To consider Notices of Motion.

Council considered two notices of motion. The Chairman informed Council that the third notice of motion concerning blue badges had been withdrawn from the meeting and would be deferred to a future full Council meeting.

 

Council debated the first motion set out below:

 

Motion 1 – Timings of meetings of the council

 

In moving the motion Councillor MD Lloyd-Hayes made the following points:

 

·         The timings of meetings during the day did not encourage local residents to engage in local issues or influence decision making. Employment prevented people from attending meetings during the day;

·         Day time meetings were also a disincentive to local residents with jobs from standing for election as councillors. As a consequence members on the council were not representative of the local community;

·         The chairmen of the committees at the council had the discretion to adjust the timings of meetings outside of core working hours. Since this had been introduced under the new constitution no meetings had been scheduled at times that would be more convenient for local residents;

 

The following principal points were raised by members in the debate:

 

·         At evening meetings of other public bodies there was limited attendance from members of the public;

·         Chairmen of the committees could adjust the timings of their meetings if it was felt appropriate;

·         Travelling long distances in the dark following evening meetings posed a risk to councillors;

·         The lack of public transport in the evening militated against public attendance at meetings scheduled later in the day;

·         Other authorities with evening meetings failed to attract a good turnout from the public;

·         There was sympathy for the principles and sentiment that had motivated the motion;

·         It was commented that requiring half of all meetings to be outside of the council’s core hours was felt to be excessive;

·         The impact on officer time was raised and the cost to the authority of attendance at evening meetings;

·         The council covered a large rural area and there were a number of local responsibilities members had in the evenings including parish council meetings;

·         The scheduling of meetings in the evening had been attempted before and had not been a success;

·         Members were urged to approve the motion for a trial period of six months to assess the effectiveness of evening meetings;

·         A members had recently had to resign from the council because work commitments were incompatible with the requirement to attend daytime meetings;

·         The current scheduling of meetings during the day discouraged members of the public from becoming councillors or attending meetings; and

·         The current scheduling of meetings had resulted in a uniformity of councillors. 

 

In seconding the motion Councillor A Warmington made the following points:

 

·         It was disappointing that the debate had been trivialised;

·         Although chairmen had the discretion to adjust the timings they had chosen not to change the time of meetings to accommodate members of the public;

·         It was very difficult to be a councillor if you had a full time job. An understanding employer was required;

·         The current membership of the Council was not representative of the local community which was attributable to the lack of evening meetings; and

·         Members of the Council had resigned because they were unable to attend meetings during the day as a consequence of work commitments.

 

In summing up Councillor MD Lloyd Hayes made the following points:

 

·         It was a predictable response from members and it was noted that no amendments had been proposed;

·         In response to the impact on officers time it was commented that time off in lieu could be used; and

·         The council needed younger, working age people which evening meetings would help to achieve.

 

The motion, as published, was put to the vote and a majority of Council voted against the motion. The motion was lost.

 

Motion 2 – Street cleaning and litter

 

In moving the motion Councillor EJ Swinglehurst made the following points:

 

·         The motion was intended to support efforts to reduce litter; and

·         It was noted that a number of initiatives pursued by local businesses, including reusable coffee cups, contributed positively towards litter reduction.

 

In seconding the motion Councillor BA Durkin made the following points:

 

·         Local community groups were proactive in addressing litter concerns and council officers had volunteered for litter picks;

·         There was a need for young people to be educated to not drop litter; and

·         Support from members would help highlight the issue.

 

The following principal points were raised by members in the debate:

 

·         There was broad agreement with the objectives of the motion;

·         The introduction of a social responsibility tax was raised;

·         A small addition to paragraph 4 of the motion was requested to include the wording ‘…but encourage the recycling of…’ after the wording ‘disposal of’. The change was acceptable to the proposer and seconder of the motion;

·         The amount of litter attributable to packaging was not felt to be significant. Educating people not to drop litter should be the main focus of efforts to reduce the problem.

·         There were some companies who offered free-of-charge enforcement services and details would be sent to the cabinet member.

·         The removal of litter bins by Balfour Beatty.

 

A motion that the question be now put was proposed by Councillor RJ Phillips and seconded by Councillor CA Gandy and agreed by Council.

 

After allowing the proposer to sum up, the Chairman put the motion, including the change outlined above, to the vote. The motion was carried.

 

Resolved – that the Executive is asked to write on behalf of Herefordshire Council to government making the following points:

 

1.    The cuts in local authority funding have impacted our ability to deliver non statutory services.  The rural sparsity of Herefordshire presents a particular challenge to our street cleaning programme and verge litter clearing which are non-statutory services.

 

2.    The increasing volume of litter being dropped in the county on our streets and both major and minor roads is unsightly and dangerous.  We recognise the tremendous efforts made by local people who go on litter picks or who just pick up litter when they see it.  However, it is neither practical nor safe to rely on local volunteers to litter pick on busy highways.

 

3.    Therefore we raise this issue with the suggestion that sufficient finances be made available to local authorities to attend to the problem.  Such money should be raised from a tax on fast food (take away) outlets, confectionary and crisp manufacturers, alcohol and soft drink companies and tobacco companies since these are the main contributors to the problem.  It will not be a pasty tax but a litter tax (although some benefit to health may accrue).

 

4.    Defra should also be encouraged to run a campaign to stop the careless disposal of but encourage the recycling of silage wrappers, fertiliser bags, seed bags, feed sacks, baling twine and mineral buckets.

 

5.      Furthermore, the Executive is asked to consider whether further steps can be taken to support Parish Councils, local community groups and individuals who wish to deal with this problem in their area.   The Executive is also asked to look into what can be done to encourage local business to engage with this challenge to reduce waste and litter in our lovely county.