Council and democracy
Home > Council and Democracy > Election results by party > Declarations > Document > Agenda and minutes
Venue: Council Chamber, The Guildhall, Market Square, Cambridge, CB2 3QJ
Contact: Democratic Services Committee Manager
Note: Please note that the public questions and motions will take place in the afternoon session. Public questions will be no earlier than 1pm and motions no earlier than 2pm
No. | Item | ||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
To elect a Mayor for the Municipal Year 2024/25 Minutes: Councillor S Smith proposed, and Councillor Moore seconded
the nomination of Councillor Baiju
Thittala as Mayor for the
Municipal Year 2024/25. Resolved (unanimously) that: Councillor Baiju
Thittala be elected Mayor for
the Municipal Year 2024/25. Councillor Baiju
Thittala then made the
statutory declaration of acceptance for the Office of Mayor. |
|||||||||||||
To elect a Deputy Mayor for the Municipal Year 2024/25 Minutes: Councillor Carling proposed and Councillor Bird seconded the nomination of Councillor Dinah Pounds as Deputy Mayor for the Municipal Year 2024/25.
Resolved (unanimously) that: Councillor Dinah Pounds be elected Deputy Mayor for the Municipal Year 2023/24.
Councillor Dinah Pounds then made the statutory declaration of acceptance for the Office of Deputy Mayor. |
|||||||||||||
Additional documents: Minutes: The minutes of 15 February and 29 February 2024 were confirmed as a correct record and signed by the Mayor. |
|||||||||||||
To note the Returning Officer's Report that the following have been elected to the Office of Councillor Abbey – Naomi Bennett Arbury – Patrick Sheil Castle – Antoinette Nestor Cherry Hinton – Mark Ashton Coleridge – Tim Griffin East Chesterton – Gerri Bird King’s Hedges – Jenny Gawthrope Wood Market – Tim Bick Newnham – Hugh Clough Petersfield – Mike Davey Queen Edith’s – Immy Blackburn-Horgan Romsey – Dave Baigent Trumpington – Nadya Lokhmotova West Chesterton – Sam Carling Minutes: It was noted the following had been elected to the Office of Councillor Abbey Ward: Naomi
Bennett Arbury Ward: Patrick
Sheil Castle Ward: Antoinette
Nestor Cherry Hinton: Mark
Ashton Coleridge Ward: Tim
Griffin East Chesterton
Ward: Gerri Bird King’s Hedges Ward: Jenny
Gawthrope Wood Market Ward: Tim
Bick Newnham Ward: Hugh
Clough Petersfield Ward: Mike
Davey Romsey Ward: Dave
Baigent Queen Edith’s Ward: Immy
Blackburn-Horgan Trumpington Ward: Nadya
Lokhmotova West Chesterton
Ward: Sam Carling |
|||||||||||||
To Pass a Resolution of Thanks to the Outgoing Mayor Minutes: Resolved (unanimously) on the proposal of Councillor A Smith seconded by Councillor Davey
This Council expressed its appreciation of the manner in which duties of the Mayor and Mayor’s consorts were discharged by Councillor Jenny Gawthrope Wood and consorts Nicholas Gawthrope, Saba Alai South, Hazel Maher and Cllr Dinah Pounds during their period of office. |
|||||||||||||
Mayor's announcements Minutes: The following
announcements were made: The Mott Sermon
would take place at Holy Trinity Church on Sunday 26 May at 9.30am. Midsummer Fair
Proclamation had been scheduled for Wednesday 19 June. Apologies for
absence were received from Councillors Flaubert, Payne, Sheil and Swift. |
|||||||||||||
Declarations of Interest Minutes:
|
|||||||||||||
To elect from among the Members of the Council Four Bailiffs of the City for the Municipal Year 2024/25 Minutes: Resolved (unanimously) to:
Appoint Councillors Gawthrope Wood, Dryden, McPherson, Blackburn-Horgan and Martinelli, Bailiffs of the City for the Municipal Year 2024/25. |
|||||||||||||
To elect a Leader of the Council The Council is required to appoint a Leader of the Council.
Article 7.3 of the Constitution states: The Leader will be a councillor elected to the position by
the Council and will remain as Leader until the day of the Annual Meeting of
the Council in the year their term of office ends or until: 1. death or
disqualification; or 2. resignation
from the office; or 3. removal from office by resolution of the Council. Minutes: On the nomination of Councillor Gilderdale and seconded by Councillor Bird it was resolved to:
Elect Councillor Mike Davey as Leader of Cambridge City Council. |
|||||||||||||
To consider the recommendations of Committees for adoption |
|||||||||||||
Civic Affairs Committee - Committee Appointments PDF 118 KB Additional documents:
Minutes: As there were two
nominations for the role of Vice-Chair of Planning Committee, Council was asked
to vote on these nominations before a vote on the Committee Appointments was
taken. Nomination:
Councillor Porrer 5 votes to 20, with
1 abstention. Nomination:
Councillor Baigent 22 votes to 5 votes,
with 8 abstentions Resolved (unanimously) to: Agree the appointments
to city council committees and joint partner bodies and appointment of Chairs
and Vice-Chairs below (as updated by the ‘Update to Committee Appointments’
document contained within the Information Pack). Environment and
Communities Scrutiny Committee Total: 5 Labour, 2
Lib Dem ,1 Green Pounds (Chair),
Nestor (Vice Chair), Swift, Divkovic, TBC Payne, Hauk Glasberg Alternates: Griffin,
Sheil, Martinelli, Flaubert, Tong Planning and
Transport Scrutiny Committee Total: 5 Labour, 2
Lib Dem,1 Green Nestor (Chair),
Baigent (Vice Chair), Swift, Griffin, Divkovic Porrer, Bick Clough Alternates: Pounds,
Sheil, Lee, Lokhmotova, Bennett Housing Scrutiny
Committee Total: 6 Labour,2
Lib Dem,1 Green Griffin (Chair),
Robertson (Vice Chair), Gawthrope Wood, Baigent, Swift, Thittala Varkey Martinelli, Lee Tong Alternates: Nestor,
Pounds, Young, Porrer, Bennett Strategy and
Resources Scrutiny Committee Total: 5 Labour, 2
Lib Dem,1 Green Robertson (Chair),
Gawthrope Wood (Vice Chair), Sheil, Baigent, Todd-Jones Bick, Young Bennett Alternates: Griffin,
Lab TBC, Porrer, Martinelli, Clough Civic Affairs
Committee Total: 4 Labour,1
Lib Dem,1 Green) McPherson (Chair), Gawthrope
Wood (Vice Chair), Sheil, Robertson Young Bennett Alternate: Holloway,
Bick, Clough Employment
(Senior Officer) Committee Total 6 Labour,1 Lib
Dem, 1 Green Davey, Carling,
Gilderdale, Moore Bick Bennett Alternates:
Thornburrow, Porrer, Clough Licensing
Committee Total: 6 Labour, 3
Lib Dem,1 Green McPherson (Chair),
Bird (Vice Chair), Moore, Griffin, Pounds, Wade Bick,
Blackburn-Horgan, Young Clough Alternates: Davey,
Flaubert, Bennett Planning
Committee Total: 6 Labour, 2
Lib Dem,1 Green Smart (Chair),
Baigent (Vice Chair), Thornburrow, Gilderdale, Carling, Dryden Porrer, Lokhmotova Bennett Alternates: Nestor,
Todd-Jones, Flaubert, Young, Howard Cambridgeshire and
Peterborough Combined Authority Board Total: 1
Labour A.Smith Alternate: Davey Combined
Authority Overview and Scrutiny Committee Total: 2 Labour Divkovic, Gilderdale Combined
Authority Audit and Governance Committee Total: 1 Labour Todd-Jones, Alternate: Carling Greater Cambridge
Partnership Joint Assembly Total: 2 Labour, 1
Lib Dem S.Smith, Thornburrow, Bick Joint Development
Control Committee - Cambridge Fringes Total: 4 Labour, 2
Lib Dem S.Smith (Chair), Baigent, Smart, Thornburrow Porrer, Flaubert, Alternates:
Gilderdale, Nestor, Young, Lokhmotova Cambridge Joint Area Committee Total: 4 Labour, 1 Lib Dem,1 Green Thornburrow, Robertson, Baigent, Moore Young Bennett Alternates: Carling,
Pounds, Martinelli, Tong |
|||||||||||||
Civic Affairs Committee - Governance Review Proposals PDF 171 KB Additional documents: Minutes: Resolved by (22 votes to 13, with 1 abstention): i. That the Council design and implement a revised ‘Leader and Cabinet’ model of decision making and authorises the Chief Executive to enable changes to be implemented from the Annual Council Meeting in May 2025. ii. To establish a member-officer design group with external technical support to develop a revised 'Leader and Cabinet' model with final proposals including an updated constitution being presented to the Civic Affairs Committee and then to full Council for adoption. |
|||||||||||||
Annual Statements Group Leaders will each have the opportunity to speak for not more than 10 minutes on their Group’s priorities for action and objectives for the forthcoming municipal year. Minutes: Group Leaders spoke on their Group’s priorities for action and objectives for the forthcoming year. |
|||||||||||||
Public questions time Minutes: Question 2 Does the leader of the Council feel that the Council’s
equality and diversity policies could be improved to help further protect
victims of discrimination from facing harassment or victimisation
after raising concerns about discrimination with the Council? The Leader of the Council responded with the
following:
i.
