Brighton & Hove City Council




4.30pm24 October 2019


Hove Town Hall, Council Chamber





Present:   Councillors Phillips (Chair), Robins (Deputy Chair), Simson, Allcock, Bagaeen, Barnett, Bell, Brennan, Brown, Childs, Clare, Davis, Deane, Druitt, Ebel, Evans, Fishleigh, Fowler, Gibson, Grimshaw, Hamilton, Heley, Hill, Hills, Hugh-Jones, Janio, Knight, Lewry, Lloyd, Mac Cafferty, Mears, McNair, Miller, Moonan, Nemeth, Nield, O'Quinn, Osborne, Peltzer Dunn, Pissaridou, Platts, Powell, Rainey, Shanks, C Theobald, West, Wilkinson and Williams.








32             Declarations of Interest


32.1         Councillor Druitt declared a personal and prejudicial interest in Item 45 (3), a Notice of Motion concerning School Transport as he was the General Manager of Brighton & Hove Community Transport which provided services for school transport.  As such he would withdraw from the chamber and take no part in the debate or voting on the matter.


32.2         Councillor Simson declared a personal but no prejudicial interest in Items 38 (2) Petition and 45 (6) Notice of Motion concerning safe to school walking as her daughter worked at Hill Park School.


32.3         Councillor Phillips declared a personal but no prejudicial interest in Item 45 (3) Notice of Motion concerning School Transport as her partner was the General Manager of Brighton & Hove Community Transport.  She had applied for and been granted dispensation by the Monitoring Officer to remain and take part in the debate but would refrain from voting on the matter.


32.4         No other declarations of interests in matters appearing on the agenda were made.




33             Minutes


33.1         The minutes of the Special meeting held on the 25th July 2019 were approved and signed by the Mayor as a correct record of the proceedings;


33.2         The minutes of the last ordinary meeting held on the 25th July 2019 were approved and signed by the Mayor as a correct record of the proceedings;


33.3         Councillor Mac Cafferty referred to the minutes of the Extraordinary meeting held on the 3rd October and noted that the Conservative Group Members were listed as being present, but they had not remained for the debate and therefore questioned whether they should be listed as being present.


33.4         The Monitoring Officer stated that the Members in question had signed the attendance register and as such were recorded as having been present, albeit that they did not remain for the discussion of the item in question.  There was no requirement for a councillor to remain for the duration of a meeting but having signed the register their attendance had to be taken on face value.


33.5         The Mayor noted the information and asked that the minutes be agreed, which the council approved and she therefore signed them as a correct record of the proceedings.




34             Mayor's Communications.


34.1         The Mayor stated that she wished to offer the Full Council’s support and to extend its sympathy and condolences to residents from Pankhurst Avenue, some of whom lost their homes and everything in them and others who have been unable to return home since Friday 20 September when a terrible fire started and took hold in their block of flats.  The emotional trauma of seeing that fire and losing your home is utterly incomprehensible to most of us and I urge residents to contact Councillor Williams as the Chair of the Housing Committee or the Hanover & Elm Grove Ward councillors if they needed any support.


34.2         It was her privilege on behalf of the council to welcome those people who were directly involved in dealing with that terrible fire and its immediate aftermath. Their actions were to be rightly recognised and our thanks offered for their unequivocal support to the residents and those affected by the fire. So many people helped in so many different ways. The firefighters who responded so quickly and tackled the fire on that windy night, including crews from across the Service attended including local firefighters from Preston Circus, Roedean and Hove. Officers involved in the incident included Andrew Gausden, Nigel Cusack, Dan Channon, Matt Lloyd and Mark Andrews. The people who opened up the rest centre late that evening and helped people get warm.


The members of the community who started donating food and drink, clothes and furniture and who set up a fundraising page which has donations now of over £10,000 – which as Landlords of the flats the Guinness Partnership has said they will match fund. The support provided by specialists to those people experiencing shock and trauma. The team at the Control Centre took multiple 999 calls and worked hard to ensure the right resources were sent to the scene. West Sussex Fire and Rescue Service also assisted, with crews from Worthing and Burgess Hill and Station Commander Richard Bradley. They were supported by the Service’s engineering team and Sasha Phillips from the communications team.


I would also to thank the other blue light services who provided support on the night. There are simply too many endeavours to name each and every one. I would therefore like to ask the Chief Executive to call on the following to come forward so that I can present them with a certificate as a mark of the city’s and the council’s gratitude for their endeavours.  I will also ensure that certificates are given out to those who could not attend and that their names are recorded in the minutes.


34.3         The Mayor then stated that she would like to congratulate Ryan Pook, a Brighton & Hove lifeguard who, in early summer, swam through rough waves and high winds to help rescue a 13-year-old, despite the treacherous conditions at Black Rock he, was able to support and secure the boy in a rescue tube, reassure him and hold him clear of breaking waves.


The seafront team are an essential part of our council services and much valued for the job they do keeping people safe. Could I ask Ryan along with Councillor Robins to come forward to accept a certificate of recognition for his service.


34.4         The Mayor noted that the Royal Pavilion & Museums had won a prestigious Georgian Group award for the best restoration of a Georgian Interior as part of the 2019 Georgian Group Architectural Awards in recognition of the quality of the restoration work undertaken on the Saloon in the Royal Pavilion. Could I ask Janita Bagshawe, David Beevers and Tim Thearle along with Councillor Robins to come forward to accept the certificate.


34.5         The Mayor also noted that the team behind Brighton & Hove’s Volks Railway, the oldest working electric railway has won a Public & Community Award from the Sussex Heritage Award In recognition of how the creation of a new visitor centre and station by the Aquarium has vastly improved the railway for residents and visitors attracting more that 400 people an hour at peak times.  She then asked Barry Fuller along with Councillor Robins to come forward to accept the award.


34.6         The Mayor then outlined a few of her forthcoming engagements:


(a)  A Civic Service would take place at St Nicholas Church in Brighton on the 1 December, all Councillors will have received invitations to attend. 


(b)  A lecture relating to the newly returned artefact from the Royal Collection to the Royal Pavilion, on loan for a limited time only, takes place on the 5 December in aid of the Mayor’s charities. Support from Councillors is appreciated with tickets priced £20, for enquiries please contact the Civic Office.


(c)  The Mayor’s Christmas Reception Friday the 13 December (Lucia) at Brighton Town Hall, you are in for a real treat with the Actually Gay Men’s Choir performing. Everyone is welcome to attend.




35             To receive petitions and e-petitions.


35.1         The Mayor invited the submission of petitions from councillors and members of the public.  She reminded the Council that petitions would be referred to the appropriate decision-making body without debate and the person presenting the petition would be invited to attend the meeting to which the petition was referred.


35.2         Councillor Childs presented a petition on behalf of Mr Mason and signed by 416 residents calling for the pedestrianisation of St James’ Street.


35.3         The Mayor noted thanked Councillor Childs and noted that there were no other petitions to be presented.




36             Written questions from members of the public.


36.1         The Mayor reported that 5 written questions had been received from members of the public and invited Mr. Nigel Furness to come forward and address the council.


36.2         Mr. Furness asked the following question; Councillor Platts, our current Mayor, Councillor Alex Phillips, also holds office as a Member of the European Parliament and is now proposing to stand as a Prospective Parliamentary Candidate for Brighton Kemp Town. As these latter two categories involve publicly participating in politics, is this a conflict of interest?


36.3         Councillor Platts replied; Thank you, Mr. Furness, for your question.  Your question relates to the Mayoralty rather than the policies or actions of the Administration. As such, I do not feel it would be appropriate for me to comment. I would, however, like, with your permission Madam Mayor, to ask the Monitoring Officer if he would be able to explain the legal and constitutional position.


36.4         The Monitoring Officer stated that the Local Government Act 1972 did not prohibit the Mayor from standing as an MP; although they would need to be mindful of the office in regard to their canvassing.  The only restriction was that it was not possible to hold both the office of an MEP and MP.  Should there be a General Election and the Mayor was elected, she would have to stand-down as an MEP.


36.5         Mr. Furness asked the following supplementary question; would Councillor Platts take on board the legal position and ask the Mayor to relinquish the chains of office as they would be unable to campaign otherwise.


36.6         The Mayor noted the question and asked the Monitoring Officer to respond.


36.7         The Monitoring Officer confirmed that the only restriction was that the office of MEP and MP could not be held at the same time.  The role of the Mayor was not affected by a decision to stand for election to Parliament.


36.8         The Mayor thanked Mr. Furness for his questions and invited Mr. Christopher Hawtree to come forward and address the council.


36.9         Mr. Hawtree asked the following question; Would Councillor Robins please tell us when the use of the £121,000 per year (which was brought back to Libraries at February’s Budget) will be discussed at a Committee, as promised by Councillor Knight in her reply to my supplementary question several months ago?


36.10      Councillor Robins replied; £63,000 of the £121,000 put back into the Libraries’ budget to help safeguard the future of library services has been permanently added to the staffing budget, enabling 60 extra hours a week for frontline staffing across the library service.  The remaining £58,000 is being used this year to cover temporary staffing pressures, and to support the setting up of the new Business and IP service, and the development of a new four-year Libraries Service plan.  The longer-term use of the remaining £58,000 will be discussed as part of the ongoing budget proposals, due to come to Policy & Resources Committee on 5th December.


36.11      Mr. Hawtree asked the following supplementary question; Could Councillor Robins confirm what the position is regarding the Library Plan and when it was likely to come to committee?


36.12      Councillor Robins replied; The Library Service Plan had been drawn up and was due to be outlined at a workshop on the 19th November which was open to all councillors and he hoped that many would attend to provide feedback.


36.13      The Mayor thanked Mr. Hawtree for his questions and invited Mr. Ollie Sykes to come forward and address the council.


36.14      Mr. Sykes asked the following question; February Budget Council allocated £190k in recurrent funding to the rebuilding of the council’s Sustainability Team to help the council better address climate and wildlife emergencies as these concern our city, as well as other matters such as fuel poverty in our city. Can the Chair of ETS please provide an update on the implementation of that agreed allocation?


36.15      Councillor Pissaridou replied; Budget Council on 28 February agreed £190k in new funding to the council’s Sustainability Team to provide staff and other resources required to expand activity in climate change mitigation and biodiversity protection and enhancement, following Council’s unanimous declaration of climate and biodiversity emergencies in December 2018. This work may include development of citywide initiatives such as food waste collection, district heat installations, renewable energy development, biodiversity enhancement in the urban and rural estate and green infrastructure work.


In 19/20 a smaller amount of the additional will be spent on staffing, and the majority is allocated to sustainability initiatives. Current plans include a minimum £75k allocation to the emerging Carbon Neutral 2030 programme which will help to develop our city response to the Climate Emergency, including supporting the development and delivery of a Citizens Assembly on climate change. In addition, approximately £25k of the funding is being used to develop the Circular Economy route map, which will present opportunities to understand how better use of materials, resources and space can help to significantly reduce our carbon footprint. The route map will focus on two sectors initially: the built environment and construction, and the visitor economy, and it is anticipated that the route map could be approved in spring 2020. 


From 20/21 most of the funding will allocated to new sustainability posts and a restructure of the Sustainability team will take place in the coming months. Roles are likely to include an additional Sustainability project manager and a Biodiversity officer. Work is underway to determine the exact structure and role descriptions required in line with HR policies and procedures, as part of a wider service redesign of teams within City Development & Regeneration. In addition, discussions are underway with other council teams to part fund roles around Energy and green infrastructure – it is envisaged that these roles could be recruited in early 2020.


Any underspend of this £190k allocation in 2019/20, will be spent on alternative sustainability initiatives. This could include revenue elements relating to capital projects funded through the £500k Sustainability and Carbon Reduction Investment Fund (SCRIF).


36.16      Mr. Sykes asked the following supplementary question; whilst we are a Silver Food Standard City, I wondered if the Chair of ETS would considers using some of the funding referred to, to enable the city to achieve the Gold Standard?


36.17      Councillor Pissaridou replied; In 2021 the intention is to allocate the funding to new sustainability posts, but I am more than happy to take on board the request and look at what can be done to enable the council to work towards the Gold Standard.


36.18      The Mayor thanked Mr. Sykes for his questions and invited Mr. Daniel Harris to come forward and address the council.


36.19      Mr. Harris asked the following question; The Valley Social Club has been a staple of the Whitehawk community for generations, starting as a shack and with the help of the local community who helped to fundraise we have the large community building which is standing today. In 2015 over 10 trustees resigned, leaving two and Conservative Councillor Mary Mears left. The building has been inaccessible to the local community. I support the council buying this asset. Can the council confirm the completion date and price paid for the Valley Social Club?


36.20      Councillor Platts replied; The council’s Policy & Resources Committee authorised the purchase of the Valley Social Centre at their October meeting in order to secure the site for community facilities and social housing that would benefit the wider Whitehawk community.  Negotiations are currently underway with Trustees, but the sale and final price are yet to be agreed.  The council is not at liberty to say anymore at this stage.


36.21      Mr. Harris asked the following supplementary question; Would the council halt its Neighbourhood Plan until there have been consultations with the community about the need for a community facility in the area.?


