Agenda item - Notices of Motion Reported to Council for Information

Note: The following Notices of Motion were referred to the Cabinet and are reported back to the Council for information, without debate, in accordance with Procedural Rule 24.

 

(a)   Bottle Drinking Water.  Proposed by Councillor Morgan.

 

(b)  Promoting Responsible Dog Ownership.  Proposed by Councillor Duncan.

 

(c)   Free Speech and the Older People’s Council.  Proposed by Councillor Randall.

 

(d)  Identity Cards.  Proposed by Councillor Kitcat.

13.1       The Mayor noted that the following notices of motion and the decisions thereon had been reported back to the Council in accordance with Procedural Rule 24 for information only and would therefore be noted:

 

(a)            Bottled Drinking Water.

 

13.2       The Cabinet considered the following Notice of Motion submitted to Council on 13 March 2008 by Councillors Morgan and Mitchell. An amended version of the Notice of Motion was tabled at the meeting reflecting the amendments moved by the Green Party and adopted at Council on 13 March 2008.

 

“This council notes that the majority of restaurants in Brighton and Hove serve bottled mineral water, and that while most will provide tap water on request, some do not.

 

Tap water is of very good quality, up to 500 times cheaper than bottled water and emits around 300 times less CO2 in processing than bottled alternatives. A glass of tap water has a carbon footprint of 0.3g of CO2, a bottle of mineral water gas a carbon footprint of up to 185g of CO2.  Much of the bottled water we drink is shipped in from overseas, and shipping has been shown to have emissions greater even than airfreight. The use of bottled water too often contributes to landfill where glass and plastic bottles used to provide the water are not recycled. In many organisations, including the council, disposable plastic cups are often used to serve the water, and these are also frequently not recycled.

 

This council notes the “London On Tap” campaign run by Thames Water and the Mayor of London, and the competition to design reusable carafes for use in restaurants across the capital, and resolves to consider a similar initiative.

 

This council resolves to encourage restaurants, cafés and hotels in the city to provide tap water on request or as a matter of course, and to encourage the use of reusable carafes which encourage people to opt for the cheaper and more sustainable alternative to bottled water.

 

This Council asks that the relevant committee considers whether bottled mineral water and disposable plastic cups should continue to be provided within the city council and whether instead to provide tap water served in reusable glasses to councillors, staff and visitors, and also to consider a review of the use of water coolers to ensure that water used is as far as possible locally sourced and sustainable.”

 

13.3      The Chairman invited Councillor Morgan to speak to the motion.

 

13.4       Councillor Morgan addressed the Cabinet on the substantive points of the motion.

 

13.5       RESOLVED –

(1)       That the Notice of Motion be noted and

 

(2)       That the Cabinet would determine the provision of water when the current contract expired.

 

(b)            Promoting responsible Dog Ownership

 

13.6       The Cabinet considered the following Notice of Motion submitted to Council on 13 March 2008 by Councillors Duncan and Davey.

 

‘This Council recognises the social and health benefits of responsible dog ownership, the harm caused by irresponsible dog owners failing to clean up after or control their animals, and expresses its support for preserving open access to public areas including (but not limited to) beaches and golf courses for dog owners acting responsibly.

 

This Council notes that:

·            Dogs play an essential role in improving health, welfare and quality of life for many thousands of residents of and visitors to the city

·            Proposals to ban dog walking on outlying beaches and open spaces in the city will effectively ban dog owners from accessing such spaces, since many such residents’ only use of these facilities is during their daily walking of the dog

·            Dog owners and walkers who fail to control their companion animals or clean-up after them are endangering the health and welfare of others. This is contrary to both national legislation and local bye-laws and should not be tolerated

·            Any extension of the current ban on dogs on beaches between the two piers could force visitors to the city to leave their pets in vehicles with probable adverse consequences on the welfare of the animals concerned.

 

13.7       This Council therefore

 

·            Expresses its opposition to proposals to extend the current summer ban on dogs between the two piers to all beaches within the city limits and require dogs to be on leads on other open spaces including Hollingbury Golf Course

·            Resolves to take firm action against irresponsible owners who do not clean up after their dogs or control them properly in public places

·            Supports the sentiment in the petition organized by local campaign group ‘It’s Barking Mad’, the text of which follows, and which has been signed (as at Monday, March 3) by 576 people including a Member of the European Parliament, one of the city’s Members of Parliament, three Prospective Parliamentary Candidates and 20 members of this council.

 

“We fully support the need to have some designated dog-free beaches as currently in place. We are for fair access to the beaches for all and oppose an all out ban on dogs on the beaches between April and September. We are for a crack down on fouling. We are against unnecessary dog restrictions on the promenade, the Undercliff Walk and at Hollingbury & Waterhall golf courses.”

 

13.8       The Chairman invited Councillor Duncan to speak to the motion.

 

13.9       Councillor Duncan addressed the Cabinet on the substantive points of the motion.

 

13.10    RESOLVED –

 

(1)       That the Notice of Motion be noted and

 

(2)       That the Notice of Motion be considered when determining Item 20 on the agenda (‘Dog Control Order’).

 

20.     Dog Control Orders

 

20.1       The Cabinet considered a report of the Director of Environment detailing proposals to replace current bylaws relating to dogs and the Dogs (Fouling of the Land) Act 1996, with a Dog Control Order.  The replacement of the current bylaws with Dog Control Orders was designated under the Clean Neighbourhoods and Environment Act 2005 Sections 55 and 56 (for copy see minute book).

 

20.2       The Cabinet also took into consideration the petition, Notice of Motion and Deputation as above, when considering the issue.

 

20.3       RESOLVED- Having considered the information and the reasons set out in the report, the Cabinet accepted the following recommendations:

(1)   That the making of an order pursuant to Section 55 of the Clean Neighbourhoods and Environment Act 2005 providing for offences relating to the control of dogs in respect of land within Brighton & Hove be agreed.  The Dog Control Order shall relate to:-

 

(a)  the removal of dog faeces;

(b)  for keeping of dogs on leads;

(c)   the exclusion of dogs.

 

          In respect of land specified in appendix 3.

 

(2)       That the level of fixed penalty fro contravening a dog control order be set at £80.00; and

 

(3)       That the commencement of the Dog Control Order from Midnight 31^st December 2008 be approved.

(c)            Free Speech and the Older People’s Council

 

13.11    The Cabinet considered the following Notice of Motion submitted to Council on 24 April 2008 by Councillors Randall and Duncan.

 

This council applauds the excellent work of the Brighton and Hove Older People’s Council (OPC).

 

It also notes the all-party support for local democracy expressed recently and often in the debate on the introduction of the cabinet system in Brighton and Hove.

 

In the spirit of this commonly expressed belief:

 

The council resolves to work with the Brighton and Hove Older People’s Council to remove the clause from the OPC constitution that threatens with suspension any member who:

 

‘Speaks or publishes any written work with the attention of affecting public support for a political party’ or ‘canvasses in the interests of any political party with the exception of delivering political party leaflets.’

 

13.12    The Chairman invited Councillor Randall to speak to the motion.

 

13.13    Councillor Randall addressed the Cabinet on the substantive points of the motion.

 

13.14    RESOLVED –

 

(1)       That the Notice of Motion be noted and

 

(2)       That discussions with the Older Peoples Council be held as to their ability to determine their own terms of reference.

 

(d)            Identity Cards

 

13.15    The Cabinet considered the following Notice of Motion submitted to Council on 24 April 2008 by Councillors Kitcat and Randall.

 

This council notes that the Home Secretary has announced that some foreign nationals will begin carrying ID Cards in November 2008 with some UK citizens to start receiving the cards in 2009. The introduction of these cards will have an effect upon all of the people of Brighton & Hove. This council believes that:

 

1. The disadvantages of such a scheme will outweigh any likely benefits to the people of Brighton & Hove;

 

2. The scheme will do little, if anything, to prevent terrorism, crime or fraud;

 

3. The national database that underpins the identity card scheme may facilitate criminal fraud, terrorism and potential state abuses of human rights;

 

4. The ID card and database proposals are likely to fundamentally alter the relationship between the state and the individual.  According to Government estimates, the cost of the scheme will reach £5.5 billion, with independent commentators predicting substantially higher costs.  Brighton & Hove residents will be required to pay an estimated £30 for a stand-alone ID card or £93 for a passport and ID card together.

 

5. The city's share of the scheme's £5.5 billion cost over ten years would amount to approximately £24 million equivalent to 40 additional police officers on our streets for the next ten years.

 

This council resolves to:

 

1. Affiliate to the 'No2ID' campaign, which already includes MPs and several political parties;

 

2. Make representations at every possible stage, reiterating this council's opposition to ID cards;

 

3. Take no part in any pilot scheme or feasibility work in relation to the introduction of national identity cards;

 

4. Make it a policy of the council to ensure that national identity cards would not be required to access council services or benefits unless specifically required to do so by law;

 

5. Only co-operate with the national identity cards scheme where to do otherwise would be unlawful;

 

6. Instruct the Chief Executive to write to the Home Secretary expressing these views and asking her to reconsider her decision to push forward with this scheme.

 

13.16    The Chairman invited Councillor Kitcat to speak to the motion.

 

13.17    Councillor Kitcat addressed the Cabinet on the substantive points of the motion.

 

13.18    In reaching their decision the Cabinet also considered the petition as presented by Councillor Kitcat at item 8.5.

 

13.19    RESOLVED –

 

(1)       That the Notice of Motion be noted.

 

(2)       That the principle of the motion be recognised and that relevant intervention be undertaken as and when Government begin formal consultation or initiation of the project.