The Council had a
comprehensive equality and diversity policy which outlined its commitment as an
employer, service provider and community leader, promoting diversity equality
and inclusion and all legal obligations under the Equality Act.
ii.
This policy as
with all Council’s policies was continually reviewed and updated.
iii.
As part of its
legal obligations, the Council ensured harassment, victimisation
and any other conduct prohibited under the Equalities Act was eliminated for
staff and residents.
iv.
If the public
speaker had any further concerns or queries on this issue to contact the
Council. Public Supplementary Question
i.
Thanked the Leader
for their response.
ii.
The Council
deserved considerable credit for its commitment to promote equality and
inclusion for all members of the community.
iii.
The Council’s work
on these issues was a model that other Local Authorities would do well to
follow. The Leader thanked the public speaker for their
contribution and reiterated to contact the Council should there be any further
queries on this issue which he would be happy to take forward. Question 3 What progress has been made in providing Transit
site/(s) in Cambridge?
i.
Four years after
the rhetorical statement by the then Executive Councillor for Equalities,
Anti-Poverty and Wellbeing on the impact of the Police, Crime, Sentencing and
Courts Bill in criminalising the travelling way of
life, the Council had still failed to provide any meaningful solution or change
to their policy of eviction. We have argued that the threat of eviction is a
blunt instrument when, under the new Police Act 2022, Travellers could have their caravans seized and their children
taken into care if they refused to leave. On the 14/5/24 in the case of Wendy
Smith vs the King and Secretary of State for the Home Department, the High
Court issued a declaration of incompatibility finding that provisions in the
Police Act unlawfully discriminate against Gypsies and Travellers.
ii.
The decision was
based on the lack of authorised transit site
provision on which they could camp lawfully. We have continuously pointed this
out while the Council have chosen instead to focus on a series of delayed and
rejected GTANAs to tell them what was clearly right in front of their
(collective) face: that it is the lack of transit sites that causes the
greatest conflict between the Traveller and settled community. Now the High Court decision will force Parliament
to review those provisions to ensure their compatibility with the ECHR. It
seems incredible that the Council and partners have been unable to find a piece
of ground for a transit site, roughly the size of a football pitch (1.6 acres).
Such an area could accommodate 20 pitches based on government size design
standards for permanent sites of 320sqm. The suggested number of pitches for
transit sites is half that number.
iii.
Is this truly
beyond the capability of the Council? English Romani and Irish Travellers have protected status under the ECHR which
includes the right to a home.
iv.
Human rights are
rights taken to be universal, of considerable importance, and relate to the
individual and not collectively – rights that are denied Gypsies and Travellers under planning law. Now the High Court
declaration of incompatibility further highlights the Council’s failure to
resolve this long-standing problem. Based on this new and compelling
information, we ask you to provide a firm timetable for progress. The
Executive Councillor for Communities said the following:
i.
The Council’s
eviction policy for unauthorised encampments on
Council land was only acted upon after an assessment had been undertaken which
would take into consideration any welfare concerns.
ii.
The Council and neighbouring authorities had tried for many years to
identify sites that could be potentially used for transit site provision, but
due to multiple reasons, none of the identified sites had been able to be
progressed.
iii.
Once the current
Needs Assessment and report had been completed, the findings would be provided
to the Strategic Steering Group, which would next meet in July. Public Supplementary Question
i.
For the last four
years the Council have been engaged in conversation regarding the lack of
provision for Gypsy, Roma and Travellers in the City and Cambridgeshire.
ii.
The Council had
failed in its responsibility to the Gypsy, Roma
and Traveller community.
iii.
The High Court Case referenced in the
original question stated that Local Authorities were ignoring the fact that
they should not evict if there was no other provision.
iv.
The Council had shifted its position over
time and had even spoken of a permanent site but what it did not recognise was
the lack of transient sites which were the cause of the most conflict.
v.
The response just provided by the
Executive Councillor had nothing to do with the issue raised in the original
question, which has been highlighted repeatedly.
vi.
Now there was a legal requirement to
address this issue immediately, a solution was required now. The
Executive Councillor responded with the following:
i.
Heard the
frustration expressed and was aware that the matter had been going on for some
time.
ii.
Was sorry had not
given the answer that was wanted.
iii.
Once the current
Needs Assessment and report had been read, would notify the public speaker to
provide further information. The report would also refer to a permanent site as
well as transitional. Question 5
i.
For the first
time global warming has broken the 1.5-degree limit set by the 2015 Paris
Agreement over the course of an entire year. Cambridge has already passed the
point of 'sustainable growth' and the 2030 Net Zero targets of Cambridge City
Council are evidently out of reach. Our local water crisis has drawn the
serious concern of the Environment Agency who are sensibly stepping in to
object to the placing of ever greater strain on our local resources.
ii.
Isn't it time
that Cambridge City Council fully acknowledges the gravity of the climate
breakdown accelerating around us and therefore adopts a realistic approach to
planning for this city's future? We know that Mr. Gove is knocking on our door
with completely unfeasible growth plans so now is the time to go firmly in a
new direction. We need a new vision, a new attitude that sets out what we
consider to be realistic limits to the city's growth. The current Government’s
plans serve corporate interests; they will not help our existing local
communities to thrive in the coming years. We are in desperate need of strong
local leadership that will help us all to get through the challenges that
certainly lie ahead.
iii.
Would this City
Council accept that 'sustainable growth' is an oxymoron, and will it say no to
Mr. Gove's development plans, and politely suggest that he redirect his
department's levelling up efforts towards those parts of the country who are
crying out to have their brownfield sites developed in order
to rejuvenate their own communities? The Leader
of the Council responded with the following response:
i.
In 2019,
Cambridge City Council announced a climate emergency, shared a vision for
Cambridge, developed a plan to become net zero carbon, accordingly, working
with external partners.
ii.
The Council was
now the second greenest District Council in the United Kingdom.
iii.