36.22      Councillor Platts replied; There is provision for the community to be consulted in due course, however the objective at present is to secure the site so that its future can then be determined for the benefit of the community.


36.23      The Mayor thanked Mr. Harris for his questions and invited Ms. Irina Blosse to come forward and address the council.


36.24      Ms. Blosse asked the following question; EMF safety limit guidelines were set by The International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection (ICNIRP) in 1998. However, because many health effects from radiation below the guidelines’ levels were confirmed by scientists and doctors, many countries including France, Cyprus and Russia chose to significantly reduce these limits, especially in places where children were present: schools, playgrounds etc. Children and pregnant women are the most vulnerable. Shouldn't we be taking extreme care when proposing to increase the radiation levels even further with 5G and adopt a Precautionary Principle instead? 


36.25      Councillor Moonan replied; Nationally, Public Health England provides the expert advice on public health matters associated with radiofrequency electromagnetic fields, or radio waves, used in telecommunications. The implementation and regulation of 5G technology is a national responsibility and local authorities do not have a direct role other than considering the installation of new transmitters within the planning process.


Public Health England has provided the following information on the safety of 5G technology. The UK uses international health-related guideline levels that are based on the International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection (ICNIRP). Current technical standards that draw on the ICNIRP guidelines will apply to the 5G products that are developed. UK network operators are already committed to complying with the ICNIRP guidelines.


The highest frequencies being discussed for future use by 5G are around 10 times higher than those used by current network technologies, up to a few tens of gigahertz (GHz).


Their use is not new, and they have been used for point-to-point microwave links and some other types of transmitters that have been present in the environment for many years. ICNIRP guidelines apply well beyond the maximum frequencies proposed for 5G.


PHE advise that it is possible that there may be a small increase in overall exposure to radio waves when 5G is added to an existing network or in a new area. However, the overall exposure is expected to remain low relative to guidelines and, as such, there should be no consequences for public health. PHE has stated it is committed to monitoring the evidence applicable to this and other radio technologies, and to revising its advice, should that be necessary.


36.26      Ms. Blosse asked the following supplementary question; The ICNIRP guidelines were set up as a result of research into the heating effects from EMF on an adult brain. It does not take into consideration however that a child's brain, bones and biology are different to that of an adult. The ICNIRP have a disclaimer that they are not responsible for any third-party damage and their guidelines are only for information.

Will Brighton and Hove Council be responsible then for any damage to our children from exposure to EMF from 5G, if they allow this technology to be rolled-out in Brighton and Hove?

36.27      Councillor Moonan replied; I do understand your concerns and anxiety and to reiterate our powers as a local authority are limited and we do not have the scientific expertise and have to rely on Public Health England to give advice.  We are following that advice and if it changes out response would change as a result.


36.28      The Mayor thanked Ms. Blosse for her questions and noted that concluded the item.







37             Deputations from members of the public.


37.1         The Mayor reported that three deputations had been received from members of the public and noted that there was a Notice of Motion listed at Item 45 (3), Home to School Transport – Policy Panel on the agenda which related to the first deputation.  She was also aware of an amendment to the notice of motion from the Green Group and would therefore take the motion and the amendment directly after the deputation had been made and responded to. 


37.2         The Mayor also noted that some of the people supporting the first deputation had been delayed and therefore invited Mr. Rolfe as the spokesperson for the second deputation to come forward and address the council.




37.3         Mr. Rolfe thanked the Mayor and stated that, On the 19th April 2018 The Kingscliffe Society made a deputation to B&HCC about Health & Safety concerns over the Pride PVP annual event. We were directed to the Tourism Development & Culture Committee and thence to Safer Communities who were to produce a Review in the form of a questionnaire as a public condition. They issued their questionnaire on the day before they surveyed/walked the St James's PVP Area with us (TKS) together with the St James's LAT group. Therefore, none of our issues pointed out during the survey could be included in the B&HCC questionnaire. The results from the questionnaire formed more a Popularity Poll than the Review as promised (which was to cover all residents & business concerns) but were presented as a factual outcome dealing full with all the issues raised.


We have, therefore, continued to pursue our H&S concerns and requirements at Council meetings and by emails, but all to no avail.


In the Agreement the B&HCC made with the Pride organisation in 2014 various clauses were included to improve the management of this event, specifically;

3.15   with the explicit intentions of creating a safer and welcoming event.

3.16   PVP format aimed at creating an event that achieves a better outcome/or attendees, businesses and local residents (our underlines)

3.19    Evaluation of the PVP by the Safety Advisory Group (including the councils emergency services) with regard to the event's objectives of delivering a safer and high-quality event was largely very positive. The evaluation process with local businesses and communities is ongoing at the time of report writing and any further information will be provided at meetings.


We dispute whether these objectives have ever been fully achieved.

In regard to 3.15. As the PVP does not commence until 6pm, many attendees arrive for the event already intoxicated or drug affected from the 'Party in the Park' where they have been indulging all afternoon.

In regard to 3.16. As the PVP has an overwhelming emphasis on over-loud music (up to 120 DPC inside homes) and the on-street alcohol consumption promoted by the demands of St James's abundant licensed premises. The wishes of residents & unlicensed traders are therefore given very low priority.

In regard to 3.19 During the last 2 years in St James St. Pride has estimated an attendance@ between 35,000 & 42,000 revellers in its narrow adjacent side streets, filled to overflowing with somewhat intoxicated revellers contained behind un-climbable barriers. With no public address system, emergency lighting, and escape signage and no pre-issued escape plan for residents or revellers to follow. The 2-meter-high non-climb barricades are erected from midday on the Friday until late night on the Sunday and for the last 2 years of PVP event and no pre or post PVP meetings have been organized so no relevant information is exchanged and acted upon.

It is recognised that the PVP is raising funds, one aspect of which is a social fund to reduce the effect it has on the wider community, but it is raised by imposing unreasonable distress and conditions on many local residents and non-licensed traders who are bearing the brunt of the true cost.

Any emergency is a tragedy waiting to happen.

With respect, we would ask the Council to withdraw the Pride PVP agreement and employ a Company that will comply with the Council's Requirements & those of Health and Safety.


37.4         Councillor Robins stated that he had a full response for the deputation and suggested that it be recorded in the minutes and sent to Mr. Scoble, but in the meantime wished to thank Mr. Rolfe for presenting the deputation.


Note: the full response is detailed below:

A review of the Pride Village Party was carried out in 2018 following a previous deputation from the Kingscliffe Society. Part of that review was a public consultation about the event continuing in the location of St James’ St. Nearly 3000 responses were received with support largely in favour of the event continuing to be held in the St James’ St area, many of those responses were from local residents and businesses and again there was a majority of support from those responding that it should remain where it is. The consultation was only part of that review, evidence was included in the committee report about complaints received about the event especially about noise and the report showed that there were very few, and also the event site plan which showed points of egress and ingress and the routes for emergency vehicle access.


The points that have been raised by the Kingscliffe Society about the Health and Safety arrangements were discussed at two independent safety advisory groups in July 2019 and it was felt by the group, made up of senior officers from the Council and emergency services that the risk assessments carried out by Pride Community Interest Company mitigated the risks and were compliant with current Health and Safety guidelines.


Public address systems can be taken over and used to make announcements.  An exercise took place looking at evacuation following guidance around Safety in Public Places.  82,000 people can be evacuated from the area in under 10 minutes should the need arise.  Every Road has security and stewards, in the event of an emergency the music systems / and security will be on hand to advise people to stay indoors or not depending on the situation.


During the run up to the event and after the event there are regular meetings to ensure that all mitigation to manage risks are in place and that any lessons learnt from the previous year are incorporated into the planning process for the following year. Pride CIC works with the statutory agencies throughout this to ensure that they put in place recommendations from the statutory agencies such as the police, fire service and the health and safety officers at the council. A detailed event management plan is produced and again this will be amended in light of recommendations from the safety advisory group and others.


During the event Pride are based in Dorset Gardens throughout the weekend, with regular Event liaison team meetings which are fed back to a multiagency Silver command and there is ongoing communication for the duration of the live event, over the whole weekend.


Pride hold regular meetings with residents in the run up to the event and officers are on site to check noise levels during the event and to ensure the safety of both residents and party goers.


We are satisfied that there are contingencies in place for the event to continue to be run by Pride CIC for 2020.


37.5         The Mayor thanked Mr. Rolfe for attending the meeting and speaking on behalf of the deputation. She explained that the points had been noted and the deputation would be referred to the Tourism, Equalities, Communities & Culture Committee for consideration. The persons forming the deputation would be invited to attend the meeting and would be informed subsequently of any action to be taken or proposed in relation to the matter set out in the deputation.


(1)   Home to School Transport for Students with Special Educational Needs and Disabilities(SEND)


37.6         The Mayor then invited Ms. Pippa Hodge as the spokesperson for the first deputation to come forward and address the council.


37.7         Ms. Hodge thanked the Mayor and stated that, Children as young as 4 or 5 years old, rely on this Service to take them safely to/from the setting named in their Education, Health & Care Plan (EHCP) in line with Statutory Duties* (Appendix 2). Numbers are rising year on year. The previous 4-year Contractor Framework expired in August 2019.  Several years of Contractor consistency created effective links between Schools/Colleges, Parent Carers (& their CYP) and the local Brighton Contractors (Community Transport take many of the children using wheelchairs, some with profound and multiple learning disabilities).  Whilst not without glitches, the long-standing system centred around acquired SEND/Autism training & awareness, plus familiarity with pupils individually, which built trust and delivered a reliable service.  Crucially:


Each child was recognised as an individual with discreet Core Support Needs, e.g. living between 2 parents’ homes, or being a child who regularly went to Respite (their Care package), or specialist clubs, to enhance Life Skills.  This essential community cohesion was recognised as a fundamental factor in ‘Whole Child’ Wellness and Development, upholding Equalities and City CYP Key Principles


Drivers and Escorts, supported by back offices, used their common sense and route knowledge to minimise the stress for children, ensure that they arrived on time and ready to learn, and to enable working parents to meet their obligations, or get other young children to school.


When possible, Drivers and Escorts remained with their cohort of children, building up trust and assisting that difficult transition between home/school/home which many youngsters with SEND, especially those with Autism &/or Sensory Processing Difficulties, typically find overwhelming.


In March 2019, a Dynamic Purchasing System/DPS (a bid-down system) to reduce Overspend was proposed by Edge Public Solutions (employed as Advisors in January 2019). A DPS approach had been discussed at Policy, Resource & Growth Committee (11/10/18*). Meeting minutes (Conclusion 7.2) authorised a new framework, but not a DPS (since the simulated desktop exercise did not prove the anticipated savings to the Committee’s satisfaction). Nevertheless, a DPS was approved, via Urgency Powers (March 2019) without passing back through PRG or CYP Committees.  As a direct result of these changes the transport scheme is failing to safeguard our children.


We Request A Full Cross-Party Scrutiny Group So This Never Happens Again. We ask Councillors from each party to fulfil your Responsibilities and personally conduct a beginning to end scrutiny of events, in keeping with your stated civic duties as elected councillors. 


We challenge the logic & validity of the Independent Review: this was again presented as a ‘fait accompli’; ‘Officers investigating Officers’ cannot be ‘independent’ (every LA is facing Transport issues); Parent Carers do not want to speak with yet more Officers from another Authority when they struggle with their own; Officers will leave once their report is submitted, and there will be no accountability for changes or a safe framework legacy.  You are our Councillors & Moral Guardians of Civic Services. Please, put our City’s Children above local Politics. We must learn how this has gone so shockingly wrong.  No more personal cost to our children’s physical safety, mental wellbeing and education; or to families; no more ‘wait and see if there are incidents’; no more financial cost of outsourcing to ‘3rd parties’ from our City Budget. Councillors, we are beyond apologies, please act.


37.8         Councillor Allcock replied, Thank you for your passionate and heartfelt deputation Pippa.  Obviously, we have been in contact before today in person and by email, but I am glad to have your direct input at this meeting, as I am sure all elected members are.


I hope you are able to accept that there has been full recognition of the problems that some parents faced at the start of this term and I know that for some this is still ongoing. Arrangements certainly did not proceed as planned. This should not have happened, and no one wants this to happen again. I want to repeat this unreserved apology today. But I also want to reassure you and all parents and carers that we will not rest until this situation is completely resolved.


I understand we urgently need to re-build trust between the community and the local authority and therefore, as an Administration, we believe it is important that a review is carried out.  A review that will be fully independent of the Council which will be asked to investigate all areas of the home to school transport function, including the initial decision-making process to change the arrangements. Lead reviewers have already been identified and a decision on this will be made by me in consultation with the Chair of the Audit & Standards Committee and PACC.  In addition, following a suggestion from PACC, the review will be supported by a representative from Contact – a national charity working with the families of disabled children who will also get in touch with families directly. Contact is not a Local Authority service and is not staffed by council officers.  We are also considering other ways to enable greater levels of parent/carer oversight of the review.


