Agenda item

Notices of Motion

To consider the following Notices of Motion under Standing Order 12:

 

A – Motions referred from the Cabinet in accordance with Standing Order 12.1(a)

 

None

 

B – Motions submitted for consideration directly by Council, in accordance with Standing Order 12.1(b)

 

(i)        From Cllr Fraser

 

“Council welcomes the Government’s policy on integrated health and social care and local efforts to make this a reality for people in York, who should be central to NHS provision.

 

Council notes, however, the damaging impact of the £3bn Tory-Lib Dem Government’s top down reorganisation of the NHS, which is forcing local health economies to waste millions of pounds on pointless procurement exercises as they compete with the private sector for patient contracts.

 

This is all against a backdrop of severe financial pressure and significant historical underfunding of York’s healthcare system and mental health services in particular.

 

The cumulative effects on York patients include:

-         Restricted access to certain treatments and procedures due to the Government’s insistence that the Vale of York Clinical Commissioning Group (VoYCCG) take on the historic debt of the former Primary Care Trust (PCT);

-         The excessive waiting times for access to talking therapies for those experiencing mental ill health; and

-         The imposition of funding cuts to York Hospital including reduced payment to the hospital for in-patient readmissions within 30 days and the imposition of an arbitrary threshold for A&E patient numbers above which the hospital only receives a percentage of the full tariff for emergency admissions.

 

Council resolves:

-         To request the Chair of the Health Overview and Scrutiny Committee to make arrangements for Health Overview and Scrutiny Committee to consider conducting a review on the impact on local health services based on so called ‘efficiency’ savings and chronic underfunding of the NHS in  York, to enable residents to understand what future services  will look like over the period 2015-2020;

-         To call on the city’s two MPs to lobby for a fairer deal in funding for York’s NHS;

-         To publicly condemn the estimated £3bn unwanted and ineffective top down reorganisation of the NHS;

-         To publicly support the NHS (Amended Duties and Powers) Bill which is being debated in Parliament and aims to halt privatisation in the health service by repealing sections of the Health and Social Care Act 2012 that enforce competition in the NHS;

-         To note the Labour Party’s commitment to increase NHS spending by £2.5bn per year mid way through the next parliament.”

 

(ii)      From Cllr Richardson

                                                                                                                                                                                                                        “Council agrees with concerns of residents that the Labour Cabinet has often forgotten it is there to serve residents and has failed to listen to their wishes and to properly engage.  The Cabinet has too often been wrongly focused on grand plans outside the city and on vanity projects rather then on vital services such as salt bins, rubbish collection and potholes.

 

With the move to no overall control councillors resolve to work together to deliver the services residents want, deserve and respect.  Council notes that Cabinet brought in a charge for second green bins and has discussed the potential for future additional charges.  Council believes that council tax is the fee paid for services including rubbish collection and does not support additional charges.  In particular the Council believes that a potential charge for the first green bin would be harmful to recycling rates as well as unfair to residents.

 

Therefore Council commits not to bringing in additional charges for the collection of residents’ domestic rubbish for the life of the present Council, and endeavours to maintain this commitment during the next Council.”

 

(iii)     From Cllr Aspden

 

“Council Notes:

·       The judgement of the Government Traffic Adjudicator, Stephen Knapp, that City of York Council had “no power” to issue PCNs (Penalty Charge Notices) under its Lendal Bridge trial.

·       The decision of the Labour Cabinet to only repay PCN fines to those who apply for a refund and to close applications on the 31st December.

Council Believes:

 

That the Labour Cabinet must repay all the Lendal Bridge fines.

 

Council Resolves: To ask Cabinet to extend the 31st December deadline and to instruct officers to put in place a system for automatically repaying all Lendal Bridge fines.”

 

(iv)    From Cllr D’Agorne

“Council notes with concern the growing number of local pubs that are closing and being threatened with conversion to supermarkets, in some cases without the opportunity for the local community to have a say in the process.

Council further notes the support of local MP’s High Bayley and Julian Sturdy and supports the intent of Early Day Motion 208,

"That this House believes that permitted development rights are leaving pubs in England vulnerable to demolition or conversion to a range of retail uses without planning permission; further believes, in light of evidence from the Campaign for Real Ale, that two pubs a week are converted to supermarkets, and that these planning loopholes are contributing to the loss of valued community amenities; is concerned that local people are being denied a say in the future of their neighbourhoods; and so urges the Government to bring forward amendments to the General Permitted Development Order 1995 so that any demolition or change of use involving the loss of a pub would require planning permission."

In the short term, in order to provide local accountability, Council calls on Cabinet to follow the example of other councils by swiftly introducing an Article 4 exemption to GPDO 1995 so as to require application for planning permission for such change of use within the boundary of the City of York, starting with the Punch Bowl in the Groves as an urgent priority.