Work had begun
to develop a sustainable vision for the future with South Cambridgeshire
District Council. There were challenges which needed to be addressed such as
the issue of water availability and housing.
iv.
The new Greater
Cambridge Local Plan would include ambitions around climate change, improving
accessibility and wellbeing for everyone in the city.
v.
Did not accept
that 'sustainable growth' was an oxymoron. Sustainable growth was possible but
had to be carefully considered and managed. Unless managed effectively there
could be damage to the climate.
vi.
Without
effective growth it would not be possible to significantly change what’s better
for the city and for the country. vii.
The Council had
developed several initiatives with external partners, particularly with
Manchester City Council and Officers were working to deliver those initiatives.
viii.
In conclusion,
there were parts of the question which could agree with, but other parts of the
public question undermined what was possible for the city. The Council in
conjunction with South Cambridgeshire District Council could achieve these
possibilities through to 2050.
ix.
Did object to
some of the proposals outlined by Mr. Gove's development plans, 250,000 new
homes were not a feasible option. Work was needed to be undertaken to change
that.
x.
How would the
Council bring forward their vision. Had
already began working with Peter Freeman (Chair of Homes England); the Council
had established the first steps to address the water crisis. Public Supplementary Question
i.
This week the
Leader of the Council claimed that every action to Mr. Gove’s growth agenda
needed to be challenged and wanted to ensure that an alternative narrative was
heard.
ii.
Agreed it was
time for a new story and to shape this new narrative.
iii.
The citizens of
Cambridge wanted to leave behind the environmentally damaging thinking that lead to growth at all costs.
iv.
Traditional
economic thinking would do nothing to help survive the climatic changes that
were already upon us. It also left no space for existing residents to thrive,
for example, local people had said they were suffering in the inequality crisis
which would not be remedied by a growth agenda.
v.
In this time of
climate emergency, Cambridge City Council must lead; lead Cambridge in a
transition away from the fixation on economic growth which did have a limit,
the environment set those limits.
vi.
To halt further
environmental degradation, the traditional economic theory and its linear way
of thinking needed to be left behind. vii.
The Council’s
priority must be to protect the city and the planet, not to support a fatally
flawed philosophy wrapped up in such terms as ‘fast growth cities, sustainable
growth and good growth’. viii.
Would the
Council be willing to leave the green washing terminology of sustainable growth
behind and focus on looking after the current residents of Cambridge.
ix.
Local people were
already fostering a new mode of operating which embraced a cyclical circular
economy.
x.
Urged to look at
the Cambridge resilience website where 178 organisations could be found. These
organisations were run by people of Cambridge for the people of Cambridge, who
operated according to the principles of self-sufficiency, regeneration, conservation,
community resilience and community care.
The Leader
of the Council said:
i.
Agreed it was
time to approach things differently and hoped a new Labour
Government would be part of that process, if successful in the July elections.
ii.
Anticipated a Labour Government would look to make sure that Cambridge
was used in a way that would be productive for the nation and that residents
were part of that process and wealth was genuinely shared; the Community Wealth
Building Programme was so important as it gave people back a resource of wealth
from the city.
iii.
The work that
had been undertaken with Manchester City Council provided a platform to
genuinely level up across the nation.
This could not be done without linking closely with Cambridgeshire and
Peterborough Combined Authority and other external partners to ensure that the
relevant resources went back into the City.
iv.
As referenced,
work had been undertaken and would continue which would start to become much
more open about 2050 in the next few weeks. Had repeatedly gone back to Peter
Freeman and Micheal Gove to stress the importance of the City Council
representing the Community.
v.
The democratic
responsibility of a Council was to speak on behalf of its residents, the core
of this was to tackle inequality and make sure that the growth that came to
Cambridge went into affordable homes, affordable council homes, all of which
were sustainable, and jobs for local people, who for too long had not benefited
from the wealth that was in the city. The
following two questions would receive a written response from the Executive
Councillor as the members of public were not in attendance. Question 1
i.
Would like to
address the Council about the way in which the café at the Meadows Community
Centre is run by the nominated charity-based company called: ‘Royal Voluntary
Services’ (RVS).
ii.
As a member of
the public, who has lived in Cambridge all my life and have visited the cafe
numerous times over the past few months, I really think that a conscious review
about how the RVS is suited to the long-term needs of the Meadows Community
Centre and with the very lack of suitability, to have any external company
running this centre?
iii.
Having the:
‘Meadows Cafe’, being run by its own staff and structure, seems to be the right
way to go. It would bring in one hundred percent more revenue, because it would
be controlled: “In-House”. Which would give much more flexibility to the needs
of the people living nearby. Even “Charity Companies”, must make profit to
sustain the expenses of catering laws and employing permanent staff, to run the
company.
iv.
In conclusion I
ask the Council to review this matter and allow the Meadows Cafe to be run
internally and under its own needs that would greatly benefit the said
communities of Arbury and Kings Hedges combined. Question 4 At the
most recent Environment and Community Scrutiny Committee meeting, the Executive
Councillor for Communities stated in response to a public question: – Council
officers had received the first draft Gypsy, Roma and Traveller Accommodation Needs Assessment (GTANA) report at
the end of the previous week and were already working through the initial
findings. – A
publication date for after the May elections would need to be agreed between
Cambridge City Council and South Cambridgeshire District Council. This was two months ago. The
May elections have come and gone. When will the GTANA report be published?
Additionally, given that this GTANA is already coming four years late, will
Cambridge City Council expedite the implementation of its findings? |
|||||||||||||
To deal with oral questions Minutes: Question 1 Councillor Hauk to Executive Councillor for Community Wealth
Building and Community Safety. What does the Executive Councillor think inequality means
for Cambridge, and what is she planning to do to address it? The Executive Councillor responded with the following the
comments: i.
Inequality meant a lack of fairness and would
point to the age of austerity under Central Government. ii.
Under the Conservative Government, 800 libraries
had closed, 1300 children centres and reportedly an extra 600,000 children were
in poverty. iii.
Would campaign to ensure the Conservative party
would leave Government on July 4. iv.
Would continue the hard work undertaken to make
sure that residents accessed regular food via Cambridge Sustainable Food (CSF),
obtained advice from the Citizen’s Advice Bureau and had a warm place to visit
via the Council’s community centres. v.
Would maintain the exemplar community grant
funding. £1.5million had been awarded with the primary outcome to reduce social
and economic inequality and empower residents. There was also a continuous
emphasis to bring about improved health and wellbeing, bringing the community
together. vi.
Would continue to build on the Council’s Youth
Strategy so young people felt that Cambridge was for them. vii.
Would continue to sustain the Council’s Cultural
Strategy and work with youth engagement. viii.
Planned to consolidate the Community Wealth
Building Strategy using the Council’s resources, assets, and powers to build
community wealth for a more inclusive sustainable economy enabling residents
and communities. ix.
In conclusion, if you compared what Council’s
Officers and Councillors had achieved in the last ten years for the residents
of Cambridge, we should be running the Government. Question 2 Councillor Glasberg to Executive Councillor for Open Spaces
and City Services. Cambridge Water were still unable to agree a Water
Management Plan to ensure that we have drinking water without further adverse
impact on the chalk streams and the environment. The proposed interventions
cannot be delivered until 2032 and 2036. Would the Executive Councillor update
us on what representations the Council intends to make to the water authorities
(OFWAT, Environment Agency and Water Resources East in particular) and on the
Council’s own assessment of the partial contribution that might be made to the
Water Scarcity Group’s proposed measures? The Executive Councillor for Planning, Building Control and
Infrastructure answered with the following: i.
This issue had been raised many times by the
Labour Group over the last five years since the publication of the last Water
Resources Management Plan (WRMP). ii.