We want a level of scrutiny and challenge to make sure that we learn all there is to learn from this and so we can use that knowledge to make improvements.  We know this will not be comfortable, but it needs to be done and done quickly so that any improvements can be implemented as soon as they are identified. The final draft of the terms of reference for the Independent Review have now been agreed which, again, incorporates valuable input from the Parent and Carer Council as well as the suggestions of the Chair of the Audit & Standards Committee. At our request these are drawn as widely as possible.  As Chair of this committee I promise you that I want every aspect looked at and when I say no stone unturned I mean it.


Representative groups, many of them here today, as well as individual families affected must and will have the opportunity to share their views and experiences with the reviewers, as part of their work. I know that you, and others are asking for an internal, cross-party Member led Policy Panel, and we are more than happy to work with Members to provide this additional layer of scrutiny. But our first priority has always been to resolve the problems our young people and their families have faced, with the scrutiny and review now running alongside. Having an independent outsider working on this as well will, we hope, encourage greater openness and transparency.


Of course, we completely understand why other elected Members want answers to questions and a degree of oversight themselves So, as well as encouraging councillors across the spectrum to engage with, and contribute to, the Member-led panel and the Independent Review, I have agreed that there could be a that a short report to provide a progress update on the independent review and the current situation with Home to school transport brought to the next meeting of the Children Young People & Skills Committee in November. Members will have an opportunity there to ask questions about the review. 


Once the Independent Review is completed as planned, it is anticipated that a further, final report will be brought to the January meeting of the CYPS committee. The committee system in Brighton & Hove is designed to give opportunities for councillors to both set policy at committees and also to scrutinise the work of the council. I expect and hope that councillors will want to ask questions about any recommendations coming from the review and also to be assured that actions are in place to address these recommendations. Future meetings of the CYPS committee and reports from the policy panel will provide robust opportunities to scrutinise progress.


By its definition, an Independent Review ensures that all areas of the council’s work can be explored as part of the review without any party-political influence getting in the way of the changes that I’m sure families in the city would want for the future. If the CYPS committee or the Policy Panel continues to have concerns, then these can also be referred to a future meeting of Full Council. It is vital therefore that we learn from what went wrong and make changes for the future.




              (3) Home to School Transport – Policy Panel


37.9         The Mayor then invited Councillor Mears to move the Notice of Motion, Item 45 (3) on the agenda.


37.10      Councillor Mears thanked the Mayor and Ms. Hodge for bringing her deputation to the meeting.  She stated that all Members had a responsibility as corporate parents and to ensure that the home to school transport service met the needs of the children concerned. She acknowledged that all new contracts experienced teething troubles, but it was clear this contract was not fit for purpose.  Members had raised questions at the committee and expressed concern over the lack of Member oversight for the contract.  Hence the motion called for a cross-party Member Panel to review the process of issuing the contract and to feed into the Independent Review.  She also confirmed that she was happy to accept the Green Group’s amendment.


37.11      Councillor Simson formally seconded the motion and reserved her right to speak in the debate.


37.12      Councillor Clare stated that she wished to thank the parents and children for attending today’s meeting and that she believed the changes to the contract had led to an unacceptable level of distress for them.  She welcomed the proposal for an Independent Review but agreed that there was a need to begin reviewing the process as soon as possible and therefore the amendment sought to add to the notice of motion.


37.13      Councillor Hugh-Jones formally seconded the amendment.


37.14      Councillor Knight stated that no-one had wanted to be in the position that currently existed and fully supported the apology given by Councillor Allcock.  However, there was a need to move forward and take action and to understand the decision-making process so that improvements could be made.  She welcomed the cross-party panel as it would enable Members to review matters and provide transparency and accountability.  She hoped that all councillors would work together to resolve the difficulties and to regain the trust of parents and the young people.


37.15      Councillor Bell expressed his concern over how the situation had been reached and his frustration that having raised questions previously at committee these had not been addressed.  He believed it was appropriate to have a cross-party Member Panel and hoped that it could begin its review as soon as possible.


37.16      Councillor Simson noted that the value of the contract had meant it fell below the threshold for a report to have to come to committee, however she felt for such an important matter, Members should have had oversight.  She questioned whether the Independent Review would be fully independent given that the decision to award the contract was taken under delegated powers.  She fully supported the need for a cross-party Member Panel and hoped that lessons could be learnt in regard to the process of awarding the contract and a solution found to the current problems with the contract.


37.17      Councillor Mears noted the comments and stated that it was important for Members to be involved in the review process and the cross-party Member Panel would enable that.  She hoped it would then be able to feed into the Independent Review and that all parties concerned would have the opportunity to input into the review process.


37.18      The Mayor thanked Ms. Hodge for attending the meeting and speaking on behalf of the deputation. She explained that the points had been noted and the deputation would be referred to the Children, Young People & Skills Committee for consideration. The persons forming the deputation would be invited to attend the meeting and would be informed subsequently of any action to be taken or proposed in relation to the matter set out in the deputation.


37.19      The Mayor then noted that the amendment to the Notice of Motion had been accepted and therefore put the following motion as amended to the vote:


This council resolves to ask the Children, Families & Skills Committee to urgently establish a cross-party Member led Policy Panel consisting of six Members, two from each political party, and chaired by a Member of the Opposition. It would have the remit to, inter alia, review and discuss solutions to resolving the current negative impact on schools, families, children and young people and generally the implementation of the home to school transport service; and oversee any results of the external investigation proposed by the Administration.


37.20      The Mayor confirmed that the motion had been carried unanimously.


(3) Valley Gardens


37.21      The Mayor then invited Ms. Serena Burt as the spokesperson for the third deputation to come forward and address the council.  She also stated that as Item 45 (4) Notice of Motion on Valley Gardens listed on the agenda referred to the same matter, she intended to take the motion immediately after the deputation had been presented and responded to.


37.22      Ms. Burt thanked the Mayor and stated that, I’m here today to briefly talk you through an alternative plan for Valley Gardens phase 3. This has been drawn up by leading architects, engineers and design professionals from our city - on behalf of us all.


The plan is based on the best elements of the Council’s own original design options.  We don't consider it definitive and so further input is invited and welcomed. Our current version removes most of the transport disbenefits from the current council scheme, provides a much better cost benefit ratio with significantly closer alignment to Transport for the South East's stated strategy.  It would achieve a more positive outcome on almost every measure than the current official one - identified as offering ‘low value for money’ by the Local Enterprise Partnership Coast 2 Capital.


Our core proposition achieves the following:


·           The creation of city-wide routes to the centre for cyclists and pedestrians complete with better access to attractive new green spaces increasing biodiversity.

·           The creation of a dedicated two-way bus and taxi lane to link North Street to a contiguous public transport corridor at Marlborough Place and retaining the city centre’s natural transport hub complete with the three iconic “deco” bus shelters.

·           The creation of a 'mixed use' pedestrianised seafront gateway to explore the east of the city Instead of separating Kemptown from the centre with the current proposed scheme.

·           The creation of a dedicated cycle hub at Pool Valley with a crossing to the seafront, safely clear of pedestrians at the front of the Pier as well as public transport and general traffic. 

·           Moving cycle lane away from the Steine gardens perimeter makes access better for the public realm and essential for use as event space.

·           The creation of a remodelled roundabout to ensure the safest and most environmentally friendly free movement of general traffic - and removing the need to redevelop the junction at Duke's Mound.


Residents, businesses and public sector professionals across all sectors of the local economy have already offered valuable input.  We genuinely believe that something close to this plan is one that the entire city can get behind.  


We therefore respectfully ask Full Council to note our proposal and ask the ETS Committee to give full and proper consideration to this plan.


37.23      Councillor Pissaridou replied, thank you for bringing this deputation to Full Council this afternoon.  I can see that you are representing a number of businesses and organisations today on behalf of the Valley Gardens Forum.


The deputation serves to underline that there is still a considerable amount of interest in this final phase of the Valley Gardens project, and that there is agreement that investment is urgently needed to assist in regenerating this city centre area.  The benefits of doing so will also be felt in areas that are adjacent to it, such as St James’s Street and The Lanes.


Although it has been in the media, what I am pleased to be able to say personally today, is that the Local Enterprise Partnership (which is known as the LEP) completed its review and consideration of our Business Case earlier this month.  In doing so, it has also taken into account a number of representations that it has received from various sources.  The conclusion is that the LEP has finally approved the £6 million pounds worth of external funding for the project.  That is a significant milestone for the city and the council, and everyone who has been involved so far.


Once we have entered into the Funding agreement with the LEP, the next stage will be to progress the development of the preferred design that was agreed by the council’s Environment, Transport & Sustainability Committee over 8 months ago in February.  This will involve the appointment of a new project team and carrying out further engagement with local people and communities, including the Valley Gardens Forum.  Plus, the new Councillor Task & Finish Group that we have agreed to set up for Valley Gardens will have oversight of the next stages for Phase 3 and will include stakeholders in its meetings and discussions.  


As an Administration, we are committed to implementing changes that will bring the biggest overall benefits to the most people. That does mean moving away from car usage in the city centre to improve air quality and reduce congestion; it does mean creating more green space to protect the local environment; and it does mean creating more public space to enhance the landmarks that draw people to the city, including the Royal Pavilion and the seafront. 


This final phase of the Valley Gardens project will form a vital part of our move to become a carbon-neutral city by 2030 through investment in a safe, accessible, sustainable and high-quality transport network that supports walking, cycling, and public transport.  It will also give public space back to the local community, allowing the city’s residents and visitors the opportunity to enjoy this area of our city once more.


What I am sure you are aware of, and must emphasise again today, is that the decision made in February was arrived at following considerable debate and discussion by councillors at many council meetings.  That debate, and discussion has been informed by thorough public consultation, and heavy scrutiny and challenge.  Therefore, the design that has been agreed by the council will be the starting point for the next stage of design, and the final design will need to take into account the budget, time and resources that we have available to complete it. 


Undoubtedly, things will change as the design is worked on, but we must remain true to the overall vision for the area and the core objectives that the council has agreed.  If we are serious about addressing climate change, improving air quality and future-proofing the city for the years to come, then we must be bold in our vision and we must act now.


I have noted that the proposed option that you have put forward in the deputation includes a considerable number of changes to the agreed design, including: -

·      a roundabout at the Palace Pier;

·      two extra traffic signal junctions near the Royal Pavilion;

·      significant changes to Pool Valley;

·      a new crossing on the A259.    


Whilst I acknowledge your claims within the deputation, the implications of some of these changes do not appear to have been technically assessed or fully quantified, but we will consider whether any of the ideas put forward can help further support the improvements within the agreed design, while maintaining value for money.  


I do recognise that this deputation will be discussed and considered further at the Environment, Transport & Sustainability Committee next month, but thank you again for presenting it today.  I hope that my response has helped to explain the point that we have now reached, and how we intend to move forward with this exciting project.




              (4) Valley Gardens


37.24      The Mayor then invited Councillor Miller to move the Notice of Motion on behalf of the Conservative Group.


37.25      Councillor Miller stated that the need for the redevelopment of Valley Gardens was recognised however, the current scheme was flawed, and he believed would be a waste of public money.  The funding from the LEP was welcome but he felt that further consultation was needed to resolve the traffic issue as well as a full environmental impact assessment (EIA).  There had been a lack of consultation with the residents affected and he believed the process should be put on hold until other options could be considered.


37.26      Councillor Nemeth formally seconded the motion and stated that plans had been drawn up behind closed doors and there was a need for public involvement. The Valley Gardens Forum had raised a number of valid points and they knew what they were talking about, but their concerns had not been taken into consideration.  He supported the need to pause the process and take the opportunity to improve the eco credentials of the project.


37.27      Councillor Bell stated that the scheme had been railroaded through with concerns raised by businesses, communities and residents ignored and a lack of consultation.  There was a need for a joined-up scheme that was supported collectively by all affected and hoped this could be achieved.


37.28      Councillor Fishleigh stated that there was a need for an environmental impact assessment and a new transport infrastructure to take account of the Town & Country Planning regulations.  She believed there was a need to look beyond party politics, in order to be able to agree a viable scheme that would benefit the city.  She also asked for a recorded vote on the motion and hoped this request would be supported.


37.29      The Mayor noted that it was Councillor Fishleigh’s maiden speech and congratulated her on behalf of the council.


37.30      Councillor West stated that it had taken time, but the project’s completion was in sight and would provide better facilities for everyone in the city.  There would be an opportunity to comment on the final design stage and the Member Stakeholder Working Group was due to reconvene which would enable a broader conversation on the proposals.  He reminded the council of the objective for the city to be carbon neutral by 2020 and hoped that councillors would support the scheme going forward.


37.31      Councillor Pissaridou stated that she understood the concerns raised in relation to the EIA but noted that the new scheme had been assessed and there was no requirement for a full EIA. However, the situation would continue to be reviewed during the development of the Scheme and design process.  There would be further consultation and the configuration of traffic signals and movement of traffic taken into account as part of any engagement during Phase 3.


37.32      Councillor Peltzer Dunn noted the comments and queried if the actions being referred to in the motion were being taken into consideration as part of the process, why then the Notice of Motion could not be supported.


