Agenda item
TO CONSIDER MOTIONS SUBMITTED BY MEMBERS OF THE COUNCIL
The motions submitted by Councillors for debate at this meeting are set out in agenda item 12 attached.
Note: Report back on location of meetings
The Council Meeting on 27th October 2010 considered a motion proposed by Councillor Dr. Emma Jones and seconded by Councillor David Snowdon regarding ‘location of meetings’.
Work is underway as set out in the resolution but it has unfortunately not been possible to complete this work in time for a report to be included on the agenda for this meeting. A report on this matter will therefore be presented to the next ordinary Council meeting.
Decision:
12.1 Motion proposed by Councillor Denise Jones regarding Bancroft Local History Library & Archive
Councillor Denise Jones moved, and Councillor Bill Turner seconded, the motion as printed in the agenda.
Councillor Peter Golds moved, and Councillor Tim Archer seconded, a tabled amendment to the motion. This amendment was put to the vote and was defeated.
The original motion was put to the vote and was agreed as follows:-
DECISION
This Council believes that:
- East London has a rich heritage that should be safeguarded and celebrated.
- Bancroft Local History Library & Archive has an important and unique collection of historical archives of East London that is well used and should be developed and preserved for posterity.
- Bancroft Local History Library & Archive is in need of refurbishment and investment.
This Council notes that:
- At the Full Council on 27th October 2010 a motion was tabled on Bancroft Local History Library and Archive proposed by Councillor Ohid Ahmed, seconded by Councillor Rabina Khan. One of the resolutions was to: “support the Mayor in his proposal that all £500,000 of the section 106 from the Peugeot site development should be earmarked to the Bancroft Local History Library and Archive”
- The facts are incorrect. Officers had already agreed at a PCOP meeting on the 23rd September 2010 to allocate £500k S106 money from the Peugeot Garage site on Mile End Road to Bancroft Local History Library. Whilst the support of the Mayor to allocate this money to Bancroft is reassuring, the decision was taken under the previous administration.
- More significantly, a pre application bid for up to £2 million capital funding was submitted to the Heritage Lottery Fund which was supported by Councillor Denise Jones as the former Lead Member for Culture whilst officers are continuing discussions with the HLF regarding the national importance of the Bancroft Road History Library and Archives.
This Council further notes that:
- The motion also contained a statement that ‘The former Lead Member for Culture should not have requested the withdrawal of £350,000 funding from Bancroft in favour of the Rich Mix Centre’
- Cllr Edgar tabled an amendment to the motion, proposing to delete this reference and clarifying that any implication that the former Lead Member had made such a request was untrue. Cllr Ohid Ahmed refused to accept this amendment and voted against it. The substantive motion was then passed still containing this untrue implication.
- Councillor Denise Jones, the former Lead Member for Culture refuted the implied allegation that she made such a request. She made this point at the meeting under Council Procedure Rule 15.14 ‘personal explanation’ but ruled herself out of the discussion because she is a trustee of Rich Mix.
- Following the meeting, at the request of Councillor Denise Jones, the Chief Executive of the Council investigated the implied allegation and found “that there was no evidence that Councillor Jones requested the withdrawal of £350,000 funding from Bancroft in favour of the Rich Mix Centre.” This finding was circulated to all Councillors.
This Council believes:
- That any allegation that the former Lead Member for Culture requested the withdrawal of £350,000 funding from Bancroft in favour of the Rich Mix Centre is untrue and should be withdrawn by Councillor Ohid Ahmed.
- That Councillors Ohid Ahmed and Rabina Khan should apologise to Councillor Denise Jones for making a defamatory statement in public and for the damage they have done to her reputation.
- That the fact that the implied allegation was untrue should be formally recorded in the minutes of the Full Council of 8th December 2010.
This Council resolves:
- To continue to support the development and refurbishment of the Local History Library and Archives with the allocation of £500k of S106 money from the Peugeot site in Mile End Road, from the Heritage Lottery Fund and from any further funding opportunities.
- To rescind the motion as presented on 27th October 2010 to Full Council on the grounds that it contained false information.