A second revision of the Cambridge Water
Company’s WRMP had been issued in February 2024. The Department for
Environment, Food and Rural Affairs would determine whether it could be
adopted, advised by the Environment Agency and the Office of Water Services
(OFWAT). iii.
The Council had responded to the earlier draft
plan almost a year ago after consideration with members of the Planning and
Transport Scrutiny Committee. The Committee’s joint response with South
Cambridgeshire District Council was then published on the City Council’s
website. iv.
It was simply not possible to use more water
than was available, under the previous Labour Government, the Environment
Agency had been well funded with plans and regulations to help achieve water
neutrality. The last fourteen years with the Conservative Government had
resulted in the current situation. v.
The population increase was as expected, but the
improvement required for the infrastructure had never been placed on a
statutory basis and profits for developers had been put first. vi.
There would be a long wait for the major
interventions of a connection to resources at Grafham Water and the
construction of the Fen Reservoir. vii.
The Council were not waiting for the anticipated
review of building regulations but were already seeking enhanced water saving
measures in major schemes through the development management process. viii.
The Council were aware of how to build in ways
that reduced water usage and would continue to engage with the Water Scarcity
Group. ix.
Hoped that it was seen how seriously the matter
was being taken but there were limits on what could be done. The right
legislation and regulations were required, and the Council would press the next
Prime Minister to make them a priority. Question 3 Councillor Porrer to Executive Councillor for Open Spaces
and City Services. Could the Executive Councillor for Open Spaces and City
Services please update members on progress on our policy, as agreed at Council
in October 2021, to remove single use plastics from events on Council owned
land. The Executive Councillor said the following: i.
The Council had made significant strides in
implementing the removal of single use plastics from events on our land. ii.
Following the Council's agreement in October
2021, clear guidelines and criteria for events held on Council-owned land had
been established. iii.
Event organisers were bound by the Council’s
terms and conditions of hire which required the elimination of single-use
plastics from their activities. iv.
Officers had engaged extensively with event
organisers to communicate the new requirements and provide support in adopting
them. This included offering and suggesting alternatives to single-use
plastics, such as biodegradable or reusable options, and connecting organisers
with suppliers who could meet these needs. v.
When events were inspected, Officers checked
that measures were in place to ensure compliance with the Policy. Council staff
conducted spot checks and reviews of events to ensure single-use plastics were
not being used. vi.
Officers had confirmed that all events held on
Council-owned land since the policy's implementation had successfully
eliminated single-use plastics. Positive feedback had been received from both
organisers and attendees, who appreciated the Council’s commitment to
sustainability. vii.
Looking forward, the Council would continue to
build on this progress by further refining the guidelines, enhancing support
for event organisers, and exploring new ways to promote and facilitate
sustainable practices. viii.
The Council remained committed to its goal of
making all events on Council-owned land free from single-use plastics and would
keep all Members updated on the ongoing efforts and achievements. Question 4 Councillor Blackburn-Horgan to Executive Councillor for
Housing and Homelessness. How, after the Council set up the private renters’ forum,
did the Executive Councillor believe the Council could influence the exorbitant
costs of renting a single room in a small, licensed HMO, now reaching £1350 per
month in Queen Edith’s Ward? The Executive Councillor said the following: i.
Was acutely aware of the affordability challenge
within the City, the Council were
delivering one of the largest social housing building programmes in the UK. ii.
Whilst work was undertaken to influence and
enforce the standards of private rented properties, particularly HMO’s across
the City, the rent levels were not an area that the Council could influence. iii.
The programme for affordable housing delivery
remained ambitious which was the best way for the Council to make housing as
affordable for as many people as possible.
Question 5 Councillor Young to The Leader of the Council. How does the Council track officer's response times to
Councillors emails? The target is a response within 5 working days. Is that
target being met? The Leader of the Council responded: i.
As set out in the guidance document Officers had
a commitment to ensure that all Councillors received a response within seven
working days. ii.
Officers did try to respond quicker than the
seven-day deadline, particularly for specifically urgent issues or issues
outlined as time sensitive. iii.
The Council did not track Officer response time,
but trust that Officers responded promptly. iv.
Asked that if Councillors experienced issues
with Officer’s response times to highlight this and would bring this to the
attention of the Chief Executive to remind Officers of their
responsibility. Question 6 Councillor Tong to Executive Councillor for Housing and
Homelessness. In their most recent dog awareness report, the Royal Mail
published that over the previous year postal workers across the UK suffered 381
injuries from dogs biting at them through letterboxes. These attacks can cause
serious harm, including permanent disability. Does Cambridge City Council
currently have a policy regarding internal letterbox cages, and, if not, would
it consider fitting all its new homes with them in future? The Executive Councillor said the following: i.
Was shocked to hear of the injuries that postal
workers sustained while delivering mail. ii.
The Council were always looking at ways to
improve the design and standards of its housing, managing design standards and
budget responsibly to ensure value for residents. iii.
There was no policy for internal letter box
cages for current properties or new build housing due to identity theft and was
not currently being considered. iv.
Internal letter box cages would not be
applicable to the new build flats which made up most of the Council’s housing
delivery; letter boxes were protected from dog access as were either in a
secured lobby or on a wall. v.
Had carried out many deliveries around the City
when campaigning, as all Councillors, and understood this issue. The best tool
was to take a wooden spoon to aid with the deliveries of Councillor’s leaflets!
Question 7 Councillor Bick to Executive Councillor for Community Wealth
Building and Community Safety. What methods does the Council have at its disposal to
require graffiti to be removed by owners or occupants from private buildings
where it is disfiguring a neighbourhood (especially where it is in a
conservation area) and acting as a magnet for further proliferation? The Executive Councillor responded with the following: i.
The Council could address graffiti on private
buildings especially in conservation areas through the Antisocial Behaviour
Crime and Policing Act 2014. ii.
The available powers could be used to remove
existing graffiti and to put in place actions that property occupiers or owners
had to take to manage future incidents of graffiti. iii.
A Community Protection Warning (CPW) would first
be issued to the occupier or owner of the property which outlined the matter
and set out the requirements appropriate to remedy the detriment being caused
by the graffiti. It was important to note the CPW did not carry a right of
appeal. iv.
If the occupiers or owners failed to comply the
Council would then serve a Community Protect Notice (CPN). This legally
required the occupier or owner to remedy the detriment of the graffiti. The CPN
did come with a right of appeal. v.
Failure to comply with a CPN was a criminal
offence and further action could be taken by the Council such as issuing a
Fixed Pentalty Norice or prosecute. The Council also has the right to under the
removal of the graffiti without requiring permission, specifically to areas of
the building adjacent to the public highway that were open to the air and could
be accessed without entering the properties curtilage. Question 8 Councillor Martinelli to Executive Councillor for Open
Spaces and City Services. Please could the Executive Councillor update us on the
Council's commitment to No Mow May? The Executive Councillor provided the following update: i.
The Council recognised the importance of a
healthy and biodiverse environment and supported No Mow May as part of
promoting biodiversity. As stated when asked a question on this last year, it
was a very worthy national campaign. ii.
In 2022, the Council introduced the principles
of No Mow May and the Plantlife Good Verge Guide into the Biodiversity Strategy
to shape how public spaces were managed. Have since reduced the cutting
schedule and designated more areas of long grass. iii.
Whilst the Council supported No Mow May, there
were times over the course of the month where Officers were required to
maintain some mowing activity in parts of the city to ensure public spaces and
County Highways verges were accessible and safe for all to use. This typically
included areas around play equipment, designated amenity spaces such as picnic
and event spaces or where critical traffic sight lines, footpaths or cycle ways
were impacted by verge growth. Not doing so, would present a risk to residents
and visitors. iv.