37.33      Councillor Robins stated that he believed the matter had been through various stages at committee and noted that a previous Opposition Spokesperson had championed the Scheme and therefore questioned the opposition to it.


37.34      Councillor Miller stated that the current Scheme was not right for Valley Gardens and cost benefit ratio was questionable.  There was a clear need for further consultation and to take on board the views of the local community, local businesses and the residents deserved more.  He hoped that the motion would be supported.


37.35      The Mayor thanked Ms. Burt for attending the meeting and speaking on behalf of the deputation. She explained that the points had been noted and the deputation would be referred to the Environment, Transport & Sustainability Committee for consideration. The persons forming the deputation would be invited to attend the meeting and would be informed subsequently of any action to be taken or proposed in relation to the matter set out in the deputation.


37.36      The Mayor noted that Councillor Fishleigh had requested a recorded vote and sought the support of the Council to the request which was confirmed.  She therefore asked for a recorded vote to be undertaken on the following motion:


              This council requests the Environment, Transport & Sustainability Committee to:

(1)   Ensure that Valley Gardens Phase 3 is subject to a full environmental impact assessment; and

(2)   That the Duke’s Mound junction proposal will be subject to a full public consultation in the context that it not only impacts Valley Gardens Phase 3 but also impacts on the A259 coastal road and the Waterfront/Blackrock development.


37.37      The Head of Democratic Services undertook a recorded vote, the results of which are detailed below:























Not Present



Not present



Not present



























































































Peltzer Dunn









































































Not present


Theobald C










Not present
































Not present






















37.38      The Mayor confirmed that the motion was lost by 14 votes to 32 with 2 abstentions.






38             Petitions for Council Debate


38.1         The Mayor stated that where a petition secured 1,250 or more signatures it could be debated at the council meeting.  She had been made aware of two such petitions and noted that there was an amendment to the cover report’s recommendation for the first petition from the Green Group. The Mayor also noted that there was a Notice of Motion listed as Item 45 (6) Safe School Walking Zones on the agenda and stated that she was minded to take the motion along with the second petition and to have one debate on the matter.


38.2         The Mayor then invited Ms. Gillian Foote to present the petition on 5G technology.


38.3         Ms. Foote thanked the Mayor and stated that the petition which had been signed by 2,240 people called on the Council to halt the rollout of 5G technology in Brighton & Hove and invoke the Precautionary Principal adopted by the EU in 2005 which stated:


“When human activities may lead to morally unacceptable harm that is scientifically plausible but uncertain, actions shall be taken to avoid or diminish that harm.”


She stated that the residents of Brighton & Hove, insisted that the City Council should invoke the Precautionary Principal regarding 5G technology and all associated infrastructure before deploying it in our city. We (the residents) now call for independent research and for the City Council to prove to its constituents that 5G is SAFE and poses NO risk to human health, animals, wildlife, insects, birds and the ecosystem as a whole. Once 5G is deployed fully, it will expose people 24/7 to mandatory radiation without their informed consent, which constitutes a blatant breach of their Human Rights.


38.4         Councillor Moonan thanked Ms. Foote for presenting the petition and stated that she hoped she could give her and the petitioners some reassurance.  Public Health England (PHE) took the lead nationally and provided expert advice on public health matters associated with mobile phone technology. We have liaised with PHE to get the latest information and guidance and to seek their advice on whether there are any health risks for the public. PHE have told us that the current exposure of the general public to radio waves is well within the international health-related guideline levels that are used in the UK. They said that when 5G is added to an existing network or in a new area the overall exposure to radio waves is expected to remain low relative to these guidelines. As such there should be no consequences for public health.

5G is now being rolled out across the country and UK network operators implementing 5G are committed to complying with the current guidelines. The ability of councils to influence the roll-out of mobile technology is limited by central government regulations and we are unable to adopt a policy to halt the roll out of 5G. But the planning system does require that any new installations are consistent with the international guidelines PHE adheres to.

The council has a vital role to play in encouraging economic development in the city, and digital connectivity is a key part of this. It’s particularly important as our local economy has such a strong specialism in the creative, digital and IT sectors. We’re keen to promote the most up-to-date and effective mobile and wireless technology for work premises in the city. Our residents also expect this in their homes and on their phones.


Councillor Moonan also stated that she was happy to accept the amendment from the Green Group.


38.5         Councillor Osborne moved the amendment on behalf of the Green Group and stated that it was felt that more information was required so that councillors understood the situation and hoped that it could be supported.


38.6         Councillor Powell formally seconded the amendment and reserved her right to speak in the debate.


38.7         Councillor Bagaeen stated that the matter was an interesting topic and raised important concerns which he had raised with the Director of Public Health England and had been assured that there was no evidence of a danger to health.  They maintained precautionary advice on the limited information they had and he suggested that more should be done to get the involvement of mobile operators.


38.8         The Mayor noted that was Councillor Bagaeen’s maiden speech and congratulated him on behalf of the council.


38.9         Councillor Powell noted the comments and sated she had nothing to add.


38.10      Councillor Moonan thanked everyone for their comments and sated that she would be happy to explore the matter further at the meeting of the Health & Wellbeing Board.


38.11      The Mayor thanked Ms. Foote for attending the meeting and presenting the petition and noted that the amendment had been accepted.  She therefore put the recommendation as amended to the vote which was carried unanimously.


38.12      RESOLVED: That the petition be noted and a report on the issue provided for consideration at the next available meeting of Health & Wellbeing Board.


38.13      The Mayor then invited Councillor Nield to present the petition relating to the ability for children to walk safely to schools in the city. The Mayor also noted that there was a Notice of Motion listed as item No. 45 (6) on the agenda which related to the same matter and stated that she therefore intended to take that item at the same time and to have one debate on the issue.


38.14      Councillor Nield thanked the Mayor and stated that she also had a notice of motion on the subject and therefore simply wished to point out that the petition had secured over 1,300 signatures in only a few weeks.  It highlighted the concerns that parents/carers had in regard to their children being able to walk safely to school and called for action to be taken to address their concerns.


38.15      Councillor Allcock thanked Councillor Nield for bringing the petition to the council and congratulated her on the campaign. He stated that the council was fully committed to enabling and encouraging children to walk to and from school safely.  He noted that a significant number of initiatives and improvements were underway to assist in achieving this aim with a number of schools having already benefitted.  The Safer Routes to School programme had been successful and would continue to create an environment in which children felt safe to walk to school.


38.16      The Mayor then invited Councillor Nield to move the Notice of Motion listed as Item No. 45 (6) Safe School Walking Zones.


38.17      Councillor Nield thanked the Mayor and stated that October was the international walk to school month, which promoted the best travel option for children to get to school.  She was aware that schools across the city and the country promoted walk to school week and the motion sought to extend that common aim to ensure that children could walk safely to school throughout their school life.  At present parents and carers faced the daily struggle of tackling rush-hour traffic and a lack of safe crossing zones to get their children to school. It meant children were also being denied the opportunity to develop an independence and get to and from school by themselves. There was a need to listen to the concerns of parents and to find solutions to the problems faced on a daily basis and to empower them to take advantage of being able to walk safely to school.


38.18      The Mayor noted that it was Councillor Nield’s maiden speech and congratulated her on behalf of the council.


38.19      Councillor Shanks formally seconded the motion and stated that there was a clear need to tackle the issue highlighted by the motion and the petition.  She acknowledged that there was a need to change behaviour of parents who opted to drive their children to school as well as other drivers and to reduce traffic levels and hoped that a positive outcome could be found.


38.20      Councillor Moonan welcomed the petition and notice of motion and noted that Public Health England had recently published figures for the health profile of Year 6 and noted that Brighton & Hove compared well with the national figure.  However, there was a need to do more and to get young people walking to school and to set habits that would benefit them in later life.


38.21      Councillor Brown welcomed the petition and stated that it highlighted the problem that needed to be addressed.  Whilst most schools had travel plans there were still significant hazards that had to be faced and she hoped that the council would work closely with schools and parents to find solutions and then enable them to be implemented. There was a need to be proactive rather than reactive and not to rely on statistics before addressing calls for crossings to be installed.  She also noted that funding had been identified at the last Budget Council to help to tackle the issue but had not been approved.


38.22      Councillor O’Quinn noted that 20mph zones had been established in the city and suggested that more signage and consideration of 10mph zones around schools should be considered; as well as action to improve sight lines and to prevent illegal parking around schools.  She also suggested that another aspect that should be reviewed was that children were not necessarily local to their school, which meant that parents were choosing to drop them off by car.  It was a complex issue and would need to be given full consideration if it was to be addressed.


38.23      Councillor Hill stated that there were issues with major junctions being near to or in between schools which caused difficulties for parents and children.  It meant there was a need to prioritise when putting solutions into place and she questioned whether it was possible to re-look at the use of school crossing patrol officers and to encourage people to volunteer.


38.24      Councillor West stated that it was an important matter that needed to be considered and different solutions found for different areas but with the aim of providing safer to school routes.  He was aware of school crossing patrol officers being threatened by drivers for stopping the traffic and that had to be addressed.  The use of the car to take children to school should be the exception rather than the norm and children should be given the confidence to be able to walk to school.


38.25      Councillor Bagaeen stated that more action was needed to enforce double yellow lines and to get the bus company to improve the quality of buses being used for the school services.  Having experienced travelling by bus himself, he could not allow his children to use the current vehicles that were operating as they were over-crowded, and windows could not be opened.  He hoped that discussions could be held with the bus companies to improve their fleet and the number of buses operating on school routes.


38.26      Councillor Nield thanked everyone for their contributions to the debate and stated she was aware of existing schemes to help children to walk to school.  However, they tended to concentrate on how to deal with traffic etc. rather than creating safe walking zones and initiatives such as ‘School Streets’ created in other cities should be considered; as well as establishing a network of zones across the city.  She also questioned the reliance on accident data to determine whether a crossing could be provided and the struggle to obtain Section 106 funding and hoped that this could be reviewed.


38.27      The Mayor thanked Councillor Nield for presenting the petition and put the recommendation listed in the covering report to the vote which was carried unanimously.


38.28      RESOLVED: That the petition be noted and referred to the Children, Young People & Skills Committee meeting on the 11 November 2019.


38.29      The Mayor then put the following Notice of Motion to the vote;


This council resolves to ask Environment, Transport and Sustainability committee to commission a report, exploring:


-            How existing 10-minute walking zones around our schools can be optimised, adding the crossings and road calming measures necessary to create genuinely safe walking routes to school.

-            How visual elements could be used throughout a zone to give drivers a clear message that they are near a school, walking families have priority, and drivers are guests in that zone.

-            Funding options available to create these zones (such as grants, planning contributions, parking surplus, bids for funding)

And further, that such a report:

-      sets out the ways in which the council will work in close consultation with schools and local communities about the creation of these zones.


38.30      The Mayor confirmed that the motion had been agreed unanimously and would be referred to the Environment, Transport & Sustainability Committee for consideration.








39             Call Over for Reports of Committees.


(a)          Callover


39.1         The following items on the agenda were reserved for discussion:


Item 44  -     Review of Political Balance


(b)         Receipt and/or Approval of Reports


39.2         The Head of Democratic Services confirmed that Item 44 had been reserved for discussion; and that the following reports on the agenda with the recommendations therein had been approved and adopted:


Item 42  -     Adoption of the Shoreham Harbour Joint Area Action Plan

Item 43  -     Attendance Policy and Procedures.


(c)          Oral Questions from Members


39.3         The Mayor noted that there were no oral questions relating to the items that had not been called.




40             Written questions from Councillors.


40.1         The Mayor confirmed that written questions from Members and the replies from the appropriate Councillor were taken as read by reference to the list included in the addendum which had been circulated prior to the meeting as detailed below:


(1)      Councillor: Gibson


40.2         The answer to the below question was initially deferred till after the budget and then answered partially without revealing the modelling of actual costs for the specific schemes, so please provide the full answer to include all the specific schemes referred to in the question below?


“Can the new homes schemes modelled (in answer to question 8 to full council on April 19th 2018) as estimates (using estimates of borrowing and build costs) be modelled inputting the actual build cost and the actual capital charges (or if this is not easy to establish using the weighted average capital charge on actual borrowing taken out since 2015) of the loans used to fund the schemes over a 60 year period to establish the projected surplus/deficit based on more accurate inputs?”


Reply from Councillor Williams, Chair of the Housing Committee



The table below models each project updated using the current model and assumptions including actual costs and the average rate of borrowing during the period of 2.15%. Rental figures are based on the old LHA rates and previous Living Wage rates and are reduced by 1% over a 4-year period.


Average Cost of borrowing 2.17%

Treasury Green Book

Scheme Name

Previous Subsidy / (Surplus)

60 Year Subsidy / (Surplus) LHA

60 Year Subsidy / (Surplus) 37.5%LW

60 Year Subsidy / (Surplus) LHA

60 Year Subsidy / (Surplus) 37.5%LW

Preston Road






Manor Place (South)






Manor Place (North)






Ardingly Street






Guinness Garage Sites






Kensington Street






Brooke Mead






Findon Road












Lynchet Close













The above table indicates that if the lower interest rate had been used when assessing the viability of these schemes, Wellsbourne (Hobby Place) and Lynchet Close may have been viable at 37.5% Living Wage Rents however, overall the schemes based on this rent level would be a net liability to the HRA and therefore a consistent approach is preferred to protect the HRA’s financial position and long-term viability.

