Agenda item - Notices of Motion

The following Notices of Motion have been submitted by Members for consideration (copies attached):

 

(a)               Badger Cull.  Proposed by Councillor Wakefield.

 

(b)              The Transparency in Lobbying, Non-Party Campaigning, and Trade Union Administration Bill.  Proposed by Councillor Hawtree.

 

(c)               British National Speed Trials.  Proposed by Councillor K. Norman.

 

(d)              Energy Price Freeze.  Proposed by Councillor Morgan.

 

(e)               Fixed Odds Betting Terminals.  Proposed by Councillor Daniel.

(a)       Badger Cull

 

61.1         The Notice of Motion as detailed in the agenda was proposed by Councillor Wakefield and seconded by Councillor Phillips.

 

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

 

“This council notes that the widespread public and scientific concern at the government’s badger culling pilots, and the government’s stated intention to roll out badger culling more widely across the UK including East Sussex.

           

However the government appointed Independent Scientific Group's ten year randomised badger culling trial concluded that “badger culling can make no meaningful contribution to cattle tuberculosis control in Britain." 

 

The RSPCA have also said that “as culling cannot be selective many perfectly healthy badgers will be slaughtered as ‘collateral damage’ in fact, as many as 6 out of 7 badgers killed could be [bovine Tuberculosis] free.”

 

Many experts have pointed out that better on-farm welfare, tighter bio security and stricter cattle movement controls are key to combating the disease.

 

Vaccination can also be used to protect badgers from catching this disease and to prevent them from passing it back to cows, as is now the case in Wales. Cattle vaccination also has a role to play long term, once the current regulatory hurdles are overcome.

 

This council objects to the badger culling pilots and any future expansion to other parts of the country, including East Sussex.

 

This council therefore:

 

a)           Asks that the Chief Executive of our council writes to the Secretary of State informing them of council’s objections.

 

b)           Requests a report to Policy & Resources Committee setting out how the council will work with tenant farmers to prevent culling from taking place on council-owned land.

 

c)            Joins the RSPCA in asking the city’s MPs to support Early Day Motion 661, calling for any roll out of the cull to be subject to a vote in Parliament.”

 

61.3         The motion was carried.

 

(b)       The Transparency in Lobbying, Non-Party Campaigning and Trade Union Administration Bill

 

61.4         The Notice of Motion as detailed in the agenda was proposed by Councillor Hawtree and seconded by Councillor Buckley.

 

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

 

 “This Council calls upon the city's three MPs to reject Part 2 of the so-called ‘gagging’ Bill as it will have a deleterious effect upon vital, meaningful civic engagement in democratic life. It will strike at the very core of an English tradition: the right to disagree.

 

As the Bill stands, it will severely curtail, and place a costly, indeed surreal administrative burden upon charities, especially in the year before a General Election. Such charities' political lobbying is, of course, already regulated by the Charity Commissioners. 

 

As the independent Commission On Civil Society And Democratic Engagement panel, Chaired by Baron Harris of Pentregarth (former Bishop of Oxford), has concluded in a recent report: “the combined effect of lowering the threshold for registration, cutting spending limits, introducing a cap in constituencies and broadening the scope of activities subject to regulation is extensive: it is likely to result in a broad range of everyday issue-focussed campaigning being caught by the Bill”.

 

There is opposition to these from organisations as varied as the Christian Institute and the National Secular Society; the Countryside Alliance and Friends of The Earth. Furthermore, the Joint Committee on Human Rights has expressed concern that, with organisational costs being taken into account, the Bill would harm the fundamental right to assembly for rallies and marches.

 

We believe campaigning organisations are vital to a healthy democracy and civil society. To curb them through this bill would be incredibly damaging to our democratic well being.

 

In light of the recommendations by the Commission on Civil Society and Democratic Engagement, we ask that the Bill be rejected - so that the next General Election can be conducted in an open and honest fashion, without a gag being placed upon those it is meant to represent and help.

 

61.6         The motion was carried.

 

(c)       Brighton National Speed Trials

 

61.7         The Notice of Motion as detailed in the agenda was proposed by Councillor K. Norman and seconded by Councillor G. Theobald.

61.8         Councillor Fitch moved an amendment to the notice of motion on behalf of the Labour Co-Operative Group which was seconded by Councillor Robins.

 

61.9         The Mayor noted that the amendment had not been accepted by Councillor K. Norman and put it to the vote which was carried.

 

61.10    The Mayor then put the following motion as amended to the vote:

 

“This Council notes that the historic Brighton National Speed Trials event, organised by the Brighton & Hove Motor Club, has been an integral part of the city’s outdoor events calendar since 1905, when Sir Harry Preston persuaded the Town Corporation to lay a tarmac motor racing track between Black Rock and the Aquarium. This much-loved event attracts many visitors to Brighton & Hove and hence makes a significant contribution to the local economy.

 

This Council notes the proposals to stop supporting the Brighton National Speed Trials on Madeira Drive.

 

Therefore, this Council resolves to ask the Economic Development & Culture Committee to give consideration to the staging of the Brighton National Speed Trials event in 2014 and beyond as part of setting its annual Events Programme for 2014.”

 

61.11    The motion was carried.

 

(d)       Energy Price Freeze

 

61.12    The Notice of Motion as detailed in the agenda was proposed by Councillor Morgan and seconded by Councillor Mitchell.

 

61.13    Councillor Sykes proposed an amendment to the notice of motion on behalf of the Green Group which was seconded by Councillor Jarrett.

 

61.14    The Mayor noted that the amendment had been accepted by Councillor Morgan.

 

61.15    The Mayor then put the following motion as amended to the vote:

 

“The Council notes the the ‘big six energy companies’ have increased their prices for gas and electricity by 37% since October 2010. In comparison, average earnings have risen by just 4.4% over the same period.

 

The Council notes the recent report by energy regulator OFGEM that showed profits made by the Big Six Energy Companies,  British Gas, Npower, SSE, Scottish Power, e.On and EDF have risen to £53 per household in 2012, in comparison to £8 in 2009.

 

The Council recognises the impact these price rises are having on residents across the City, especially vulnerable groups such as the elderly, and those working on low incomes whose wages have not kept pace with the spiralling cost of utility bills.

 

Finally, this Council also recognises the importance, in particular across our City, of home energy efficiency measures in mitigating high domestic fuel bills.

 

This Council resolves:

 

1)                 To request the Chief Executive and Leader of the Council writes to the Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change:

a.            To urge him to implement an energy price freeze;

b.            To request that the funds currently made available from levies on energy companies for home energy efficiency measures are not reduced in any way by an energy price freeze;

c.            Reiterating the request of this Council in March 2012 to launch an independent public inquiry into the Big Six energy companies in order to identify market reforms that will make energy pricing fairer, reduce fuel poverty and increase trust between consumers and companies.

 

2)                 To request that officers continue to work closely with community and voluntary associations across the City to support vulnerable groups over the winter period who may find themselves unable to afford to heat their homes.”

 

61.16    The motion was carried.

 

(e)       Fixed Odd Betting Terminals

 

61.17    The Notice of Motion as detailed in the agenda was proposed by Councillor Daniel and seconded by Councillor Lepper.

 

61.18    Councillor Cox proposed an amendment to the notice of motion on behalf of the Conservative Group which was seconded by Councillor Simson.

 

61.19    Councillor Randall proposed an amendment to the notice of motion on behalf of the Green Group which was seconded by Councillor Powell.

 

61.20    The Mayor noted that the amendment moved by Councillor Cox had not been accepted by Councillor Daniel and put it to the vote which was carried.

 

61.21    The Mayor noted that the amendment moved by Councillor Randall had been accepted.

 

61.22    The Mayor then put the following motion as amended to the vote:

 

“This council notes the terrible impact on vulnerable people caused by the provisions of the Gambling Act 2005, introduced by the then Labour Government, namely:

 

1.      The prevalence of Fixed Odds Betting Terminals (FOBTs) in betting shops often referred to in the media as “the crack cocaine of gambling”.

 

2.      That, unlike fruit machines in pubs, bingo halls and amusement arcades where cash stakes are limited to £2, gamblers can bet with cash or via a debit card up to £100 every 20 seconds on FOBTs, more than four times as fast as the rate of play in casinos.

 

3.      That in 2012, over £1.5bn was lost on FOBTs across the UK. More profit was made from FOBTs than from the National Lottery, when according to the most recent British Gambling Prevalence Survey, 56% of the population play the Lottery, but just 4% play FOBTs.

 

4.      Empirical evidence that suggests FOBTs are the most addictive form of gambling.

 

5.      Research carried out by Geofutures, which found there to be four times as many betting shops in areas of high unemployment than in areas of low unemployment.

 

6.      Research carried out by 2CV in Newham, which found that the average bet per spin on FOBTs is £17, and the average amount of cash inserted into the machine is £55 per session, with one in five putting in over £100 a time.

 

7.      Nationally, more than 80% of turnover in betting shops and more than half of profits are derived from FOBTs. Less than 20% of stakes in betting shops are over the counter.

 

8.      A recent economic analysis undertaken by Landman Economics, commissioned by the Campaign for Fairer Gambling, which assessed the impact of FOBTs on local economies and across the wider economy. The report concluded that every £1bn spent on FOBTs produces a net reduction of 13,000 jobs, compared to if spent in the wider consumer economy. The projected doubling of revenue from FOBTs by 2023 could cost a further 23,000 jobs across the economy.

 

This Council further notes:

 

1.            The announcement made by Maria Miller MP, Secretary of State for Culture Media and Sport, on 10th October 2013 in response to the Triennial Review of gaming machine stakes and prizes which left the stakes on FOBTs unchanged but concluded that “there remains a serious case to answer in relation to the potential harm caused by category B2 gaming machines and we consider their future to be unresolved pending further work, which is already underway.”

 

2.            The position in the Republic of Ireland where the Government has introduced legislation to outlaw FOBTs in betting shops.

 

This council believes that the increase in FOBTs is causing significant problems and believes that the Government should either use the existing legislative framework, or introduce legislation to outlaw B2 casino games in betting shops.

 

At the very least, local authorities should be given the powers to protect the local amenity and wellbeing of communities by (1) stopping the proliferation of betting shops and (2) reducing the maximum stakes and slowing down the speed of play.

 

This council therefore requests:

                                                        

1.      The Chief Executive writes to the Secretary of state for Culture, Media and Sport to outline the terms of this motion and demand urgent action against FOBTs by the Government; and

 

2.      The Policy & Resources Committee to consider the use of the Sustainable Communities Act to control the spread and activities of betting shops, and reduce the maximum stake on Fixed Odds Betting Terminals to £2 per spin.”

 

61.23    The motion was carried.