To balance the commitment to biodiversity whilst
ensuring that open spaces were safe and useable, cutting is kept to a minimum
and only mowed where required. v.
Through the management of the Council’s parks,
local nature reserves and tree stock we are supporting pollinators year-round
and throughout their lifecycle. For example, by installing bee banks, bee
hotels and deadwood features parks and local nature reserves as well as
maintaining and planting a diverse range of flowering trees in our streets and
open spaces. vi.
Would finish by stressing again the usability
point. Want to build a coalition of support behind the various things
undertaken to support biodiversity, like the recent achievement of cutting
herbicide use out of our regular operations. Leaving large, well-used public
commons completely unmown made them much less usable and risked damaging
crucial public support. The question from Councillor Flaubert would receive a
written response as the time limit for the oral questions had been reached. Question 9 Councillor Flaubert to Executive Councillor for Open Spaces
and City Services. Could the Executive Councillor for Open Spaces update us on
the planned community clean-up days around Cambridge this year? |
|||||||||||||
To consider the following notices of motion, notice of which has been given by: |
|||||||||||||
Councillor Bick - Vision for Cambridge COUNCIL BELIEVES that ‘good growth’ in and around Cambridge
is possible, if planned with care for sustainability. Evidence already gathered by local councils
indicates that this should be provided for, in particular to
alleviate poor housing conditions and rising costs, which are not only a source
of division and inequality, but also jeopardise our vital public services and
limit businesses which are directly or indirectly dependent on our unique
concentration of research and innovation for advancement in the world. WE POINT TO the records of parties which have recently led
this council and South Cambridgeshire in delivering new communities meeting a
wide spectrum of needs and means, and in nurturing the success of the local
economy. WE WELCOME a role for central government in addressing key
factors beyond the scope of local councils, particularly in ensuring investment
in water supply, transport infrastructure and social housing – the absence of
which would result in unsustainable growth, which the city would not be able to
support. But WE ARE HUGELY CONCERNED by arbitrary government housing
targets and unsubstantiated proposals for a development corporation and
planning intervention, which cast locally elected representatives of residents
as mere outside advisors or minority participants in the shaping of the future
of our own area in an accountable way. WE RESOLVE to challenge this ‘power grab’ by central
government; to seek instead a genuine partnership, and to strengthen the local
democratic component of this by pursuing the creation of a unitary council
which brings together most local decision-making and service provision into one
new body. And WE RECOMMIT to locally-led, evidence-based planning and to development that is above all sustainable, both socially and environmentally. Minutes: Councillor Bick
proposed and Councillor Hauk seconded the following motion: COUNCIL BELIEVES
that ‘good growth’ in and around Cambridge is possible, if planned with care
for sustainability. Evidence already gathered by local councils indicates that
this should be provided for, in particular to alleviate poor housing conditions
and rising costs, which are not only a source of division and inequality, but
also jeopardise our vital public services and limit businesses which are
directly or indirectly dependent on our unique concentration of research and
innovation for advancement in the world. WE POINT TO the
records of parties which have recently led this council and South
Cambridgeshire in delivering new communities meeting a wide spectrum of needs
and means, and in nurturing the success of the local economy. WE WELCOME a role
for central government in addressing key factors beyond the scope of local
councils, particularly in ensuring investment in water supply, transport
infrastructure and social housing – the absence of which would result in
unsustainable growth, which the city would not be able to support. But WE ARE HUGELY
CONCERNED by arbitrary government housing targets and unsubstantiated proposals
for a development corporation and planning intervention, which cast locally
elected representatives of residents as mere outside advisors or minority
participants in the shaping of the future of our own area in an accountable
way. WE RESOLVE to challenge
this ‘power grab’ by central government; to seek instead a genuine partnership,
and to strengthen the local democratic component of this by pursuing the
creation of a unitary council which brings together most local decision-making
and service provision into one new body. And WE RECOMMIT to
locally-led, evidence-based planning and to development that is above all
sustainable, both socially and environmentally. Councillor Carling proposed and Councillor Griffin
seconded the following amendment to Motion 14a (deleted text
COUNCIL
BELIEVES that ‘good growth’ in and around Cambridge is possible, if planned
with care for sustainability. Evidence
already gathered by local councils indicates that this should be provided for,
in particular to alleviate poor housing conditions and rising costs, which are
not only a source of division and inequality, but also jeopardise our vital
public services and limit businesses which are directly or indirectly dependent
on our unique concentration of research and innovation for advancement in the
world. WE
POINT TO the records of parties which have recently led this council and South
Cambridgeshire in delivering new communities meeting a wide spectrum of needs
and means, and in nurturing the success of the local economy. WE
WELCOME a role for central government in addressing key factors beyond the
scope of local councils, particularly in ensuring investment in water supply,
transport infrastructure and social housing – the absence of which would result
in unsustainable growth, which the city would not be able to support. But
WE ARE WE
RESOLVE to lobby this and any future government to engage genuinely with
local representatives and seek a genuine partnership. We note that the complex
local government environment around Cambridge is less than ideal for
transparency and meaningful engagement and commit to continuing our exploratory
work on how we might resolve this, including consideration of options around
becoming a unitary authority. And WE RECOMMIT to locally-led, evidence-based planning and to
development that is above all sustainable, both socially and environmentally The amendment was
carried by 20 votes to 13, with 1 abstention. Resolved (by 29
votes to 4, with 1 abstention) that: Sustainable Growth
and Democratic Engagement in Cambridge COUNCIL
BELIEVES that ‘good growth’ in and around Cambridge is possible, if planned
with care for sustainability. Evidence
already gathered by local councils indicates that this should be provided for,
in particular to alleviate poor housing conditions and rising costs, which are
not only a source of division and inequality, but also jeopardise our vital
public services and limit businesses which are directly or indirectly dependent
on our unique concentration of research and innovation for advancement in the
world. WE
POINT TO the records of parties which have recently led this council and South
Cambridgeshire in delivering new communities meeting a wide spectrum of needs
and means, and in nurturing the success of the local economy. WE
WELCOME a role for central government in addressing key factors beyond the
scope of local councils, particularly in ensuring investment in water supply,
transport infrastructure and social housing – the absence of which would result
in unsustainable growth, which the city would not be able to support. But
WE ARE CONCERNED by the lack of meaningful government engagement with elected
representatives in Cambridge and surrounding areas about the future of our
city, with details regarding the proposed development corporation still lacking
and no evidence of appetite for meaningful discussion of alternative options.