In addition Council supports the provision of advice to local groups on how to register their local pub as a 'community asset', identifying key social assets in local communities that need to be protected.”

(v)      From Cllr Simpson-Laing

 

“Council notes with concern that in the consultation document for the refranchising of Northern Rail and Trans Pennine Express there is a requirement for bidders to outline how they will remove the safety critical role of the guard from their services.  

 

Council’s response to the consultation for the refranchising argued that service reductions, staff reductions and ticket office closures are based on a false construct that regional rail is unaffordable, when in fact the problem is systemic under-investment.  

 

Council is extremely concerned about the potential impact such a retrograde move would have on travellers to and from York and across the region in general. Passenger Focus research demonstrates that passengers perception of safety and security is greatly enhanced by the presence of conductors on trains. 

 

Conductors provide an invaluable service to passengers providing: 

-    A vital customer service role including, travel information and assisting passengers with mobility issues to board and alight trains comfortably and safely at the many stations in the region that are not staffed.

-     Dealing with issues of health emergencies, anti-social behaviour and reacting to safety and operational incidents.

Council is deeply concerned that the alcohol ban on a number of Saturday services, to and from York, will be unworkable without guards and the effect this will have on York’s Visitor economy.  

 

It is the view of Council that for some the removal of guards will make train travel to and from York less attractive. 

 

Council therefore requests the Chief Executive to write to:

- York, North Yorkshire and East Riding and theLeeds City Region Local Enterprise Partnerships and to the City’s two MPs to oppose the proposal to remove on-board conductors and request that they lobby for their retention

- contact the Department for Transport and relevant Government Minister to ensure on-board conductors are retained within the service specification.”

Minutes:

A     Motions submitted for consideration directly by Council, in accordance with Standing Order 12.1(b)

 

(i)        Impact of Savings and Underfunding on the NHS (proposed by Cllr Fraser, seconded by Cllr Funnell)

 

“Council welcomes the Government’s policy on integrated health and social care and local efforts to make this a reality for people in York, who should be central to NHS provision.

 

Council notes, however, the damaging impact of the £3bn Tory-Lib Dem Government’s top down reorganisation of the NHS, which is forcing local health economies to waste millions of pounds on pointless procurement exercises as they compete with the private sector for patient contracts.

 

This is all against a backdrop of severe financial pressure and significant historical underfunding of York’s healthcare system and mental health services in particular.

 

The cumulative effects on York patients include:

-         Restricted access to certain treatments and procedures due to the Government’s insistence that the Vale of York Clinical Commissioning Group (VoYCCG) take on the historic debt of the former Primary Care Trust (PCT);

-         The excessive waiting times for access to talking therapies for those experiencing mental ill health; and

-         The imposition of funding cuts to York Hospital including reduced payment to the hospital for in-patient readmissions within 30 days and the imposition of an arbitrary threshold for A&E patient numbers above which the hospital only receives a percentage of the full tariff for emergency admissions.

 

Council resolves:

-         To request the Chair of the Health Overview and Scrutiny Committee to make arrangements for Health Overview and Scrutiny Committee to consider conducting a review on the impact on local health services based on so called ‘efficiency’ savings and chronic underfunding of the NHS in  York, to enable residents to understand what future services  will look like over the period 2015-2020;

-         To call on the city’s two MPs to lobby for a fairer deal in funding for York’s NHS;

-         To publicly condemn the estimated £3bn unwanted and ineffective top down reorganisation of the NHS;

-         To publicly support the NHS (Amended Duties and Powers) Bill which is being debated in Parliament and aims to halt privatisation in the health service by repealing sections of the Health and Social Care Act 2012 that enforce competition in the NHS;

-         To note the Labour Party’s commitment to increase NHS spending by £2.5bn per year mid way through the next parliament.”

 

On being put to the vote, the motion was declared CARRIED and it was

 

Resolved:  That the above motion be approved. 1.

 

(ii)      Additional Charges for the Collection of Residents’ Domestic Rubbish (proposed by Cllr Richardson, seconded by Cllr Steward)

 

“Council agrees with concerns of residents that the Labour Cabinet has often forgotten it is there to serve residents and has failed to listen to their wishes and to properly engage.  The Cabinet has too often been wrongly focused on grand plans outside the city and on vanity projects rather then on vital services such as salt bins, rubbish collection and potholes.

 

With the move to no overall control councillors resolve to work together to deliver the services residents want, deserve and respect.  Council notes that Cabinet brought in a charge for second green bins and has discussed the potential for future additional charges.  Council believes that council tax is the fee paid for services including rubbish collection and does not support additional charges.  In particular the Council believes that a potential charge for the first green bin would be harmful to recycling rates as well as unfair to residents.

 

Therefore Council commits not to bringing in additional charges for the collection of residents’ domestic rubbish for the life of the present Council, and endeavours to maintain this commitment during the next Council.”