(Action by: Stephen Halsey, Corporate Director, Communities, Localities and Culture)
Motion: Referral to Overview and Scrutiny Committee
At this point Councillor Tim Archer moved, and Councillor Peter Golds seconded, a motion under Procedure Rule 14.1.4 that the issues set out in Councillor Denise Jones’ motion above be referred to the Overview and Scrutiny Committee. This motion was put to the vote and was agreed.
DECISION
That the issues set out in Councillor Denise Jones’ motion 12.1 ‘Bancroft Local History Library and Archive’ be referred to the Overview and Scrutiny Committee.
(Action by : John S Williams, Service Head, Democratic Services)
12.2 Motion proposed by Councillor Tim Archer regarding public questions, petitions and deputations at Council
With the consent of the meeting under Procedure Rule 15.8.1, Councillor Tim Archer altered the text of his motion.
Councillor Tim Archer moved, and Councillor David Snowdon seconded, the revised motion as tabled.
Councillor Joshua Peck moved, and Councillor Helal Abbas seconded, an amendment to the motion as included in the tabled papers. This amendment was put to the vote and was agreed.
The substantive motion as amended was then put to the vote and was agreed as follows:
DECISION
This Council Notes:
- That at the Council meeting of October 27th changes were made to the Council’s constitution regarding Petitions, Deputations and questions from members of the public at future Council meetings.
- That these changes were included in the report of the cross-party Constitutional Working Party.
This Council Believes:
- It is for the Constitutional Working Party to report on changes to the constitution.
This Council Resolves:
- To ask for the Constitutional Working Party to meet and re-consider the recent changes to Petitions, Deputations and questions from members of the public.
- To ask the Constitutional Working Party to bring a report back to a future council meeting on this issue.
(Action by: John S. Williams, Service Head, Democratic Services)
12.3 Motion proposed by Councillor Joshua Peck regarding Victoria Park events
DECISION
This Council notes:
· That Victoria Park has long been used to host big events, including the annual fireworks display, Paradise Gardens and commercial concerts and that many of these are popular with residents who live around the park and those from further afield;
· That the frequency of events has increased in the last two years and with it the noise, crowds, disruption, rubbish, damage and the amount of time large parts of the park are out of use;
· That as a result, local opposition to events has grown significantly.
This Council believes:
· That events in Victoria Park are both an opportunity for our community to come together and bring new users to the park and should be supported;
· That commercial events in the park are an important revenue stream for the future upkeep of the park after the Lottery-funded restoration;
· That this must be balanced with the needs of local residents
This Council resolves:
· To ask officers to bring forward a policy that:
o Limits the number of large commercial music events in the park to six each year;
o Prevents the park being used on consecutive weekends throughout the summer, with at least two weekends free after a weekend of events;
o Brings forward the closing time for events to 10pm;
o Increases the level of security, stewarding and traffic management in the streets surrounding the events;
o Reduces the noise levels permitted at events; and
o Includes a separate policy that addresses the particular needs of the 2012 Live Site during Olympic year, recognising that this is a one-off occasion but also recognising the needs of local residents.
(Action by: Stephen Halsey, Corporate Director, Communities, Localities and Culture)
12.4 Motion proposed by Councillor Rachael Saunders regarding the NHS
Councillor Tim Archer moved, and Councillor Dr. Emma Jones seconded, a tabled amendment to the motion. This amendment was put to the vote and was defeated.
DECISION
This Council notes:
1. That in 2006 David Cameron promised “no more pointless and disruptive reorganisations” of the NHS;
2. That Tower Hamlets PCT recently came top of the World Class Commissioning League Table;
3. That the Conservative-Liberal Democrat government recently published a White Paper, “Liberating the NHS”, which proposed the abolition of PCTs and opened the door to private companies offering commission support to GPs. Under these proposals consortia of GPs will control 80% of the total NHS budget;
4. That GPs in Tower Hamlets have stated their support for the good work that the PCT does, and have decided that under the plans in the White Paper they wish to operate a GP consortium on a borough level and to do all they can to preserve the talent and expertise currently in the PCT.
