2022, domestic
gas prices increased by 95% and domestic electricity prices by 54%. This is due
in part to a return of global gas demand as
pandemic restrictions are lifted and
lower than normal production of natural gas. On 1 April 2022 the new price cap
came into force. The regulator Ofgem announced the cap would increase from its
current equivalent annual level of £1,277 per year to £1,971; a 54% increase. As a result, road fuel prices in
the UK have increased and energy bills may also rise further. The chief
Executive of Ofgem said on 24 May that he expected the price cap to
increase to around £2,800 in October 2022, an increase of around 40%. Food prices have also risen sharply,
with incomes and benefits failing to keep pace. According to the British Retail
Consortium, food inflation rose to 4.3% in May 2022, up from 3.5% in April, and
has now reached its highest since April 2012. Fresh food has been particularly
affected by price rises. The ONS has shown that a study of supermarket prices
showed that even staple budget items like pasta rose 50% in the year to April
2022. Alongside price increases, in April
2022, the Government also brought in tax rises, for both income tax and
National Insurance contributions (NICs). Council notes: ·
That
the Cost-of-Living emergency is a key issue for us as a local authority,
against a backdrop of financial factors at national and international level. ·
In
these increasingly difficult times, there is a for us as a local authority to
ensure advice and appropriate support is available to all residents. ·
The
disproportionate impact of the crisis on low-income households, which will
spend a larger proportion of their income than average on energy and food and
will therefore be more affected by price increases and tax rises that result in
reduced disposable income. · The work we are currently undertaking as ... view the full agenda text for item 22/31/CNLe Minutes: Councillor
Carling proposed and Councillor Collis seconded the following motion: Our residents are facing a cost-of-living
emergency. According to the Office for National Statistics, 88% of
adults in the Great Britain reported an increase in their cost of living in May 2022, due to a range of factors including
rising inflation, increases in energy prices and government tax rises. The cost of living has been increasing across the
UK since early 2021. in April
2022, inflation reached its highest recorded level, and the ONS estimates that it is now higher than
at any time since around 1982, affecting the affordability of goods and
services for households. Consumer prices, as measured by the Consumer Prices
Index (CPI), were 9.0% higher in April 2022 than a year before. On 5 May, the Bank of
England forecasted inflation to peak “at slightly over 10% in 2022 Q4, which
would be the highest rate since 1982”. and predicted that it would remain above 9% up to
and including Q1 2023. Energy prices are another important driver of inflation , with both household energy tariffs and petrol
costs increasing. From April 2021 to April 2022, domestic gas prices increased
by 95% and domestic electricity prices by 54%. This is due in part to a return of
global gas demand as pandemic restrictions are lifted and lower than normal production of natural gas.
On 1 April 2022 the new price cap came into force. The regulator Ofgem
announced the cap
would increase from its current equivalent annual level of £1,277 per year to
£1,971; a 54%
increase. As a result, road fuel prices in the UK have increased and energy
bills may also rise further. The chief Executive of Ofgem said on 24 May that he expected
the price cap to increase to around £2,800 in October 2022, an increase of around 40%. Food prices have also risen sharply, with incomes
and benefits failing to keep pace. According to the British Retail Consortium,
food inflation rose to 4.3% in May 2022, up from 3.5% in April, and has now reached
its highest since April 2012. Fresh food has been particularly affected by
price rises. The ONS has shown that a study of supermarket prices showed that
even staple budget items like pasta rose 50% in the year to April 2022. Alongside price increases, in April 2022, the
Government also brought in tax rises, for both income tax and National
Insurance contributions (NICs). Council notes: ·
That
the Cost-of-Living emergency is a key issue for us as a local authority,
against a backdrop of financial factors at national and international level. ·
In
these increasingly difficult times, there is a for us as a local authority to
ensure advice and appropriate support is available to all residents. ·
The
disproportionate impact of the crisis on low-income households, which will
spend a larger proportion of their income than average on energy and food and
will therefore be more affected by price increases and tax rises that result in
reduced disposable income. ·
The
work we are currently undertaking as a city council across all departments to
support the most vulnerable residents, including: o
increasing
our council housing stock, with over 540 new council homes already completed o
retrofitting
our existing council housing stock to help reduce fuel bills and
also supporting fuel-poor homeowners with retrofitting initiatives o
running
a Real Living Wage campaign, paying our own staff a Real Living Wage and encouraging employers across the city to do the
same o
providing
an extensive range of community grants to organisations
supporting residents o
addressing