 

An amendment was proposed by Councillor Merrett as follows:

 

The deletion of the first two paragraphs and the addition of:

 

“The Council recognises the challenging financial climate for local government and the importance that places on all political parties to work together to help protect public services. 

 

Against this background, it is important that the residents of York are fully consulted on all options for core services like waste collection. Whilst there should be consultation on all options, the Council recognises that charging for domestic waste collection will be unwelcome to York residents.”

 

On being put to the vote the amendment was declared LOST.

 

On being put to the vote, the original motion, was CARRIED and it was

 

Resolved:  That the original motion be approved. 2.

 

 

(iii)     Extension of Deadline – Lendal Bridge Fines (proposed by Cllr Aspden, seconded by Cllr Warters)

 

“Council Notes:

·       The judgement of the Government Traffic Adjudicator, Stephen Knapp, that City of York Council had “no power” to issue PCNs (Penalty Charge Notices) under its Lendal Bridge trial.

·       The decision of the Labour Cabinet to only repay PCN fines to those who apply for a refund and to close applications on the 31st December.

Council Believes:

 

That the Labour Cabinet must repay all the Lendal Bridge fines.

 

Council Resolves: To ask Cabinet to extend the 31st December deadline and to instruct officers to put in place a system for automatically repaying all Lendal Bridge fines.”

 

On being put to the vote, the motion was declared CARRIED and it was

 

Resolved:  That the above motion be approved. 3.

 

(iv)    Local Pubs – Article 4 Direction (proposed by Cllr D’Agorne, seconded by Cllr Aspden)

 

“Council notes with concern the growing number of local pubs that are closing and being threatened with conversion to supermarkets, in some cases without the opportunity for the local community to have a say in the process.

 

Council further notes the support of local MP’s High Bayley and Julian Sturdy and supports the intent of Early Day Motion 208,

"That this House believes that permitted development rights are leaving pubs in England vulnerable to demolition or conversion to a range of retail uses without planning permission; further believes, in light of evidence from the Campaign for Real Ale, that two pubs a week are converted to supermarkets, and that these planning loopholes are contributing to the loss of valued community amenities; is concerned that local people are being denied a say in the future of their neighbourhoods; and so urges the Government to bring forward amendments to the General Permitted Development Order 1995 so that any demolition or change of use involving the loss of a pub would require planning permission.

 

In the short term, in order to provide local accountability, Council calls on Cabinet to follow the example of other councils by swiftly introducing an Article 4 exemption to GPDO 1995 so as to require application for planning permission for such change of use within the boundary of the City of York, starting with the Punch Bowl in the Groves as an urgent priority.

 

In addition Council supports the provision of advice to local groups on how to register their local pub as a 'community asset', identifying key social assets in local communities that need to be protected.”

 

On being put to the vote, the motion was declared CARRIED and it was

 

Resolved:  That the above motion be approved. 4.

 

At this point in the meeting, the guillotine fell and the following business was deemed moved and seconded. Where a proposer and seconder were before Council, at the time of the guillotine falling, details are listed below:

 

(v)      Removal of on-board Conducters – Northern Rail/Transpennine Express (proposed by Cllr Simpson-Laing)

 

“Council notes with concern that in the consultation document for the refranchising of Northern Rail and Trans Pennine Express there is a requirement for bidders to outline how they will remove the safety critical role of the guard from their services.  

 

Council’s response to the consultation for the refranchising argued that service reductions, staff reductions and ticket office closures are based on a false construct that regional rail is unaffordable, when in fact the problem is systemic under-investment.  

 

Council is extremely concerned about the potential impact such a retrograde move would have on travellers to and from York and across the region in general. Passenger Focus research demonstrates that passengers perception of safety and security is greatly enhanced by the presence of conductors on trains. 

 

Conductors provide an invaluable service to passengers providing: 

-    A vital customer service role including, travel information and assisting passengers with mobility issues to board and alight trains comfortably and safely at the many stations in the region that are not staffed.

-     Dealing with issues of health emergencies, anti-social behaviour and reacting to safety and operational incidents.

Council is deeply concerned that the alcohol ban on a number of Saturday services, to and from York, will be unworkable without guards and the effect this will have on York’s Visitor economy.  

 

It is the view of Council that for some the removal of guards will make train travel to and from York less attractive. 

 

Council therefore requests the Chief Executive to write to:

- York, North Yorkshire and East Riding and the Leeds City Region Local Enterprise Partnerships and to the City’s two MPs to oppose the proposal to remove on-board conductors and request that they lobby for their retention

- contact the Department for Transport and relevant Government Minister to ensure on-board conductors are retained within the service specification.”

 

On being put to the vote, the motion was declared CARRIED and it was

 

Resolved:  That the above motion be approved. 5.

(vi)       

 

Feedback
Back to the top of the page