We note that the ruling Labour group, in partnership with the leadership of
other relevant local authorities, have been clear about these concerns publicly
– including through press statements – and that the Council’s political
leadership is continuing to push for more information and stronger engagement
(with elected representatives as well as other community voices) through all
available channels. WE
RESOLVE to lobby this and any future government to engage genuinely with local
representatives and seek a genuine partnership. We note that the complex local
government environment around Cambridge is less than ideal for transparency and
meaningful engagement and commit to continuing our exploratory work on how we
might resolve this, including consideration of options around becoming a
unitary authority. And
WE RECOMMIT to locally-led, evidence-based planning and to development that is
above all sustainable, both socially and environmentally. |
|||||||||||||
Councillor Moore - Climate & Ecology Bill Humans
have already caused irreversible climate change, the impacts of which are being
felt in the UK, and across the world. The average global temperature has
already increased by 1.2°C above pre-industrial levels and—alongside this—the
natural world has reached crisis point, with 28% of plants and animals
threatened with extinction. In addition, the UK is one of the most
nature-depleted countries in the world as more than one in seven of our plants
and animals face extinction, and more than 40% are in decline. The Climate & Ecology Bill, seeks to
address the challenges that this situation poses by creating a
whole-of-government approach to deliver a net zero and nature positive future. The
Bill aims to align current UK environmental policy with the need to halt and
reverse nature loss by 2030, which was a goal agreed to at COP15,); and reduce
greenhouse gas emissions in line with the UK’s fair share of the remaining
global carbon budget to give the strongest chance of limiting global heating to
1.5°C, which was the goal agreed to at COP21. By
bridging the gap between the UK Government’s current delivery, and what has
been agreed at international levels, Britain has a chance to be a world leader
on climate and the environment; seizing the opportunities of the clean energy
transition, including green jobs and skills; reduced energy bills; and boosting
the UK’s food and energy security. This
council notes that: · This
council declared a Climate Emergency in February 2019. · This
council declared a bio-diversity emergency in May 2019 · Cambridge
is one of 119 Global Cities named Climate Action Leaders on the Carbon
Disclosure Project 2023 A List. A-List cities are taking four times as many
climate mitigation and adaptation measures as non-A Listers. · Cambridge
City Council is ranked second amongst all UK District councils by Climate
Action Scorecards (run by Climate Emergency UK) on actions we have taken to
reach net zero in 2023. · In our
Climate Change Strategy 2021-2026 we set a target for the Council to be net
zero carbon in our direct emissions by 2030 and our Carbon Management Plan
explains how we plan to achieve it. · Our Change
Strategy 2021-2026 also sets out a vision for Cambridge City to be net zero
carbon by 2030 but we need a more ambitious policy framework and increased
investment from national government in order to
achieve that. The
CE Bill would require the UK Government to develop and achieve a new
environmental strategy, which would include: 1.
Delivering a joined-up environmental plan, as the crises in climate and nature
are deeply intertwined, and require a plan that considers both together; 2.
Reducing greenhouse gas emissions in line with 1.5°C to ensure emissions are
reduced in line with the best chance of meeting the UK’s Paris Agreement obligations; 3.
Not only halting, but also reversing the decline in nature, setting nature
measurably on the path to recovery by 2030; 4.
Taking responsibility for our overseas footprint, both emissions and ecological; 5. Prioritising nature in ... view the full agenda text for item 24/52/CNL Minutes: Under
Council Procedure Rule 26, Members agreed to accept the altered motion as
submitted by Councillor Moore (deleted text Councillor Moore
proposed and Councillor Nestor seconded the following motion: Climate
& The Climate & The Bill aims to align current UK
environmental policy with the need to halt and reverse nature loss by 2030,
which was a goal agreed to at COP15,); and reduce greenhouse gas emissions in
line with the UK’s fair share of the remaining global carbon budget to give the
strongest chance of limiting global heating to 1.5°C, which was the goal agreed
to at COP21. By bridging the gap between the UK
Government’s current delivery, and what has been agreed at international
levels, Britain has a chance to be a world leader on climate and the
environment; seizing the opportunities of the clean energy transition, including
green jobs and skills; reduced energy bills; and boosting the UK’s food and
energy security. This council notes that: ·
This council declared a Climate
Emergency in February 2019. ·
This council declared a bio-diversity
emergency in May 2019 ·
Cambridge is one of 119 Global Cities
named Climate Action Leaders on the Carbon Disclosure Project 2023 A List.
A-List cities are taking four times as many climate mitigation and adaptation
measures as non-A Listers. ·
Cambridge City Council is ranked second
amongst all UK District councils by Climate Action Scorecards (run by Climate
Emergency UK) on actions we have taken to reach net zero in 2023. ·
In our Climate Change Strategy
2021-2026 we set a target for the Council to be net zero carbon in our direct
emissions by 2030 and our Carbon Management Plan explains how we plan to
achieve it. ·
Our Change Strategy 2021-2026 also sets
out a vision for Cambridge City to be net zero carbon by 2030 but we need a
more ambitious policy framework and increased investment from national
government in order to achieve that. The Climate & Nature Bill
would require the UK Government to develop and achieve a new environmental
strategy, which would include: 1. Delivering a joined-up environmental
plan, as the crises in climate and nature are deeply intertwined, and require a
plan that considers both together; 2. Reducing greenhouse gas emissions in
line with 1.5°C to ensure emissions are reduced in line with the best chance of
meeting the UK’s Paris Agreement obligations; 3. Not only halting, but also reversing
the decline in nature, setting nature measurably on the path to recovery by
2030; 4. Taking responsibility for our
overseas footprint, both emissions and ecological; 5. Prioritising nature in
decision-making, and ending fossil fuel production and imports as rapidly as
possible; 6. Providing for re-training for those
people currently working in fossil fuel industries; and 7. Giving the British people a say in
finding a fair way forward via a temporary, independent and representative
Climate & Nature Assembly, as part of creating consensus and ensuring that
no one and no community is left behind. This council therefore resolves to: 1. Support the Climate and 2. Inform local residents and the local
press of this decision; 3. Write to our MPs Daniel
Zeichner & Anthony Browne to inform them 4. Write to Zero Hour, the organisers
of the cross-party campaign for the CE Bill, expressing Cambridge City
Council’s support. 5. Write to Sir Keir Starmer MP
expressing Cambridge City Council’s support for the bill and requesting that it
be upgraded from a private members’ bill to a government bill should there be a
Labour government after the next general election. Councillor
Glasberg advised that her amendment to the motion had been withdrawn. Resolved
(unanimously): Climate
& Nature Bill Humans
have already caused irreversible climate change, the impacts of which are being
felt in the UK, and across the world. The average global temperature has
already increased by 1.2°C above pre-industrial levels and—alongside this—the
natural world has reached crisis point, with 28% of plants and animals
threatened with extinction. In addition, the UK is one of the most
nature-depleted countries in the world as more than one in seven of our plants
and animals face extinction, and more than 40% are in decline. The
Climate & Ecology Nature Bill (an updated version of the previous
Climate & Ecology Bill and before that the CEE Bill), seeks to address the
challenges that this situation poses by creating a whole-of-government approach
to deliver a net zero and nature positive future. The
Bill aims to align current UK environmental policy with the need to halt and
reverse nature loss by 2030, which was a goal agreed to at COP15,); and reduce
greenhouse gas emissions in line with the UK’s fair share of the remaining
global carbon budget to give the strongest chance of limiting global heating to
1.5°C, which was the goal agreed to at COP21. By
bridging the gap between the UK Government’s current delivery, and what has
been agreed at international levels, Britain has a chance to be a world leader
on climate and the environment; seizing the opportunities of the clean energy
transition, including green jobs and skills; reduced energy bills; and boosting
the UK’s food and energy security. This
council notes that: · This
council declared a Climate Emergency in February 2019. · This
council declared a bio-diversity emergency in May 2019 · Cambridge
is one of 119 Global Cities named Climate Action Leaders on the Carbon
Disclosure Project 2023 A List. A-List cities are taking four times as many
climate mitigation and adaptation measures as non-A Listers. · Cambridge
City Council is ranked second amongst all UK District councils by Climate
Action Scorecards (run by Climate Emergency UK) on actions we have taken to
reach net zero in 2023. · In our
Climate Change Strategy 2021-2026 we set a target for the Council to be net zero
carbon in our direct emissions by 2030 and our Carbon Management Plan explains
how we plan to achieve it. · Our
Change Strategy 2021-2026 also sets out a vision for Cambridge City to be net
zero carbon by 2030 but we need a more ambitious policy framework and increased
investment from national government in order to achieve that. The
Climate & Nature E Bill would require the UK Government to develop and
achieve a new environmental strategy, which would include: 1.
Delivering a joined-up environmental plan, as the crises in climate and nature
are deeply intertwined, and require a plan that considers both together; 2.