This Council believes:
1. That the proposed NHS reorganisation is unnecessary, costly and not in the interests of the people of Tower Hamlets;
2. That the position that Tower Hamlets GPs have taken is welcome;
3. That any change in NHS organisation in Tower Hamlets must result in more public accountability, not less.
This Council resolves:
1. To oppose Conservative-Liberal Democrat plans to break up the NHS;
2. To use our position as local representatives to work with the groups of GPs, who organise together on geographical boundaries that reflect LAPs, to increase local democratic accountability and engagement;
3. To scrutinise the East London and City Alliance NHS and Tower Hamlets PCT in their responses to the White Paper, and to campaign for increased democratic accountability in any structural changes that are made.
(Action by: Helen Taylor, Acting Corporate Director, Adult Health and Wellbeing)
Minutes:
12.1 Motion proposed by Councillor Denise Jones regarding Bancroft Local History Library & Archive
Councillor Denise Jones MOVED, and Councillor Bill Turner SECONDED, the motion as printed in the agenda.
Following debate, Councillor Peter Golds MOVED, and Councillor Tim Archer SECONDED, a tabled amendment to the motion as follows:-
“After ‘This Council believes’ to insert a further bullet point to read ‘The Rich Mix Centre has been an unmitigated disaster and poor value for money for taxpayers’.”
Following further debate, this amendment was put to the vote and was defeated.
Motion: Referral to Overview and Scrutiny Committee
At this point Councillor Tim Archer MOVED, and Councillor Peter Golds SECONDED – “That under Procedure Rule 14.1.4 the issues set out in Councillor Denise Jones’ motion be referred to the Overview and Scrutiny Committee.”
This motion was put to the vote and was agreed. Accordingly it was:-
RESOLVED
That the issues set out in Councillor Denise Jones’ motion 12.1 ‘Bancroft Local History Library and Archive’ be referred to the Overview and Scrutiny Committee.
The original motion moved by Councillor Denise Jones was then put to the vote and was agreed. Accordingly it was:-
RESOLVED
This Council believes that:
- East London has a rich heritage that should be safeguarded and celebrated.
- Bancroft Local History Library & Archive has an important and unique collection of historical archives of East London that is well used and should be developed and preserved for posterity.
- Bancroft Local History Library & Archive is in need of refurbishment and investment.
This Council notes that:
- At the Full Council on 27th October 2010 a motion was tabled on Bancroft Local History Library and Archive proposed by Councillor Ohid Ahmed, seconded by Councillor Rabina Khan. One of the resolutions was to: “support the Mayor in his proposal that all £500,000 of the section 106 from the Peugeot site development should be earmarked to the Bancroft Local History Library and Archive”
- The facts are incorrect. Officers had already agreed at a PCOP meeting on the 23rd September 2010 to allocate £500k S106 money from the Peugeot Garage site on Mile End Road to Bancroft Local History Library. Whilst the support of the Mayor to allocate this money to Bancroft is reassuring, the decision was taken under the previous administration.
- More significantly, a pre application bid for up to £2 million capital funding was submitted to the Heritage Lottery Fund which was supported by Councillor Denise Jones as the former Lead Member for Culture whilst officers are continuing discussions with the HLF regarding the national importance of the Bancroft Road History Library and Archives.
This Council further notes that:
- The motion also contained a statement that ‘The former Lead Member for Culture should not have requested the withdrawal of £350,000 funding from Bancroft in favour of the Rich Mix Centre’
- Cllr Edgar tabled an amendment to the motion, proposing to delete this reference and clarifying that any implication that the former Lead Member had made such a request was untrue. Cllr Ohid Ahmed refused to accept this amendment and voted against it. The substantive motion was then passed still containing this untrue implication.
- Councillor Denise Jones, the former Lead Member for Culture refuted the implied allegation that she made such a request. She made this point at the meeting under Council Procedure Rule 15.14 ‘personal explanation’ but ruled herself out of the discussion because she is a trustee of Rich Mix.
- Following the meeting, at the request of Councillor Denise Jones, the Chief Executive of the Council investigated the implied allegation and found “that there was no evidence that Councillor Jones requested the withdrawal of £350,000 funding from Bancroft in favour of the Rich Mix Centre.” This finding was circulated to all Councillors.