In evaluating the viability of schemes, using the rate of borrowing does not assess the long-term risk of building new homes for rent and ensure the future viability of the HRA. The borrowing undertaken was at a time when rates were unprecedentedly low and therefore it would not be prudent to assume these rates in viability modelling.

The current model uses the Treasury Green Book discount factor to establish the Net Present Value of schemes.

This allows for a consistent approach in modelling viability. Over a 60-year life of these assets, many of the variables are subject to political and economic forces. E.g., rents may be reduced over a prolonged period; management and maintenance costs increase above normal inflation or interest rates for actual borrowing may be higher than expected in the model.

Finance would be happy to discuss the findings further with Cllr Gibson





(2)      Councillor Gibson


40.3         In the light of the recently announced changes to PWLB rates please can you update the costs provided in answer to the following question asked to Policy & Resources committee in February 2019;


Please provide a table showing the annual repayment required of BHCC on a loan at current PWLB rates for 5, 10, 20, 25, 30,35, 40 and 50 million pounds? (showing repayment periods of 30,40, 50, and 60 years for each loan).


Reply from Councillor Platts, Leader of the Council


The table below shows the annual financing costs of borrowing based on the Public Works Loan Board (PWLB) published rates on 17 October 2019. These costs are subject to the government’s discount to local authorities. This is known as the ‘certainty rate’ which is 0.20% below the published maturity rate for standard new loans. These rates apply to maturity loans where the principal loan amount is repaid in one lump sum at the end of the loan period.


PWLB rates are updated and published twice daily on banking days and can fluctuate substantially over time primarily due to changes to the Gilts market and the Bank of England Base Rate, and therefore the information in the table is indicative only, i.e. different interest rates would result in different costs.


The annual cost is based on the council’s Annuity Minimum Revenue Provision whereby the council sets aside repayments of the principle each year to meet the full loan repayment at the loan expiry date.


The parameters for the council’s investment and borrowing are set within the Treasury and Prudential Indicators. The 2019/20 indicators were agreed at Budget Council on 28 February 2019 as part of the Budget Report.



30 years

40 years

50 Years

PWLB Certainty Rate




Loan Amount






































(3)      Councillor Clare


40.4         How many complaints arose from events in Brunswick and Adelaide Ward so far this year?


Reply from Councillor Yates, Deputy Chair (Finance) of the Policy & Resources Committee


There have been no complaints recorded by the Corporate Customer Experience Team regarding events in the Brunswick and Adelaide Ward since March 2019. There may have been informal enquiries or first stage complaints or received by individual services relating to a variety of incidents in the ward, but these are not recorded centrally and there is no mechanism to provide you will reliable date. If you have concerns about specific events or incidents, you can raise them with the relevant service and officers would be happy to supply you with the information.


(4)      Councillor Nemeth – King Alfred


40.5         Starting with Councillor Geoffrey Bowden, who proudly launched the King Alfred project whilst Chairing the Economic Development & Culture Committee, please provide a timeline of lead Members for the project since Councillor Bowden, finishing with whoever is leading now?


Reply from Councillor Robins, Chair of the Tourism, Equalities, Communities & Culture Committee


When the King Alfred project was re-established in 2012, it was overseen by a cross-party Project Board chaired by Cllr Bowden. He chaired the Board for almost 3 years, through to the May 2015 local elections, following which the role of chair was taken by Cllr Morgan, the then Leader of the Council, and I’m aware that this is the point at which Cllr Nemeth joined the Board.


As a result of revised governance arrangements, all Project Boards were disbanded in mid-2016. They were replaced by the Strategic Delivery Board, a cross-party Member Board chaired by the Leader of the Council. Cllr Morgan therefore provided the lead Member role between 2016 and 2018, at which point Cllr Yates took on the role as the new Leader of the Council, and since May 2019 the Strategic Delivery Board has been chaired by Cllr Platts.


The Strategic Delivery Board receives a written update on major projects at every meeting and, as one of the most significant projects, the King Alfred was the subject of many detailed updates and reports.


Updates on Major Projects form part of the regular business of the Tourism, Equalities, Communities & Culture Committee, and also its predecessor committee (TDC), again as a standing item, through which I am briefed ahead of such meetings. I also receive regular briefings from the Executive Director Economy, Environment & Culture and Ward Councillors are briefed at key stages of the process as required.


Moving forward, as agreed at last week’s Policy & Resources Committee meeting, a new Project Board is to be created for the next King Alfred project.


(5)       Councillor Miller – Madeira Terraces


40.6         When on current projections are all 147 arches likely to be restored by this failing Labour Administration? Would they prefer the Conservative group to take over and have work start on all of them within 24 months?


Reply from Councillor Robins, Chair of the Tourism, Equalities, Communities & Culture Committee


We will be bringing an update report to Tourism Equalities Communities & Culture Committee on 21.11.19.  The Administration has a business case which can unlock funding for the first 30 arches and an update on this will be provided for committee. This will include a timeline for the appointment of a full design team, funded by the council, to further progress the design and option analysis for the structure. 


(6)       Councillor Miller – Private Schools


40.7         Does the Leader of the Council, and her colleague MP’s, agree with the Labour Party that successful schools in our city, educating many local pupils, such as Brighton College, Roedean, Lancing College and St. Christopher’s to name but a few: should be closed down, and stripped of their assets?  So as to increase the financial and land pressure on our local maintain, free and academy schools and ultimately lower standards and outcomes for all our city’s young people?


Reply from Councillor Platts, Leader of the Council


Across the city we have a well-established education partnership which has previously extended an invitation to a representative from the independent school sector. Some of our schools have been working in partnership directly with local independent schools and relationships have been positive.


I would encourage the Councillor to take another look at Labour Party national policy, as it makes no reference to closing down or asset-stripping independent schools, but rather to integrating them into the state sector.


What it does refer to is:


·           removing the VAT exemption on private school fees and using this to fund free school meals for all primary school children.

·           reversing swingeing Tory cuts to ensure our schools are properly resourced.

·           reducing class sizes to less than 30 for all five-, six-, and seven- year-olds.

·           tackling the teacher recruitment and retention crisis by ending the public-sector pay cap.

·           putting £150 million back into supporting our children in schools by scrapping the Conservatives’ nonsensical plans for schools to pay the apprenticeship levy.


On our local state sector provision, I’m proud that we are seeing improvements in standards of education across the city. Standards in the City including attainment at KS1, 2 and 4 are already higher than National Averages. The percentage of good or better schools in all phases are well above National Averages. In secondary 100% of schools are Good or better.


Whilst the Conservative Government tries to impose academisation on Moulsecoomb Primary School, against the expressed will of 96% of parents and Councillors of all stripes in this very chamber, we know that under local authority direction the school has readily improved. The council now have a significant amount of evidence of improvement demonstrating the school should no longer be classed as inadequate. This includes improved attendance and outcome data at all key stages. Notes of visits from National Leaders of Education and experienced school partnership advisers comment on improvements in teaching and learning and behaviour for learning. We are confident our statement of action has meant that the school has improved to such a place that academisation would be pointless.


This Labour administration is supporting the children and teachers and standing with the parents and carers who voted overwhelmingly to keep their local primary school in local authority control, and the government must listen to them.


(7)      Councillor Fishleigh


40.8         Is it possible for Cityclean to allocate two people to spend one day a week every week maintaining the area around Brighton train station so that this gateway into the city is more appealing to both residents and visitors with regular tasks to include painting over and scrubbing away graffiti, peeling off stickers and painting over the damage caused by them on lamp posts, repainting the black railings, weeding and tendering plant beds?


Reply from Councillor Pissaridou, Chair of the Environment, Transport & Sustainability Committee


Brighton Station and Queens Road has one street cleaner on a daily basis, Monday – Sunday starting at 5am until 1pm.  They start at Brighton station and finish at the clock tower at the end of Queens Road. The responsibilities of the individual on duty are to sweep any litter and detritus and clear any weeds. We also have a Street Cleanser on an afternoon shift who will litter pick the above area.


We are removing all graffiti from council buildings and highway furniture. We have two operatives working on the removal of graffiti between Saltdean and Mile Oak. We need to treat offensive graffiti as a priority, so non-offensive graffiti will be removed in due course.


We are currently working on a new graffiti removal approach where we implement zones for certain areas, at the moment we are working on zone 1 which is the North Street area, zone 2 begins at Queens Road which we will be working on in the near future. This also includes the removal of stickers.


We are also checking the seating area in front of the station, and the area is treated with a high-pressure jet washer regularly.


With regards to the flower beds, we keep them tidy; however please do let Cityclean know if there are any concerns on the standard of them.


Unfortunately, we have limited funding for highways maintenance and this is prioritised to ensuring that we are able to maintain the highway, leaving little funding for the routine painting of railings and lampposts. 


As you may be aware, members of the community through the Tourism Alliance have been doing a good job in recent months of maintaining the area around the station, voluntarily planting flowers and replacing benches


Proposals for enhancing the area from the station to the seafront will be outlined in the Gateway to the Sea report which will be presented to ETS Committee in November.


We are also working with GTR to move the taxi rank to the back of the station next month which will reduce congestion, improve air quality and open up the front of the station making it a much nicer entrance to the city. 


(8)   Councillor Hugh-Jones


40.9         On 1 October 2019, the Government opened the consultation on Future Homes Standard by 2025. The consultation ends on 10 January 2020. The government withdrew the Code for Sustainable Homes (CSH) in March 2015 following which this Council had to fight hard to incorporate the equivalent of CSH Level 4 into City Plan Part 1.


Unsurprisingly, more recently, in its report on energy efficiency, the Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy (BEIS) Committee also described it as

nonsensical to be continuously making the problem worse by allowing new homes to be built that will also need to be retrofitted”.


In relation to existing housing stock, the Committee on Climate Change noted in its 2019 report to Parliament that:

Policies are not in place to deliver the Government's ambitions on energy efficiency … Building standards are not sufficiently enforced … Regulations for the private rented sector prioritise costs for landlords over running costs for renters. MHCLG must play its part, including minimum standards for social housing.


Does this administration plan to respond to the consultation? If so, and in light of the climate emergency, will the Council explore, as a matter of urgency:

1.         The adoption of the Scottish model of making zero interest or equity loans available to homeowners for energy efficiency improvements, or an equivalent model?

2.     Better enforcement of energy efficiency standards including, in the private rented sector, lobbying for the removal of the £3500 cap on landlord’s fuel efficiency improvements?


Reply from Councillor Williams, Chair of the Housing Committee Proposed response:


The Housing Committee Work Plan 2019 – 2023 agreed at Housing Committee on 18 September includes the following priorities:


·      Improving the quality of the private rented sector, including researching and reviewing an ethical loan scheme and developing the enforcement approach to private sector housing to reflect the full range of potential enforcement options available to improve and manage standards.

·      Achieving carbon reductions and sustainability in housing, including addressing fuel poverty and developing a policy to set out how we will work collaboratively to ensure housing contributes to making the city carbon neutral by 2030.

The council is already supporting the Warmer Sussex project with Retrofitworks, to improve the energy efficiency of homes across Brighton & Hove and the wider Sussex area.


The council will explore energy efficiency loan options and private rented sector enforcement and lobbying opportunities through the reports we are committed to bringing forward to Housing Committee under the Workplan.


The council will be responding to the consultation. We will use opportunities as they arise to respond to consultation and lobby government on elements of the regulations that we see as restricting improvements to energy sufficiency standards in the private rented sector.


(9)   Councillor Gibson


As of 1st if October 2019, please can you tell me, across Brighton and Hove how many:

-      CPZ permits were issued?

-      What the annual cost average charge per permit?

-      How many addresses have each of 2, 3, 4, 5 permits issued?

-      How many vehicles have permits for 2 zones?


Reply from Councillor O’Quinn, Chair of the Licensing Committee


i)      CPZ permits were issued?


There are currently 40379 valid permits, of which 38843 are resident permits.


ii)     What the annual cost average charge per permit?


The average cost of all current active permits is £136.06. This figure includes permits purchased for 3 months, so does not represent the annual cost per permit.


The annual costs of resident permits are as follows:


For zones A, C, E, F, G, H, J, M, N, O, Q, T, Y, Z;    £130 annual (£180 if paid quarterly)


For Zones U and W; £100.00 annual (£120.00 if paid 6 monthly).


There is a 50% discount for low emission vehicles and a 25% increase for high emission vehicles.


A full list of fees and charges for all permit types are available in this pdf document.


iii)   How many addresses have each of 2, 3, 4, 5 permits issued?