Reducing greenhouse gas emissions in line with 1.5°C to ensure emissions are
reduced in line with the best chance of meeting the UK’s Paris Agreement
obligations; 3. Not
only halting, but also reversing the decline in nature, setting nature
measurably on the path to recovery by 2030; 4.
Taking responsibility for our overseas footprint, both emissions and
ecological; 5.
Prioritising nature in decision-making, and ending fossil fuel production and
imports as rapidly as possible; 6.
Providing for re-training for those people currently working in fossil fuel
industries; and 7.
Giving the British people a say in finding a fair way forward via a temporary,
independent and representative Climate & Nature Assembly, as part of
creating consensus and ensuring that no one and no community is left behind. This
council therefore resolves to: 1.
Support the Climate and Ecology Nature Bill; 2.
Inform local residents and the local press of this decision; 3.
Write to our MPs Daniel Zeichner & Anthony Browne to inform them him that
this motion has been passed, and urge them both him to sign up to support the
CE Bill. 4.
Write to Zero Hour, the organisers of the cross-party campaign for the CE Bill,
expressing Cambridge City Council’s support. 5.
Write to Sir Keir Starmer MP expressing Cambridge City Council’s support for
the bill and requesting that it be upgraded from a private members’ bill to a
government bill should there be a Labour government after the next general
election. |
|||||||||||||
Councillor Glasberg - Climate and Nature Bill 2024 The purpose of this motion is to support the Climate and
Nature Bill. A short description of the bill and the actions requested of the council
follows: A history of the bill and links to further reading are provided for
convenience. Cambridge City Council notes that: · The Climate and Nature Bill would require the UK government to make a full plan to protect us from the climate emergency and threats to the natural world. · That such a plan is needed to reverse global warming and loss of plants, animals and people. In particular, the Bill would require the government to commit to the following actions: · Delivering a joined-up environmental plan, as the crises in climate and nature are deeply intertwined, requiring a plan that considers both together; i. Reducing greenhouse gas emissions in line with 1.5°C in line with the best chance of meeting the UK’s Paris Agreement obligations; ii. Not only halting, but also reversing the decline in nature, setting nature measurably on the path to recovery by 2030; the existing Environment Act aims only to halt the decline of nature by 2030. iii. Taking responsibility for our overseas footprint, both emissions and ecological; iv. Prioritising nature in decision-making, and ending fossil fuel production and imports as rapidly as possible; v. Providing for retraining of people currently working in fossil fuel industries; and vi. Giving people a say in finding a fair way forward through an independent and temporary Climate & Nature Assembly, representative of the UK population, an essential tool for bringing public opinion along with the unprecedented pace of change required. Weaning ourselves off fossil fuels means big changes, which is why it’s important that everyone is on board with them. Cambridge City Council therefore resolves to: 1. Support the Climate and Nature Bill; 2. Inform local residents, and local press/media of this decision; 3. Write to Daniel Zeichner MP and Anthony Browne MP to inform them that this motion has been passed and urging them to sign up to support the Bill; 4. Write to Zero Hour, the organisers of the cross-party campaign for the CAN Bill, expressing its support (campaign@zerohour.uk). 5. Write to Sir Keir Starmer MP asking him to confirm his party’s support for the bill and requesting that the bill be upgraded from a private members’ bill to a government bill should there be a change of government. Background Notes (not part of active motion): History 1. The 2024 version of the Climate and Nature Bill was introduced by Labour MP, Alex Sobel on 21 March 2024 and will receive a second reading on 17 May 2024. 2. Previous versions were introduced by Green MP Caroline Lucas (twice) and Labour’s Olivia Blake (once) 3. A petition requesting support for the Bill was submitted to Environment and Community Scrutiny Committee by local Green party officers with advice from the Zero Hour campaign group on 21 March 2024 and was approved by councillors including Cllrs Glasberg and Moore. 4. The Bill is backed by ... view the full agenda text for item 24/53/CNL Minutes: Under Council Procedure Rule 13.3.1 this motion was withdrawn. |
|||||||||||||
Councillor Bennett - Disability Rights UK 2024 The purpose of
this motion is to raise awareness and support the 2024 Disabled People’s
Manifesto and to stand with disabled residents, their carers
and their families in the face of the continuing national government’s attack
on their lives and rights. The 2024 Disability
Rights UK Manifesto is a four point plan to create a society where everyone has
equal life chances and is valued and treated equally. The four points are: 1. Representation and Voice Removal of barriers for disabled people to participate in political and
public life. 2. Rights The full rights set out in the United Nations Convention on the Rights
of Persons with Disabilities (“UNCRPD”) 3. Independence The right to live independently with choice and control over the
support given. 4. Inclusion Plans for every aspect of life to address specific needs of disabled
people from the outset. Although Cambridge
City Council is not a unitary authority and social services are provided by the
county council, it is very much aware of the impact of the services that it
does provide on the lives of disabled residents. Housing, the planning service and
the public realm are critical to the life chances of disabled people. Even
basic services such as contact with the public can present extra challenges to
disabled people and carers. The council accepts
that it has an important part to play in supporting the lives of its disabled
residents and indeed all the residents who are affected by their own or another
person’s disability. However, no council
can do this work alone. Central government support is needed. Accordingly,
Cambridge City Council resolves to: 1. Sign the Manifesto as an
organisation; 2. Raise awareness of the Local Government
Association Disability Champions Network with both council officers and
councillors. 3. Write to Daniel Zeichner MP and
Anthony Browne MP to inform them that this motion has been passed and urge them
to sign the Manifesto; 4. Write to Sir Keir Starmer MP
asking him to confirm his party’s support for the Manifesto and opposition to
the current government’s proposed attacks on the dignity and rights of Disabled
People Further Reading Disability Rights UK
https://www.disabledpeoplesmanifesto.com/manifesto Local Government
Disability Champions Network (“LGDCN”) United Nations
Convention On the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Minutes: Councillor Bennett proposed and Councillor
Tong seconded the following motion: The purpose of this motion is to raise
awareness The 2024 Disability Rights UK Manifesto is a four point plan to create a society where everyone has equal
life chances and is valued and treated equally.
The four points are: 1.
Representation and Voice Removal of barriers for disabled people to
participate in political and public life. 2.
Rights The full rights set out in the United Nations
Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (“UNCRPD”) 3.
Independence The right to live independently with choice
and control over the support given. 4.
Inclusion Plans for every aspect of life to address
specific needs of disabled people from the outset. Although Cambridge City Council is not a
unitary authority and social services are provided by the county council, it is
very much aware of the impact of the services that it does provide on the lives
of disabled residents. Housing, the planning service and the public realm are
critical to the life chances of disabled people. Even basic services such as
contact with the public can present extra challenges to disabled people and
carers. The council accepts that it has an important
part to play in supporting the lives of its disabled residents and indeed all
the residents who are affected by their own or another person’s disability. However, no council can do this work alone. Central
government support is needed. Accordingly, Cambridge City Council resolves
to: 1.
2.
Raise awareness of the Local Government Association
Disability Champions Network with both council officers and councillors. 3.
Write to Daniel Zeichner MP and Anthony Browne MP to inform
them that this motion has been passed 4.