the digital divide during the pandemic and beyond o
building
on our strong track record of fighting for food justice, including continuing
our support for the city’s network of food hubs ·
That,
while many of the economic factors causing the current cost of living crisis
are outside of our control as a local authority, it is essential that we
focus our efforts on providing the assistance we do have at our disposal
to those residents struggling the most. Council resolves to: · Ensure that we continue to take a
coordinated approach towards addressing the cost-of-living emergency, alongside
working with our partners. · Set up a dedicated officer working
group to address the cost-of-living emergency. · Address health and fuel inequalities
through our health and heating project, which will employ a multi-layered
approach that provides targeted support, working closely with community and
voluntary sector partners. · Build food justice and address food
insecurity by making Cambridge a Right to Food City. This means that we will: o
Call
on national government to enshrine the right to food in law o
Write
to the Secretary of State together with the Food Poverty Alliance asking
them to strengthen the National Food Strategy to ensure that it provides
support for people struggling to eat in this cost-of-living crisis. o
Continue
our support of the city’s food hubs and commit to working with our communities
and members of the Food Poverty Alliance to form a vision of what the Right to
Food looks like for Cambridge. · Ensure that council decisions are not
disproportionately impacting on residents who are struggling the most, through
introducing a socio-economic duty and separately considering socio-economic
impacts in all our equality impact assessments. · Continue campaigning for and
championing a real living wage for workers in our city, especially working
closely with employers. · Commit to working with others to ensure
that we can harness both the good will and the wealth in our city to benefit
all our residents. · Review our small grants programme to make it easier for local groups supporting
those struggling to get funding from our community grants. Resolved (unanimously) to support the motion. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
Councillor Bick - Waste Reduction and Recycling Rates PDF 8 KB Minutes: Councillor
Bick proposed and Councillor Hauk seconded the following motion: Noting from the
recent report of corporate performance that blue bin recycling rates have decreased
over the past year and the proportion of black bin waste has increased, council
requests a report to the next Environment & Community Scrutiny committee
enabling focused scrutiny of this situation and examination of potential
emphases to reverse these trends and get back on track. This
council notes; ·
That waste and
recycling rates have remained remarkably stable over the past two years,
despite periods of lockdown with most workers and school children staying at
home plus periods of service disruption due to staff shortages. ·
That total waste and recyclate per household has reduced over the past four
years, from 901.09kg per household in 2018/19 to 879.09 kg per household in
2021/22. ·
That the weight of both
residual waste and recycling collected has reduced. ·
Despite service
disruptions to green bin collections the weight of green bin waste has
increased. ·
·
The waste hierarchy is
to reduce, reuse, recycle, recover, dispose. ·
Reducing the amount of
waste going into the residual bin and then to landfill is a priority of the
shared waste service. Council
requests a report to the next Environment & Community Scrutiny committee It was noted that
there was a typographical error in bullet point 2 which should read ‘That total
waste and recyclate per household has reduced over
the past four years, from 901.09kg per household in 2018 On a show of hands the amendment was carried by 19 votes to 7. Resolved (by 26 votes to 0) that: This council notes; ·
That waste and
recycling rates have remained remarkably stable over the past two years,
despite periods of lockdown with most workers and school children staying at
home plus periods of service disruption due to staff shortages. ·
That total waste and recyclate per household has reduced over the past four
years, from 901.09kg per household in 2019/19 to 879.09 kg per household in
2021/22. ·
That the weight of both
residual waste and recycling collected has reduced. ·
Despite service
disruptions to green bin collections the weight of green bin waste has
increased. ·
That blue bin recycling
rates have decreased over the past year and the proportion of black bin waste
has increased as the weight of residual waste collected has been
reduced. ·
The waste hierarchy is
to reduce, reuse, recycle, recover, dispose. ·
Reducing the amount of
waste going into the residual bin and then to landfill is a priority of the
shared waste service. Council requests a
report to the next Environment & Community Scrutiny committee to consider
how this trend in residual waste reduction can be maintained and increased over
the coming years. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
Written questions No discussion will take place on this
item. Members will be asked to note the written questions and answers document as
circulated around the Chamber.
Minutes: Members were
asked to note the written questions and answers that had been placed in the
information pack circulated around the Chamber. |