There are 22,708 addresses in the city with one permit, 4570 addresses with two permits, 927 addresses with three permits, 303 addresses with four permits and 136 addresses with five permits. There are a further 287 addresses with six or more permits, however these tend to be linked to large businesses, organisations, doctors’ surgeries or hospitals.


iv)       How many vehicles have permits for 2 zones?


We do not have any reports available that show how many vehicles have multiple permits issued to them.


(10)    Councillor Osborne - Students and noise complaints in Coldean 


40.10      What is the council doing to put pressure on the bus companies, the university and other stakeholders to address the issues caused by anti-social behaviour in Coldean coming from the Varley Halls? 

Reply from Councillor Pissaridou – Chair of the Environment, Transport & Sustainability Committee


Officers have had a meeting on site with representatives of Brighton & Hove buses, the University of Brighton, the students’ union, Sussex Police and the local community to discuss the issues and options which could improve access to the halls. 


Officers from the Community Safety team have also attended subsequent “round table” meetings and in response to recent reports have visited affected residents, met separately with the University and been in contact with the police and other residents and stakeholders including all the local councillors.


The bus company are currently unable to access the estate road because of the unsuitable camber of the estate road but this would require significant and expensive engineering measures to a private road which unfortunately the Council would be unable to fund because it has no obligation to do so and its spending priorities are focused on the public highway network.


Brighton and Hove Buses are currently unable to access the estate road because of the camber of the highway at the junction of the road. This would require significant and expensive engineering measures, mainly to the public highway. The University is currently commissioning work to assess what this would entail. While the Council is under no obligation to give permission or fund these works, we are keen to work together with all parties to try and find a solution. Discussions are also being had with Homes for Brighton and Hove to ensure that highway works done in connection to the recently approved development adjoining Varley Park contribute positively as much as possible to the resolution of these problems.


(11)   Councillor Osborne - Advertising- removing sugary/fatty foods and drinks 


40.11      Dame Sally Davies, Chief Medical Officer for England, recently announced that one of the best ways to tackle the obesity epidemic in children is to cut out advertising of unhealthy food and drink.


Does the council lease any land/property to advertising companies?  Does the council have powers to restrict advertising in places which it doesn’t own and does the council intend to use its authority as a licensing body to limit the advertising at events? 


Reply from Councillor Pissaridou – Chair of the Environment, Transport & Sustainability Committee


The council has 3 licenses in situ on land/property with advertising company JC Decaux. 


              These produce minimal income for the council with limited restrictions on content. The restrictions relate to only displaying material that confirms with statute (including in particular the planning obscenity sexual and racial discrimination and health laws) and with the codes promulgated by the Advertising Standards Association (or any successor body) and which is not otherwise unlawful or offensive and immediately on demand to remove and replace any material displayed in breach of this sub-clause.


The council also owns 478 Bus shelters and 5 taxi shelters in the city (excluding Heritage style shelters, which are maintained by Cityclean and do not carry advertising).


Of these 223 are advertising shelters and the council grants a concession contract to Clear Channel UK to advertise on these shelters in return for an annual income and the cleaning and maintenance of the shelters.  Contract management is undertaken by the Public Transport Team.


Our contract with Clear Channel prohibits certain kinds of advertising e.g. tobacco and gambling, and restricts others, e.g. advertisements directed towards children.


Advertisements for alcoholic drinks should not feature in promotions directed at people under 18. Advertising for alcoholic beverages or fast food takeaways should not be sited within 100 meters of any school or youth club ,or NHS building or public sector building/premises/facility/park/leisure centre primarily used by those under the age of 18 (or their guardian or carers).


In regard to the advertising boards next to the King Alfred Car park this arrangement with Clear Channel is managed by the Traffic Control Centre. They are currently reviewing this arrangement and will ensure your concerns will be considered taking into account the issues outlined with other advertisement contracts.


(12)    Councillor West


40.12      Electric cars offer an opportunity to reduce air pollution, though will not address road congestion and the danger faced by active and vulnerable road users. While it is hoped electric cars will be powered with renewable energy, the energy levels required to power large scale use of electric cars will need a huge investment in generation, transmission and charging infrastructure. When account is also taken of the high level of embodied energy needed to produce electric cars, what overall carbon saving can be achieved through switching from conventionally powered to electrically powered private vehicles? Given the Labour administration shares the Green goal of the city being carbon neutral by 2030, does the Labour administration accept that electric cars are not a panacea for carbon neutrality and that instead there needs to be a rapid and major shift from car use to active and sustainable travel modes in the city?


Reply from Councillor Pissaridou – Chair of the Environment, Transport & Sustainability Committee


I think your first question about the total amount of energy consumed by all of the processes associated with the production and use of electric vehicles and their associated infrastructure is probably better asked of the Government.


Regarding your second question, I don’t think that any political party would describe electric vehicles as a panacea to the global climate emergency that is now at the forefront of so many people’s thoughts and actions, and which is now the driver for many policies and priorities. 


However, electric vehicles can undoubtedly reduce harmful emissions from transport in local areas and communities; and for those people who can drive and can afford to switch, it is good that they have that choice and it is a sensible decision to make.


The city’s fantastic bus services provide people with a great opportunity to travel over distance, and we aim to do more with them as part of our Quality Bus Partnership.  More electric buses on routes crossing the city will make a significance difference in the city centre and the local neighbourhoods they connect.


We have eight train stations in the city – potentially untapped capacity for people in some parts of the city to get around more easily. 


And the added benefits to people’s health of walking and cycling must not be underestimated either, and that is why we are working on the development of a Local Cycling and Walking Infrastructure Plan, so that we can make those forms of transport the first choice for as many local journeys as possible.


As you are also aware the Council is developing its next Local Transport Plan where reducing carbon and improving air quality will be a significant consideration in its inception.


(13)    Councillor Mac Cafferty - Communal Bins


40.13      Can you please tabulate: 

(1) the quantity of complaints about communal bin collections;

(2) the quantity of complaints about the state of communal bins and; 

(3) the age of each communal bin, 

on each street in Brunswick and Adelaide Ward for the past five years?


Reply from Councillor Pissaridou – Chair of the Environment, Transport & Sustainability Committee


This information is not available as complaints have not been recorded in this way. There has been a recent change to how complaints are recorded and “issue with a communal bin” has been included.


The communal bin audit currently taking place is capturing a number of details for the bins, including their condition.  This will help us determine whether any repair work is needed, or if a bin needs replacing.


(14)    Councillor Mac Cafferty – Pavement Parking


40.14      Further to Scottish Parliament legislation and the Commons' Transport Committee recommendation to implement a ban on pavement parking in England, what will be done ahead of legislation in the meanwhile to enable our council to sign up to the Living Streets “Pavements for People” charter?


Reply from Councillor Pissaridou – Chair of the Environment, Transport & Sustainability Committee


The Commons’ Transport Select Committee has recommended in the short-term allowing councils outside London to enforce against ‘unnecessary obstruction’ to combat the worst incidents of pavement parking. Longer term it has recommended that central government should work towards introducing a complete pavement parking ban unless signed to allow pavement parking.


In advance of any pavement parking ban the council would need to carry out a survey of all streets in the city to decide in which streets pavement parking was to be allowed in the city. Consultation with residents in streets where pavement parking is widespread would also be necessary before a decision on whether the pavement parking ban would apply to that street.


So ahead of the legislation, enforcement officers currently issue warning notices to vehicles parked on the pavement where a Penalty Charge Notice cannot be issued to discourage pavement parking.


We look forward to hearing the government’s response to the Transport Select Committee’s recommendations and will be ready to carry out citywide surveys if a pavement parking ban is agreed.


(15)    Councillor Mac Cafferty – Licensing Complaints


40.15      Can you please tabulate the quantity of complaints about licensed premises for each street in Brunswick and Adelaide Ward in the past five years?


Reply from Councillor O’Quinn – Chair of the Licensing Committee


Street Name


Brunswick Street East


Church Road


First Avenue


Holland Road


Lower Market Street


Montpelier Place


Norfolk Place


Queens Place


Upper Market Street


Waterloo Street


Western Road







(16)    Councillor Mac Cafferty – Anti-Social Behaviour Policy


40.16      Can you please tabulate the quantity of anti-social behaviour incidents for each street in Brunswick and Adelaide Ward in the past five years?


Reply from Councillor Childs – Lead Member for Community Safety


The Community Safety Casework Team has only kept records by ward since 2018/2019.


During 2018/2019 the Community Safety Casework Team received 50 new reports of or enquiries regarding ASB in Brunswick and Adelaide ward. Some of these reports will lead to the Community Safety team opening a case and co-ordinating a multi-agency response to the problem, during which further reports of ASB may be received e.g. Norfolk Sq, Brunswick Sq, Waterloo St


During the first two quarters of 2019/2020 the Community Safety Casework Team received 10 new reports of or enquiries regarding ASB in Brunswick and Adelaide ward.

Street name

New reports of or enquiries regarding ASB

Adelaide Crescent


Bedford Place


Boundary Passage


Brunswick Place


Brunswick Rd


Brunswick Sq


Brunswick Street East


Cambridge Rd


Farman St


First Avenue


Holland Rd


Hove Lawns


Lansdowne St


Norfolk Sq


Palmeira Avenue


Palmeira Yard


Upper Market Street


Waterloo St


Western Rd


Wilbury Villas


York Rd




(17)    Councillor Mac Cafferty - Fixed Penalty Notices for Environmental Offences


40.17      Can you please tabulate the quantity of fixed penalty notices for environmental offences of littering, graffiti, fly posting and fly tipping respectively for the last five years across the city?


Reply from Councillor Pissaridou – Chair of the Environment, Transport & Sustainability Committee




Fly Posting

Fly Tipping*

Total FPNs







Statistics provide in the table above are from 01/03/2016 to 17/10/2019. We do not have data before this date


*Fly Tipping total includes both residential and commercial Fly Tipping.


(18)    Councillor Hills


40.18      Residents in my ward are keen to recycle as effectively as they can, but it can be difficult to access information about the whole range of what they can recycle and where. One comprehensive digital map that contains all public recycling points, as well as other non-council recycling services, would be really helpful. There are maps on the council website that show where specific materials/items can be collected, that is, cartons, electricals and textiles/clothes/shoes.  But would great if all recycling points could be on one map, with pull down options so users can look up recycling facilities for specific items or materials. It is particularly difficult for residents to find out about non-council recycling options and it would be great if these could be included on the map too. Recycling services such as the Green Centre collect a wide number of materials but only at specific locations on particular days, and it would really help residents if information on services such as this could be available in the same place as council information. It could help residents to locate supermarkets that collect plastic bags, and garden centres that take plant pots too. The A-Z on there at the moment is useful but the provision would be better if such a map were available too, as people generally respond better to information presented visually. I’m sure my residents would really appreciate this as many don’t have cars and would prefer to recycle as locally as they can.


When do we expect a food waste collection service be available in the city?


Reply from Councillor Pissaridou – Chair of the Environment, Transport & Sustainability Committee


We are making improvements to help residents recycle more easily through the Increasingly Recycling Project within the Modernisation Programme. This includes:

·         Improving the content on the website

·         Improving the communal bin system to include colour coding and better signage

·         Improving the quality and frequency of recycling communication sent to residents; this started over the summer and will pick up again over Christmas; (different communications are being prepared for different stakeholders)

·         A programme of work with crews on how to manage contaminated waste receptacles

·         Closer working with other council services in regular contact with residents

·         Monthly attendance at the Green Centre to support their recycling initiatives


We are looking to bring an options paper to Environment, Transport & Sustainability Committee in 2020/21 regarding a food waste collection service. Introducing a food waste collection service will be costly to the Local Authority. The government is considering introducing mandatory food waste collection by 2023. The government has said that it will provide funding to assist Local Authorities to introduce this. However, in the interim we will continue to explore options to introduce a food waste collection service prior to 2023.


The options for a food waste collection need to be considered in the context of the wider work being completed on round restructures. The experience of other councils shows that the positive impact of a food waste collection service is maximised when kerbside refuse collections are moved to fortnightly and recycling collections moved to weekly. Food waste is then collected with recycling. These options will be explored during the engagement on round restructures.


The council can provide compost bins, wormeries and Jennys for recycling food waste at a reduced price. These can be purchased via the council’s website.


The Brighton & Hove Food Partnership administer a community composting scheme for residents who do not have a garden but would like to compost their food waste. This scheme has been partly funded by the council and we are exploring options with B&H Food Partnership to extend the scheme further.




41             Oral questions from Councillors


41.1         The Mayor noted that 15 oral questions had been received.  The Mayor stated that 30 minutes were set aside for the duration of the item.


41.2         Councillor Mac Cafferty asked the following question, A few weeks ago councillors might recall that the Government announced a rise in the PWLB loan rate of 1%.  That may sound innocuous the reality is that it means for us like councils around the country that there is another huge cut coming. It came also in the same week that council houses won the Stirling prize and the councils announced that they are going to building 80 thousand new homes before 2025. The LGA calculates this could cost all of us another £70 million a year. I have a few questions and I am wondering if the Leader of the Council agrees with me that this move is damaging to the local government especially at this particular time? Also, what analysis and assessment has been done to understand what this might actually mean to us and indeed what contingencies do we have to deal with the change regardless of the damaging move, so we aren’t hurt significantly?