Write to Sir Keir Starmer MP asking him to confirm his
party’s Further Reading Disability Rights UK https://www.disabledpeoplesmanifesto.com/manifesto Local Government Disability Champions Network
(“LGDCN”) United Nations Convention On the Rights of
Persons with Disabilities Resolved (unanimously) that: The purpose of this
motion is to raise awareness of the developing 2024 Disabled People’s
Manifesto and to stand with disabled residents, their carers and their families in the face of the
continuing national government’s attack on their lives and rights. The 2024 Disability
Rights UK Manifesto is a four point plan to create a
society where everyone has equal life chances and is valued and treated
equally. The four points are: 1. Representation and Voice Removal of barriers for disabled people to participate in political and
public life. 2. Rights The full rights set out in the United Nations Convention on the Rights
of Persons with Disabilities (“UNCRPD”) 3. Independence The right to live independently with choice and control over the
support given. 4. Inclusion Plans for every aspect of life to address specific needs of disabled
people from the outset. Although Cambridge
City Council is not a unitary authority and social services are provided by the
county council, it is very much aware of the impact of the services that it
does provide on the lives of disabled residents. Housing, the planning service and
the public realm are critical to the life chances of disabled people. Even
basic services such as contact with the public can present extra challenges to
disabled people and carers. The council accepts
that it has an important part to play in supporting the lives of its disabled
residents and indeed all the residents who are affected by their own or another
person’s disability. However, no council
can do this work alone. Central government support is needed. Accordingly,
Cambridge City Council resolves to: 1. Refer the manifesto to the
Council’s Equalities Panel for scrutiny and debate involving staff, resident representatives and councillors, and reporting back to the Environment and
Community Scrutiny Committee on their discussions. 2.
Raise awareness of the Local Government Association Disability
Champions Network with both council officers and councillors. 3.
Write to Daniel Zeichner MP and Anthony Browne MP to inform
them that this motion has been passed. 4.
Write to Sir Keir Starmer MP asking him to confirm his
party’s opposition to the current government’s proposed attacks on the dignity
and rights of Disabled People. Further Reading Disability Rights UK
https://www.disabledpeoplesmanifesto.com/manifesto Local Government
Disability Champions Network (“LGDCN”) United Nations
Convention On the Rights of Persons with Disabilities |
|||||||||||||
Councillor Gilderdale - Motion on Palestine-Israel This Council
notes: a. The City Council’s three
previous statements (19th October, 15th February, 29th February) which condemned the
attack by Hamas on the 7th October and called for ‘an immediate ceasefire,
the return of hostages, unfettered access for humanitarian aid, peace in the
Middle East, international support for a two-State solution and the upholding
of international law.’ b. That since October 7th,
according to the Gaza health ministry, the present Israeli Government has killed over 34,000
Palestinians, with over 77,000 wounded and 10,000 feared buried
under the rubble in Gaza. c. That the UN Secretary-General, Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch and others have
said that Israel has committed grave violations of international law in its
assault on Palestine. The International
Court of Justice has ruled that there was a risk of irreparable harm to the
Palestinian right to be protected from genocide. d. UN experts including
Special Rapporteurs Ben Saul, Margaret Satterthwaite and Independent Expert
Cecilia Bailliet have warned that ‘any transfer
of weapons or ammunition to Israel that would be used in Gaza is likely to
violate international humanitarian law and must cease immediately’. e. That the UK continues to
sell arms to Israel which are being used in the ongoing conflict. They may be
used in a way that creates further human suffering and prolong the conflict. By
providing arms and military support to Israel, the UK Government could be
complicit in this catastrophe. f. That since 2015, the
UK has licensed at least £474
million worth
of military exports to Israel, including components for combat aircrafts,
missiles, tanks, technology, small arms and ammunition. The UK provides
approximately 15%
of the components in the F-35
stealth bomber aircraft currently being used in Gaza. g. In 2009, under a Labour
government, the UK suspended arms
licenses for naval guns due to their use against civilians in Gaza. In 2014, under a
Conservative-led government, the UK said it would suspend
licenses if
hostilities resumed in Gaza. h. A cross-party group of
134 parliamentarians have signed a letter to Foreign Secretary David Cameron and
Business Secretary Kemi Badenoch MP, asking for them to immediately suspend
export licenses for arms transfers to Israel. i. On 8th May 2024, President Biden
confirmed that the US had blocked an arms shipment of thousands of heavy bombs to
Israel over fears that they could be used during Isrrael’s military operation
in Rafah. Following this news, a former UK national
security adviser has criticised Rishi Sunak for failing to suspend arms sales to
Israel. This Council
calls on the current and any future UK Government to: a. Press for an immediate
and permanent ceasefire in Gaza, Israel and the rest
of Palestine and to make every effort to resume the peace process. b. Work to ensure that
international humanitarian law is upheld and that civilians are protected in
accordance with those laws. c. Work to ensure that civilians have access to humanitarian support, including unfettered access of ... view the full agenda text for item 24/55/CNL Minutes: Councillor Gilderdale proposed,
and Councillor Divkovic seconded the following motion: This Council
notes: a. The City Council’s three previous statements (19th October, 15th February, 29th February) which
condemned the attack by Hamas on the 7th October and called for ‘an
immediate ceasefire, the return of hostages, unfettered access for humanitarian
aid, peace in the Middle East, international support for a two-State solution
and the upholding of international law.’ b. That since October 7th, according to the Gaza health ministry, the
present Israeli Government has killed over 34,000 Palestinians, with over 77,000 wounded and 10,000
feared buried under the rubble in Gaza. c. That the UN
Secretary-General, Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch and
others have said that Israel has committed grave violations of international
law in its assault on Palestine. The International Court of Justice has ruled that there was a risk of irreparable harm to the
Palestinian right to be protected from genocide. d. UN experts including Special Rapporteurs Ben Saul, Margaret
Satterthwaite and Independent Expert Cecilia Bailliet
have warned that ‘any transfer of
weapons or ammunition to Israel that would be used in Gaza is likely to violate
international humanitarian law and must cease immediately’. e. That the UK continues to sell arms to Israel which are being used
in the ongoing conflict. They may be used in a way that creates further human
suffering and prolong the conflict. By providing arms and military support to
Israel, the UK Government could be complicit in this catastrophe. f. That since 2015, the UK has licensed at least £474 million worth of military exports to Israel, including components
for combat aircrafts, missiles, tanks, technology, small arms and ammunition.
The UK provides approximately 15% of the components in the F-35 stealth bomber aircraft currently being used in Gaza. g. In 2009, under a Labour government, the UK suspended arms licenses for naval guns due to their use
against civilians in Gaza. In 2014,
under a Conservative-led government, the UK said it would suspend licenses if hostilities resumed in Gaza. h. A cross-party group of 134 parliamentarians have signed a letter to Foreign Secretary David Cameron and
Business Secretary Kemi Badenoch MP, asking for them to immediately suspend
export licenses for arms transfers to Israel. i. On 8th May 2024, President Biden confirmed that the US had blocked an arms shipment of thousands of heavy bombs to Israel over fears
that they could be used during Isrrael’s military operation in Rafah. Following
this news, a former UK national security adviser has criticised Rishi Sunak for failing to suspend arms sales to Israel. This Council
calls on the current and any future UK Government to: a. Press for an immediate and permanent ceasefire in Gaza, Israel and the rest of Palestine and to make every effort to
resume the peace process. b. Work to ensure that international humanitarian law is upheld and
that civilians are protected in accordance with those laws. c. Work to ensure that civilians have access to humanitarian support,
including unfettered access of medical supplies, food, fuel
and water. d. To immediately revoke all licences for arms exports to Israel and
suspend arms sales to Israel. In addition,
this Council will: a. Investigate the implications of stopping banking with Barclays -
which is known for investing over £2 billion in, and providing financial services to companies arming Israel
worth £6.1 billion - and instead banking with an ethical bank. b. Continue to condemn all forms of Islamophobia and Antisemitism and
work to champion a city free from hate, including in the Council’s work to make
Cambridge a City of Sanctuary. Resolved (unanimously)
to support the motion. |
|||||||||||||
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. |