This Council believes:
- That any allegation that the former Lead Member for Culture requested the withdrawal of £350,000 funding from Bancroft in favour of the Rich Mix Centre is untrue and should be withdrawn by Councillor Ohid Ahmed.
- That Councillors Ohid Ahmed and Rabina Khan should apologise to Councillor Denise Jones for making a defamatory statement in public and for the damage they have done to her reputation.
- That the fact that the implied allegation was untrue should be formally recorded in the minutes of the Full Council of 8th December 2010.
This Council resolves:
- To continue to support the development and refurbishment of the Local History Library and Archives with the allocation of £500k of S106 money from the Peugeot site in Mile End Road, from the Heritage Lottery Fund and from any further funding opportunities.
- To rescind the motion as presented on 27th October 2010 to Full Council on the grounds that it contained false information.
12.2 Motion proposed by Councillor Tim Archer regarding public questions, petitions and deputations at Council
With the consent of the meeting under Procedure Rule 15.8.1, Councillor Tim Archer altered the text of his motion as follows:
“Delete motion after ‘transparent democracy’ and amend with:
and Notes:
- The high levels of resident interest in presenting petitions and deputations to Council over recent years
- The new Executive arrangements which require high levels of overview and scrutiny
This Council Believes:
- That the decision of the Council to withdraw the provision for deputations from the constitution degrades residents’ right to scrutinise the Executive and Full Council
- That the right to bring deputations should be restored
This Council Resolves:
- To restore the right to bring deputations
- That Rule 20 from Part 4 of the Council Constitution dated May 2009 (Entitled Deputations) be restored. This Rule shall be inserted between the current (November 2010) Rule 19 and Rule 20.
- To amend Rule 19.7 (Limitation) to read “An individual or group may submit only one of a petition, deputation or question at any given meeting. In addition, if any individual or group submit a petition, deputation or question, having presented in either of the previous two meetings, their petition, deputation or question shall be considered after all others who have not presented a question, deputation or petition at either of the previous two meetings of the Full Council.”
Councillor Tim Archer then MOVED, and Councillor David Snowdon SECONDED, the revised motion as tabled.
Following debate, Councillor Joshua Peck MOVED, and Councillor Helal Abbas SECONDED, an amendment to the motion as included in the tabled papers.
This amendment was put to the vote and was agreed.
The substantive motion as amended was then put to the vote and was agreed. Accordingly it was:-
RESOLVED
This Council Notes:
- That at the Council meeting of October 27th changes were made to the Council’s constitution regarding Petitions, Deputations and questions from members of the public at future Council meetings.
- That these changes were included in the report of the cross-party Constitutional Working Party.
This Council Believes:
- It is for the Constitutional Working Party to report on changes to the constitution.
This Council Resolves:
- To ask for the Constitutional Working Party to meet and re-consider the recent changes to Petitions, Deputations and questions from members of the public.
- To ask the Constitutional Working Party to bring a report back to a future council meeting on this issue.
Motion: Extension of time for the meeting
At this point Councillor Joshua Peck MOVED and Councillor Peter Golds SECONDED – “That the duration of the meeting be extended for 15 minutes to allow the remaining business on the agenda to be concluded.”
The procedural motion was put to the vote and was agreed. Accordingly it was:-
RESOLVED
That the time limit for the meeting be extended by 15 minutes.
12.3 Motion proposed by Councillor Joshua Peck regarding Victoria Park events
The motion as printed in the agenda was MOVED by Councillor Joshua Peck and SECONDED by Councillor Carli Harper-Penman.
Following debate the motion was put to the vote and was agreed. Accordingly it was:-
RESOLVED
This Council notes:
· That Victoria Park has long been used to host big events, including the annual fireworks display, Paradise Gardens and commercial concerts and that many of these are popular with residents who live around the park and those from further afield;
· That the frequency of events has increased in the last two years and with it the noise, crowds, disruption, rubbish, damage and the amount of time large parts of the park are out of use;
· That as a result, local opposition to events has grown significantly.