41.3         Councillor Platts replied, Firstly, I want to reassure the councillors that the PWLB interest rate rise does not affect the i360 financing arrangement. The loans for the i360 were taken out between 2014 and 2016 at fixed interest rates.


It is not helpful to have interest rates raised and there are other market lenders that we can look at for more competitive rates. If you require more information I can provide a written response.


41.4         Councillor Mac Cafferty asked the following Supplementary question, Given that the government has announced this without consultation would the Leader of the Council join with me in writing to the Secretary of State for Communities to condemn the move?


41.5         Councillor Platts replied, Yes, I would be happy to do that.


41.6         Councillor Bell asked the following question, Is the Administration pleased with the £14 billion that has been provided as extra money for school funding?


41.7         Councillor Allcock replied, Yes of course we welcome any money having been starved of funds for years. I had not been told it was £14 million, I have 5.2million for schools and 2.8 million for the special needs sector, but I will check up on your figure. School funding is complex School funding is complex and needs to take account of various grants, costs being met directly by schools, directly by local authorities and on occasion jointly.


Over the last four years the budget for schools in the city have risen due to an increase in the pupil population, but this rise has not kept pace with costs which have risen much more including a 13% increase in teacher pension costs without an increase in funding to cover this.  In addition:

·           Local Government pension costs for other school staff have also increased equating to a 4% increase for schools.

·           National Insurance rates have also increased by 4%.

·           Finally, general inflationary costs equate to a further 5% increase in school costs.


So overall, pay and other costs have risen by around 24% for schools between 2010 and 2019.  This is compared to overall funding increases for schools of around 14%, obviously leaving schools with a significant shortfall in funding over the period.


The 3.9% increases in the schools funding block that we anticipate receiving in the financial year 2020/21 is appreciated and will begin to address the huge funding gap that has been the legacy of Conservative Government cuts to our Children and Young People’s Education.


Conservative cuts are starving our schools of the funding they need to deliver a first-class education. Crippling underfunding is driving up class sizes and forcing schools to cut corners. A narrow curriculum and a culture of assessment is driving away teachers, creating a recruitment and retention crisis.


I am sure that bit of money will help as we have a lot to replace of what has been taken away.


41.8         Councillor Bell asked the following Supplementary question, I agree that cuts are a bad thing, can the Administration explain why they are cutting £1.9 million out of all our schools funding by refusing to pay out the term funding which they have been struggling with. We have been approached by the Schools Forum who have explained they are struggling, and this Administration has said ‘you must fund this yourself’.


41.9         Councillor Allcock replied, I assume you are referring to term time only backpay. New national guidance following a court case relating to term-time only staff has made it clear that these staff are owed some back pay. The previous system had been used for many years and was established practice across the country. This ruling has had a major impact nationally and affects many staff locally.  


There is no national formula for working out exactly how much people are owed. Following formal negotiations with our trade unions, with whom we work very closely, we have reached a local agreement on how much our term-time only staff are owed. We are doing everything we can to make sure all school staff affected are paid what is owed to them before the end of the year.

We are writing to staff due a back payment on an individual basis to make sure we can sit down with them to agree the payment and do the paperwork needed to make this possible. In strict legal terms, the cost of these back-pay liabilities falls to individual schools, not the council, but we are very aware that school budgets as I have referred to earlier are under a lot of pressure and we recognise that the back-pay liability is a big one-off financial burden for our schools.  But the same is true of the council, we’ve had massive reductions in government funding over the last ten years £100 million and we are currently waiting to hear exactly how much funding the government is going to give the council for next year.


So, despite the continuing funding reductions the council is facing, we are committed to sharing the financial burden of this payment with our schools. We have offered to meet 50% of the back-pay liability. We are also offering to pay our schools’ 50% share of the bill upfront and allow them to pay us back over 10-years. We have done this by making available reserves being held for future projects that aren’t needed in the short term. However, we listen to people because we want to know what is going on we listen carefully to what our schools are telling us, we have offered to suspend those repayments during this financial year and the next one, while the individual settlements with staff and future government funding allocations are being worked out.  During this period, we are determined to consider all options.


We recognise that some schools will be more affected by this issue than others and have undertaken to look at each school’s needs on a case-by-case basis. We will be discussing this issue further with our headteachers at our next Schools Forum meeting and that feels like the most appropriate way to go.”


41.10      Councillor Hugh-Jones asked the following question, Following on from my written question in July and subsequent correspondence between Councillor Pissaridou, myself and one of my residents who has been voluntarily monitoring the performance cleaning contract in relation to the Blakers Park facilities specifically. Has the Administration considered the health and safety and qualities impact of the contractor’s poor performance?  I say this because quite often public toilets are quite often located close to children’s play areas and are relied on by those children but also, they are frequently used by older people, those with disabilities and men with prostrate issues. Given the contractor’s poor performance why does it get a green rating in the Procurement Advisory Table? Is the contract being properly monitored?


41.11      Councillor Pissaridou replied, City Clean continue to work with Healthmatic, who are contracted to carry services at public conveniences across the city. There have been some ongoing issues with the delivery of the contract and we are working together to resolve these. The standard of service and staffing issues has been escalated to senior management of the company and we are asking them to address this with urgency. We are liaising with the council’s legal team to identify options to help manage and resolve the concerns we have with the service received from the contractor.


41.12      Councillor Hugh-Jones asked the following supplementary question, My resident submitted a freedom of information request in relation to this contract she then challenged a number of the original answers she received as either not answering her questions or being incomplete. Of her 24 original questions she had further questions on 18 of them. Her complaint was subsequently upheld, so my question is how come unreliable and incomplete information was provided in relation to the FOI in the first place?


41.13      Councillor Pissaridou replied, I understand that the Assistant Director of City Clean met with your resident this week, so I think that has gone a little further than what you have set out. I have nothing further to add to this because it is a very sensitive are other than to say, as you know, we are taking these concerns very seriously indeed and will do whatever necessary to resolve the situation.


41.14      Councillor Barnett asked the following question, Everywhere you look the city is full of graffiti it is filthy this look is completed by rubbish on the pavements. What impression does this give to visitors on which we rely on for revenue. It is not doing our credibility any good. We are known as a protest city not as a nice place to spend a week away. The state of this city is not due to the cost cut of spending, other towns and cities also have experienced the same cuts as the south but wherever you go in the south coast everywhere else is brighter and cleaner, Brighton & Hove has deteriorated a lot in the recent years and is now far from the place that attracted tourists and holiday makers, bringing their money with them, now the city does not hold any attraction other than for protesting. Why are we just sitting back and letting this happen? Why do people feel they can deface the city with graffiti and rubbish and are allowed to carry on doing this, where has our pride gone? we seem to be sinking under a wave of dirt, graffiti and rubbish, nothing seems to be being done this is not down to funding cuts it is down to people turning a blind eye to not wanting to do anything about the state of the city and not caring. In the paper today and again last week there were photographs of people defacing the walls. Why are we not fining and making them clear their mess up?


41.15      Councillor Pissaridou replied, What I do have to say is to contradict what you say, by 2020, local councils will have faced a reduction to core funding of nearly £16 billion over the preceding decade. That is the reality of nearly 10 years of Tory Government and residents are seeing the consequences of those cuts.


Despite this, we are taking steps to modernise our services and we are consulting the local community on how we can work together to keep the city clean, including the best way to eliminate graffiti and tagging. We’ve already introduced fines for littering, including spitting chewing gum and for fly tipping. We would welcome any representation by Cllr Barnett, if she would like to, to make her friends in government, on the need for increased funding in local services which would support these efforts. Despite this, we are taking steps to modernise our services and we are consulting the local community on how we can work together to keep the city clean, including the best way to eliminate graffiti and tagging. 


We have introduced a consultation on graffiti we have already had 711 responses in one week and they are all positive that they want the council to take some action on persuading businesses and the private sector to do something about their graffiti and we are helping them to do that. So, we have got so many initiatives with graffiti being one of the main ones.


41.16      Councillor Barnett asked the following supplementary question,  Everyone has had cut backs and everywhere else they do the basics without wasting money.


41.17      Councillor Pissaridou replied, I did not get another question, but I have found my note on tourism. The latest figures on tourism show a positive response across the board, day trips up by 1%, direct business turnover increased by 4% to 335 million, overnight stays domestic visitors up by 7%, overseas visitors decreased by 4%. But across the SE as whole the increase was 23% down so we are ‘bucking the trend’. On graffiti the figures on the consultation 716. We can’t enforce other businesses to remove graffiti on their premises, but public pressure will do so. Of 70% of those that responded said that statutory undertakers should remove their own graffiti and over 70% said large businesses should remove their own, so we are on track.


41.18      Councillor Fishleigh asked the following question, Anyone who listens to Radio Sussex or Drive Time on Radio 2 knows that the A259 between Brighton Marina and Newhaven is in trouble, despite falling traffic volume congestion is increasing and seriously affecting the bus services. A detailed survey of traffic flow on the A259 between Eastbourne and the Aquarium is currently being conducted, it is funded to tune of £100,000 by Lewes District Council. Consultants and officials working on this survey have repeatedly asked Brighton & Hove Council to share information about traffic flows in its part of the A259. Will Brighton & Hove City Council please commit to researching and sharing all the information that the A259 traffic consultants need by Christmas so that their report isn’t delayed.


41.19      Councillor Pissaridou replied, I believe that you are referring to a planned study of the A259 which is carried out by East Sussex County Council.  Once the city council has a clearer understanding of the nature and extent of that study, it will be able to fully consider what information may be available to help to inform it. ESCC and LDC arranged a meeting in March 2018 to ‘share the current evidence base and explore short, medium- and long-term strategies in relation to congestion of the A259.’  The then Chair of the ETS Committee attended that meeting. Other invitees included local MPs, Leaders and Lead Councillors of Lewes District, East Sussex and Brighton & Hove, plus council, Local Enterprise Partnership, National Park Chief Execs and/or Senior Officers.  An independent consultant was commissioned to make a presentation about the A259.


Later in 2018, ESCC announced that it intended to fund a study of the A259 in 2019/20.  LDC subsequently agreed to allocate £50,000 to the study.  BHCC has not been approached for, or made, any similar financial commitment as part of its revenue budget.


41.20      Councillor Fishleigh asked the following supplementary question,  These consultants have asked the council for information and it is not forthcoming so can somebody at the Council get on the case as it is delaying the report?


41.21      Councillor Pissaridou replied, There is no further information currently available to enable officers to fully consider the implications and opportunities to the city council and its partners, stakeholders and local communities to actively engage with the study.


41.22      Councillor Ebel asked the following question, To my surprise the Conservative Group did not attend the extraordinary Council meeting to debate the effect of Brexit on our city. Does the Leader of the Council condemn the practice of signing the attendance register only to then boycott the meeting?


41.23      Councillor Platts replied, I think it is unacceptable for people to sign in as if they are attending the meeting and then not actually attend.


41.24      Councillor Ebel asked the following supplementary question, On the day of the extraordinary Council meeting Cllr Steve Bell was reported by the Argus saying that this meeting was a waste of tax payers’ money. I was born in the GDR and have lived my first few years in a place that was not a democracy I therefore value democracy very highly. What we saw on 3 October was a conservative party that shied away from a debate on a mess that they have created. Does the Leader of the Council agree that democracy is never a waste of money and that residents have a right to be informed about the consequences of the Brexit mess that the Conservative party has left this country with?


41.25      Councillor Platts replied, I agree with you that as long as it is within the rules we have a perfect right for a want to call a debate and it is very important for democracy to be done.


41.26      Councillor Mears asked the following question, Can the Deputy Chair of Housing inform us what extra work is taking place in the city along with the 18 services including St Mungo’s that help the Housing Department are already working with and also with the police. We know that alcohol and drugs are an addiction and are killing rough sleepers and homeless on the streets and she is aware of the organised gangs now working in the city from London Road to Portslade. Although it is applaudable to be providing extra accommodation for homeless shelters prevention is paramount because it saves lives and without that going forward we can build and spend as much money on extra shelters but unless we bring prevention in very firmly more and more people will die on our streets.


41.27      Councillor Brennan replied, Lack of prevention is due to the cuts that have been made to substance misuse and mental health primarily. The only way we will prevent people from going on to our streets and taking the drugs and alcohol that they have to take to get through their day will be when we stop this austerity, when we stop Universal Credit, when we stop these awful ideologies that we have. When we take away people’s nets they fall through them and what we are seeing is that we are having to sweep up the mess. I firmly believe in treatment and consulting rooms for people that are taking drugs on the street, but all this is going to take money. I believe that people should have shelter and it is not a privilege. If that means setting up night shelters, then albeit and if it means taking them off the streets when it is pouring with rain for 5 days then let’s do it.


The council are doing a lot and I, like you, would like to make sure that the money is going to the people on the streets and not into middle management and into big charities etc. I am here really for this purpose, I want to stop the chaos on the streets I see people who have been out there for 2 years it is so entrenched that it is all they know, and I would like to help those people feel better about themselves so that they don’t want to keep going out and begging.


The gangs, I was straight on to them if they are exploiting people, they move around, and I am very aware of them and they are very aware of me and I am in contact with the community safety team within the council. We also have women on the streets, women should not be sleeping on the street ever. It is like going back to the 1800s and they are plying their goods for a sip of gin, that is reality out there being accosted by men for sexual tricks and all the sexual disease that people have, and it is something that this Administration is compassionate about we want to solve this. That will mean asking for more money in the next budget.


41.28      Councillor Mears asked the following supplementary question, Thank you for your response, I think it is important to point out that alcohol and drug addiction is not necessarily afflicted on people on lower incomes it can be anybody from any walks of life, it isn’t necessarily around austerity but we are seeing on our streets more and more rough sleepers and homeless and if you look at them you can tell that there is a serious addiction in this city and we also know and are aware of the gangs coming into the city to put people on the streets begging and that needs to be addressed because it deters from actually dealing with those that absolutely need the council’s and other organisations help but it is growing out of all proportion.


Going forward is there going to be a new homeless and Rough Sleepers’ Strategy? Over the years, it wasn’t that long from the previous Labour administration’s strategy and we have some many strategies and policies within the council, I don’t know where they end up, but I would request and hope on the new strategy that they check through the old strategy so things that work, that make a difference are put into the new strategy.


41.29      Councillor Brennan replied, My priority, and I am very aware of the drug and alcohol problem in the city, from teenagers and you are right it doesn’t just affect people of low incomes, is the people on the streets and how can we do that? It is by having more treatment centres, more detox beds and this is all the stuff that I want to bring into the strategy I agree with this.


41.30      The Mayor noted that the 30 minutes set aside for oral questions from Members had been reached and therefore the remaining eight questions would be carried over to the next meeting.




42             Adoption of the Shoreham Harbour Joint Area Action Plan


42.1         RESOLVED:


(1)      That the response to the consultation on the main modifications to the JAAP and the contents of the Inspector’s Report with her conclusion that the JAAP is legally complaint and ‘sound’ be noted;


(2)      That the JAAP be adopted, incorporating the main modifications and minor modifications as part of the Development Plan for the City, subject to the Head of Planning agreeing any further minor non-material changes to the text with Adur District Council and West Sussex County Council;


(3)      That the currently adopted west area Policies Map be revised to additionally display policies contained within the JAAP;


(4)      That the Development Brief for South Portslade Industrial Estate & Aldrington Basin be revoked.




43             Attendance Policy and Procedures


43.1         RESOLVED: That signing up to the TUC’s Dying to Work Charter, which supports staff with terminal illness to either remain in work as long as they are able, or to help them to access their pension early, depending on their wishes be agreed.




44             Appointments &Review of Political Balance 2019/20


44.1         Councillor Mac Cafferty noted that the appendix to the report listed eleven members of the Planning Committee rather than ten and sought confirmation that the Conservative Group’s allocation would be reduced to two rather than three Members.


44.2         The Head of Democratic Services apologised for the error and confirmed that the Conservative Group’s allocation would be reduced to two Members and that confirmation of who would be coming off the committee was awaited.


44.3         Councillor Bell stated that he would ensure that the Chief Executive was informed of the Group’s changes and that he was aware there would only be two seats on the committee.


44.4         The Mayor noted the information and moved that the recommendations be agreed subject to the Planning Committee’s membership reflecting the approved membership of 10 Members.


44.5         RESOLVED:


(1)      That Councillor Allcock be appointed as the Deputy Leader of the Council;


(2)      That the Council confirms the appointments to those Committees and Boards affected by the changes between political groups as set out in appendix 1 to the report, (subject to the Planning Committee being 10 Members on the basis of 3:3:2:1:1);


(3)      That it be noted the vacant places shown in appendix 1 will be notified by the respective Group Leaders;


(4)      That the following appointments be confirmed:


(a) Councillor Allcock as Chair of the Corporate Parenting Board;

(b) Councillor Evans as Chair of the Asset Management Board;

(c) Councillor Evans as Chair of the Procurement Advisory Board.


(5)      That Councillor Childs be designated as Lead Member for Community Safety and Planning Policy; and


(6)      That having received confirmation from the Police Authority that as a result of reviewing its political balance, the Council’s second representative, who is a co-optee on the Authority, should come from the Conservative Group, that Councillor Simson be confirmed as the council’s representative in place of Councillor Deane.




45             The following Notices of Motion have been submitted by Members for consideration:


              (1) Fur Free City


45.1         The Notice of Motion as listed in the agenda was proposed by Councillor Fowler on behalf of the Labour Group.  Councillor Fowler noted that fur farming had been banned by the Parliament Act 2000 and yet the fashion continued as the practice was allowed to operate in other countries and imports of goods meant it was difficult for consumers to differentiate between real and fake fur products.  She was aware that many cities around the world had taken action to ban fur and councils has amended street trading licences to prevent the sale of fur.  She hoped that councillors would support the motion and enable the council to take a lead on this issue and hopefully achieve a total ban.


45.2         The Mayor noted that it was Councillor Fowler’s maiden speech and congratulated her on behalf of the council.


45.3         Councillor Evans formally seconded the motion and stated that the use of fur had become an important consideration for people and they wanted clearer labelling and for retailers to stop miss-selling goods.  It was an important issue and Brighton and Hove should be a fur free city.


45.4         Councillor O’Quinn supported the motion and noted that the EU had the largest fur farms producing 50% of the global trade. She believed that fur looked better on live animals and hoped that the motion would be supported.


45.5         Councillor Druitt welcomed the motion and questioned why the importing of fur was still permitted as it made no sense.  He believed it was important for the council to support the principle and ensure that it controlled what was available on its own land and in its properties and any change of policy to enable that should be supported.


45.6         Councillor Miller stated that he supported the intention to protect animals but questioned how the objective of the motion could be achieved and enforced.  It would be difficult to take action against local businesses and to ensure that products were not being mislabelled.


45.7         Councillor Fowler thanked everyone for their comments and the support for the aims of the motion and hoped that animal welfare standards could be improved by taking action and making a positive stand against this trade.


45.8         The Mayor then put the following motion to the vote:


This Council resolves to request the Policy & Resources Committee:


·           To consider the introduction of a policy to prohibit the sale of any product wholly or partially made with real animal fur on Council owned land and at Council run or Council leased markets. This ban to cover such items as fur coats, vintage fur, fur shawls, garments with fur trim, fur pompom hats, and fur accessories and trinkets.

·           To explore the viability of extending said policy to the sale of leather.

·           To support the Fur Free Markets campaign of the animal welfare charity, Respect for Animals, the UK’s leading anti-fur organisation, by:

a)     Becoming a signatory to the initiative; and

b)     Seeking the advice and assistance of the charity in the enforcement of this ban.


45.9         The Mayor confirmed that the motion had been carried unanimously.


(2) Housing Benefit


45.10      The Notice of Motion as listed in the agenda was proposed by Councillor Williams on behalf of the Labour Group.  She stated that housing benefit failed to keep in touch with the increases in private rents which meant that people either had to cut back on other essentials or get into debt.  She hoped that the motion would be supported.


45.11      Councillor Evans formally seconded the motion and stated that the situation was only the top of the ice-berg.  People were faced with living in sub-standard accommodation with increasing rent levels and other factors such as the gig-economy and zero-hour contracts having an impact on their ability to afford the rents.  There was a need to find ways to support people and she hoped that the motion would be supported.


45.12      Councillor Gibson moved an amendment on behalf of the Green Group and stated that it sought to strengthen the motion and to look at what could be done locally to assist people by finding the means to provide housing for them and to support low income households.


45.13      Councillor Hugh-Jones formally seconded the amendment and noted that there was a reliance on the Government to make changes but felt that things could be done locally to improve the situation.


45.14      Councillor Platts stated that the Administration intended to have a report on how to support low income households and those facing increasing pressures of debt and hoped that this could be built into the budget process and supported by all Members.


45.15      Councillor Grimshaw stated that she fully supported the motion and the amendment and noted that she had experienced the situation and was faced with decisions about how to meet her living costs. Thankfully, she had been able to access her pension recently which meant she was able to meet her rent bills for another year.


45.16      Councillor Mears stated that the Conservative Group would not support the motion but were happy to support the amendment.  She also noted that where there was an increase in housing benefit, private landlords tended to then increase the rent levels.  There was also a lack of affordable council housing which needed to be addressed so that those on housing benefit could afford the rent.


45.17      Councillor Williams noted the comments and confirmed she was happy to accept the amendment.


45.18      The Mayor noted that the amendment had been accepted and put the following motion as amended to the vote:


This council resolves to:

(1)   Request the Policy & Resources Committee to take into account the need to reduce the burden on the poorest households in the city by making the council tax reduction scheme more generous and/or increasing funds available for discretionary support as part of this year’s budget process, thereby easing pressure on low-income households facing high housing costs; and


(2)   Ask the Chief Executive to write to the Secretary of State for Communities;

·      Expressing the council’s concern about local people being priced out of private sector housing at a time where there is insufficient social housing available; and

·      Demanding that Housing Benefit levels are increased to an appropriate level.


45.19      The Mayor confirmed that the motion had been agreed unanimously.


(3)   School Transport Policy Panel


45.20      Note: The item was taken as part of the consideration of Item No. 37(1) Deputation concerning Home to School Transport and is detailed under that item (paragraphs 37.6-37.20).


(4)   Valley Gardens


45.21      Note: The item was taken as part of the consideration of Item No. 37(3) Deputation concerning Valley Gardens and is detailed under that item (paragraphs 37.21-37.38).


Closure Motion


45.22      The Mayor noted that the meeting had been in session for 4 hours and in accordance with council procedural rules, she was required to move a closure motion.  She therefore moved that the meeting should be concluded and put the motion to the vote was unanimously opposed.


45.23      The Mayor noted that the motion had been lost and therefore invited Councillor Heley to move the next motion.


(5) Green New Deal


45.24      The Notice of Motion as listed in the agenda was proposed by Councillor Heley on behalf of the Green Group.  She stated that the country was facing a climate emergency and the council was not acting quickly enough.  There was a need to restructure the economy and society to address the issue and enable the creation of new jobs in the low carbon industry if the target of being a net zero city by 2030 was to be achieved.  The importance of the Green New Deal was now recognised and had to be supported and taken forward with partner agencies to prevent the catastrophe that would result if no action was taken.


45.25      Councillor Hills formally seconded the motion and stated that there was a clear need to put the climate first and take necessary actions to protect it and to deliver environmental change.


45.26      Councillor Platts moved an amendment on behalf of the Labour Group and stated that she hoped all the Groups could work together to ensure that action could be implemented locally to make a change.  She believed the amendment strengthened the motion and that it could be supported.


45.27      Councillor Evans formally seconded the amendment and stated that it was an issue that was close to her heart and she hoped that a way forward could be achieved to address the issue.


45.28      Councillor Nemeth stated that he shared the concerns raised over climate change but was not as clear about the Green New Deal as there appeared to be a number of different interpretations.  However, he hoped that there could be constructive discussions locally and an action plan agreed that could be taken forward.


45.29      Councillor Miller welcomed the motion and stated that there was a need to consider what actions could be taken forward and how the ambitions of the Green New Deal could be achieved.


45.30      Councillor Heley noted the comments and confirmed that she was happy to accept the amendment.


45.31      The Mayor noted that the amendment had been accepted and therefore put the following motion as amended to the vote:


This council resolves to declare:

-      support for a ‘Green New Deal,’ as a policy framework that seeks to address climate change in ways that also: boost jobs, address poverty and inequality, and restructure our economic system;

This Council asks:

-        For the Chief Executive to write to the Secretary of State and the Chancellor seeking their support for a Green New Deal and requesting an allocation of funding and resources to implement this locally

-        For the Chief Executive to write to the Shadow Secretary of State and Shadow Chancellor, expressing our support for a Green New Deal.

This Council further requests that Policy & Resources Committee commission a report detailing how, alongside existing work: [1]

-      poverty, inequality and accessibility can be addressed through the council’s plan to become net carbon neutral (‘net zero’) by 2030;

-      the council can work with partners (e.g.: Greater Brighton Economic Board, Chamber of Commerce) and specifically through the Local Enterprise Partnership, Coast2Capital, with particular reference to the Local Industrial Strategy and regional collaboration to lobby government for a stimulus package for low-carbon, ‘green’ jobs and decarbonisation projects; [2]

-      the council can demonstrate good practice as a major employer by developing net-zero initiatives and employment opportunities;

-      council can optimise the green credentials of council-owned buildings and public transport.


45.32      The Mayor confirmed that the motion had been carried unanimously.


45.33      (6) Safe School Walking Zones


45.34      Note: The item was taken as part of the consideration of Item No. 38(2) Petition for debate concerning School Walking Zones and is detailed under that item (paragraphs 38.13-38.30).




46          Close of Meeting


46.1         The Mayor thanked everyone for attending and closed the meeting.





The meeting concluded at 9.21pm










Dated this

day of