This Council believes:
· That events in Victoria Park are both an opportunity for our community to come together and bring new users to the park and should be supported;
· That commercial events in the park are an important revenue stream for the future upkeep of the park after the Lottery-funded restoration;
· That this must be balanced with the needs of local residents
This Council resolves:
· To ask officers to bring forward a policy that:
o Limits the number of large commercial music events in the park to six each year;
o Prevents the park being used on consecutive weekends throughout the summer, with at least two weekends free after a weekend of events;
o Brings forward the closing time for events to 10pm;
o Increases the level of security, stewarding and traffic management in the streets surrounding the events;
o Reduces the noise levels permitted at events; and
o Includes a separate policy that addresses the particular needs of the 2012 Live Site during Olympic year, recognising that this is a one-off occasion but also recognising the needs of local residents.
12.4 Motion proposed by Councillor Rachael Saunders regarding the NHS
The motion as printed in the agenda was MOVED by Councillor Rachael Saunders and SECONDED by Councillor Helal Abbas.
Councillor Tim Archer MOVED, and Councillor Dr. Emma Jones SECONDED, a tabled amendment to the motion as follows:-
“After ‘This Council notes’:
Remove bullet point 1 and replace with:
‘That in 2006 David Cameron promised “no more pointless and disruptive reorganisations” of the NHS and as Prime Minister is delivering on his promise’
Remove bullet point 3 and replace with:
‘That the Coalition government recently published a White Paper, “Liberating the NHS”, which empowers doctors and nurses to deliver results – putting them in charge of commissioning the services which best meet the needs of their local communities’
Remove bullet point 4
After ‘This Council believes’:
Remove bullet point 1 and replace with:
‘That the proposed NHS reorganisation is necessary for the
progression and improvement of the service that is an important expression of our
national values’
After ‘This Council resolves’:
Remove bullet point 1 and replace with:
‘To support the Government’s commitment to increase funding for the NHS and to support the reforms in the White Paper which set out plans to make health outcomes for patients among the best in the world’
Add:
‘This council further resolves:
To support the proposed Government reforms which put patients at the heart of the reforms – the priority is improving their experience of the NHS and the quality of the care they receive. Instead of top down control and political targets, current Government proposals will hand back power to patients and NHS professionals’.”
At this point, Councillor Alibor Choudhury MOVED and Councillor Ohid Ahmed SECONDED –“That the Council move to the vote.”
This procedural motion was put to the vote and was defeated.
Following debate, the amendment moved by Councillor Tim Archer was put to the vote and was defeated.
The original motion moved by Councillor Rachael Saunders was then put to the vote and was agreed. Accordingly it was:-
RESOLVED
This Council notes:
1. That in 2006 David Cameron promised “no more pointless and disruptive reorganisations” of the NHS;
2. That Tower Hamlets PCT recently came top of the World Class Commissioning League Table;
3. That the Conservative-Liberal Democrat government recently published a White Paper, “Liberating the NHS”, which proposed the abolition of PCTs and opened the door to private companies offering commission support to GPs. Under these proposals consortia of GPs will control 80% of the total NHS budget;
4. That GPs in Tower Hamlets have stated their support for the good work that the PCT does, and have decided that under the plans in the White Paper they wish to operate a GP consortium on a borough level and to do all they can to preserve the talent and expertise currently in the PCT.
This Council believes:
1. That the proposed NHS reorganisation is unnecessary, costly and not in the interests of the people of Tower Hamlets;
2. That the position that Tower Hamlets GPs have taken is welcome;
3. That any change in NHS organisation in Tower Hamlets must result in more public accountability, not less.
This Council resolves:
1. To oppose Conservative-Liberal Democrat plans to break up the NHS;
2. To use our position as local representatives to work with the groups of GPs, who organise together on geographical boundaries that reflect LAPs, to increase local democratic accountability and engagement;
3. To scrutinise the East London and City Alliance NHS and Tower Hamlets PCT in their responses to the White Paper, and to campaign for increased democratic accountability in any structural changes that are made.
Supporting documents: