Agenda item

Motions

The Council’s Constitution provides for a maximum of two hours for debate on motions. The time limit for member speeches is three minutes and the time limit for proposing a motion is five minutes.

In accordance with Procedural Rule 10.2 in Part 4 of the Council Constitution, the Chief Executive will prepare a short accompanying note for each motion in respect of any implications for climate change, resources, human rights and any other pertinent factors they may wish to include in accordance with the Council’s Policy Framework.

Motion 870 - Equalities

Proposed by Cllr Lesley Williams

Seconded by Cllr Kate Haigh

This Council has committed to do all it can to understand and address the systematic prejudices, barriers and biases that affect the lives of Black and Asian Minority Ethnic people.

This Council commits to undertaking an equalities audit when services are designed and commissioned to remove access barriers for all groups with protected characteristics.

This Council investigate adopting the Rooney Rule. This would ensure that Black Asian and Minority Ethnic people are always short listed and interviewed when middle and senior management vacancies occur.

Motion 871 – Special Schools

Proposed by Cllr Patrick Molyneux

Seconded by Cllr Richard Boyles

This Council notes the significant investment into special schools in this year’s capital budget, including Alderman Knight in Tewkesbury, and Belmont and Battledown in Cheltenham.

This Council further notes the extremely valuable role these schools play in supporting some of the most vulnerable children in our communities, apologises for the misguided actions of previous councils in seeking their closure, and commits to protect them in future.

Motion 872 – Response to Covid-19 pandemic

Proposed by Cllr Andrew Gravells

Seconded by Cllr Carole Allaway Martin

This Council puts on record its thanks to the NHS teams leading on vaccination in this county, and to the firefighters, other council staff and volunteers who support them, for their exceptional work in delivering the vaccine across our county.

This Council also notes the exceptional efforts throughout the last year of GCC staff in public health, social care and across the council, who have risen to the challenge of supporting our county at this most difficult time.

Motion 873 – Social care funding

Proposed by Cllr Iain Dobie

Seconded by Cllr Jeremy Hilton

This Council notes that

Adult social care is the single largest item of county council expenditure. At £157 million next year it represents nearly one third of all spend.
The social care funding framework is not fit for purpose and is failing the people who rely on it.
The Covid-19 pandemic has exacerbated many of these problems, including increasing levels of unmet need.
The adult social care funding gap is predicted to total £3.6 billion by 2024/25
That by 2030, one in five people across the UK are going to be aged over 65 – while in Gloucestershire, we are predicted to exceed one in four.

This Council recalls that:

The Conservative Government pledged, in its 2017 manifesto, that “where others have failed to lead, we will act” on adult social care funding.
The Government committed to publishing a green paper on adult social care funding in the 2017 Spring Budget.
In July 2018, the Government said its green paper would be published by the end of the year.
In January 2019, the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care stated that a green paper would be published in April 2019.
In July 2019, Boris Johnson promised a long-term settlement to give financial stability to care homes and reassurance to the elderly.
In December 2019 Boris Johnson reiterated his promise for an imminent plan
To date, no green paper has materialised.
In the 2021 Spring Budget, the Conservative Government again failed to announce any long-term support plan for adult social care.

This Council resolves to:

Write to the Prime Minister and Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, expressing the Council’s extreme frustration that the Government has failed to produce any long-term plan for a system creaking under unsustainable pressure.

· Ask the Prime Minister and Secretary of State to urgently publish the social care green paper, and to include a proper consultation on funding options.

Motion 874 - Gloucestershire deserves a return of civic pride

Proposed by Cllr Paul Hodgkinson

Seconded by Cllr Joe Harris

This Council notes:

· That highways inspections are meant to take place monthly on A roads, and less frequently on other classes of road.

· That these inspections are meant to pick up potholes across our road network, but also broken, obscured or illegible signs and worn out road markings.

· That such issues are about more than just road safety, but maintaining and restoring a sense of civic pride in our county.

However, this Council also recognises that these issues are routinely left for many months or even years before any action is taken, and often requires councillors or residents to report issues themselves and repeatedly chase for something to be done.

This Council knows that this is not good enough and therefore resolves to carry out a root and branch review of the inspection process to identify why this process is failing and to have a robust plan to ensure that issues are resolved. Because Gloucestershire deserves better.

Motion 875 - Commitment to carry out local inquiry into Covid-19 pandemic in Gloucestershire

Proposed by Cllr Colin Hay

Seconded by Cllr Lesley Williams

This Council notes that, tragically, more than 1,000 people have died from Covid in Gloucestershire, including over 400 in our care homes.

This Council also notes that the Government promised to throw a ‘protective ring’ around our care homes, yet a hugely disproportionate number of deaths occurred in these settings.

This Council further notes that no council services was unaffected by the pandemic, and that many areas may never return to ‘business as usual’ again.

This Council recognises that we will be living with the after effects of Covid for some time, and therefore resolves to:

· Hold a local inquiry into this administration’s handling of the pandemic in Gloucestershire, including wider aspects of affected Council business.

· To run exercises to test our resilience for future Covid-19 spikes or future epidemics.

· To share all of these results with the public in order to be transparent on areas where this council could improve.

This Council also recognises that the Government has committed to a national inquiry, but notes that they have refused to commit to any timescale for this and believes that it’s critical this Council puts in place those changes that are needed as soon as possible, so that we in Gloucestershire can protect Gloucestershire’s residents.

Minutes:

Motion 870 – Equalities

Cllr Lesley Williams proposed and Cllr Kate Haigh seconded the motion included on the agenda.

Cllr L Williams informed the meeting that she was aware that the council was committed to do everything it could to create a diverse workforce. She informed members that a diverse workforce brought new ideas and experiences; would help inform on the needs of all residents of Gloucestershire; and, help the wider workforce better understand other cultures. She stated that a diverse workforce would also help to reduce unconscious bias.

She stated that by adopting the Rooney Rule, whereby ethnic minority candidates with suitable qualifications were always listed and interviewed when middle and senior management vacancies occur, the council would be setting an example of good practice.

Some members stated that the council maintained an equitable recruitment process, which met the requirements of the Equality Act (2010) with regard to protected characteristics. It was stated that the staff survey would highlight any issues; and that the council already undertook the equality audits that the motion was requesting.

Other members stated that as an institution funded by the public it was important that the workforce represented the communities it served. It was stated that the council’s senior leadership was not representative. It was commented that the motion did not address the barriers faced by many people from ethnic minorities when considering applying for posts. It was also stated that it was important to consider how due regard statements were used.

It was stated that whilst recognising the spirit in which the motion was proposed there were concerns with regard to the legality of what was proposed. Cllr Lynden Stowe therefore proposed a motion without notice under standing order 11.1.13 to refer the motion to the Equalities Working Group. The motion without notice was seconded by Cllr Mark Hawthorne.

Cllr Stowe stated that the council had a legal and moral duty to protect against any discrimination of a protected characteristic; this was a fundamental issue. He stated that it would be important to understand the legal position of the Rooney Rule; from one perspective it could be seen as illegal positive discrimination rather than legal positive action. It would also be important to ensure that this rule did not adversely impact any of the other protected characteristics.

Cllr Haigh and Cllr L Williams agreed to accept the motion without notice.

Cllr Haigh stated that whilst agreeing to accept the motion without notice this working group had not yet met and stated that it should do so as soon as possible in the new council to progress this important issue. This was a small step which did not make the council do anything other than consider its position on employment issues.

Having received unanimous support the motion without notice was carried.

RESOLVED thatunder standing order 11.1.13, motions without notice, Motion 870 ‘Equalities’ be referred to the Equalities Working Group.

Motion 871 – Special Schools

Cllr Patrick Molyneux proposed and Cllr Richard Boyles seconded the motion included on the agenda.

Cllr Molyneux stated that we were lucky to have such excellent schools in Gloucestershire. As the Cabinet Member for Economy, Education and Skills he had been proud to deliver the £100m investment in our schools. There were 1300 children and young people in 10 special schools; for some children being placed in a mainstream education setting was not a suitable option, special schools could make a significant difference. He stated that the £100m would include the delivery of a new special school and allow expansion at others.

He stated that he did not support a one size fits all approach, and it was important to listen to parents who knew their children’s needs. He informed the meeting that this had not always been the process followed by this council. Previously councillors had though that they knew best and had proposed to close two special schools; when the Conservatives took control of this council in 2005 they adopted a new approach to education in this county and scrapped these plans.

He stated that he wanted this council to be able to say that it supported our special schools and that it regretted the previous stance of this council.

Cllr Richard Boyles, seconder of the motion, stated that it was important to reflect on the possible impact of the decisions that were stopped in 2005; how short sighted they were. The value of bespoke support to children and young people could not be underestimated. Parents knew their children well, and that one size did not fit all. He stated that it was important to set this within the context of an increasing number of Education, Heath and Care Plans (EHCP), and that it was important to ensure that there were a sufficient number of places for children and young people with SEND.

Some members shared their personal experiences of special school provision; that some children with SEND would not flourish in a mainstream setting; and that parents knew their children best. They also indicated that they supported the initiatives that had been progressed under the Conservative Administration.

A member stated that it was beyond disappointing that the current Administration would drag up an issue from two decades ago and use it for political gain. It was the Conservatives that had starved the system of funding, driving the council into special measures, leaving children at risk. They could not support a motion that was cynically using children with SEND for political gain. They stated that the Liberal Democrat Group would be abstaining from this motion, and that the motion should be withdrawn.

Cllr Kate Haigh proposed a motion without notice under standing order 11.1.13 to withdraw this motion. Cllr L Williams seconded the motion without notice. Cllr Haigh stated that she thought it unedifying to see the manner in which members were conducting themselves, and that the motion was in poor taste and should be withdrawn. She was of the view that this motion would not achieve anything.

In his right of reply Cllr Molyneux stated that the motion was not intended to be political. He believed that education was one of the most fundamental aspects of this council and that children should be at the forefront of everything this council did.

On being put to the vote the motion without notice was lost.

Returning to the substantive motion the meeting some members talked of their personal (family) experience of special schools; their wish that families with children who have SEND were not put in difficult, stressful situations; and, their activity to prevent the closure of special schools. It was stated that these schools were appreciated by parents.

Other members called into question the statement that we should be proud of all the schools given that many had failed over the previous years; the current Administration had not created a level playing field for all schools. It was stated that the funding mentioned related to capital not revenue, it was revenue that was required to support the increasing number of EHCPs. It was also stated that the rate of permanent exclusions in Gloucestershire remained high.

On being put to the vote the motion was carried.

RESOLVED

That this Council notes the significant investment into special schools in this year’s capital budget, including Alderman Knight in Tewkesbury, and Belmont and Battledown in Cheltenham.

This Council further notes the extremely valuable role these schools play in

supporting some of the most vulnerable children in our communities, apologises for the misguided actions of previous councils in seeking their closure, and commits to protect them in future.

Motion 872 – Response to Covid-19 pandemic

Cllr Andrew Gravells proposed and Cllr Carole Allaway Martin seconded the motion included on the agenda.

Cllr Gravells informed the meeting that he was happy to accept the friendly amendment from the Liberal Democrat Group: -

Given the extraordinary lengths NHS staff went to in tackling this pandemic, this Council resolves to call on the Leader to write to the Chancellor of the Exchequer, expressing the council's view that he should follow the recommendations given by the NHS pay review body.

Cllr Gravells stated that the short time frame to reach the point where there was a vaccine available was remarkable, as was the rollout of the vaccine. What has been achieved in Gloucestershire was remarkable; this week it was planned to deliver 55,000 vaccinations. He stated that it was important to recognise, and say thank you for, the hard work of the GPs, the Gloucestershire Clinical Commissioning Group and the council’s own Public Health Team. He informed the meeting that he thought that Edward Jenner would have been proud to see how his work had benefitted people.

Cllr Allaway Martin stated that this had been a tough year for everyone; people had been kept apart from their families. This period had reminded us of how precious our health and community services were to us. She praised the dedication of all involved in the response to the pandemic. She stated that the work of Oxford University was exemplary. It was important to recognise the work of the GPs in the Primary Care Networks in the county, and all the staff and volunteers who have made the rollout such a success. She encouraged everyone to have the vaccine; it was safe.

Cllr Hodgkinson thanked Cllr Gravells for accepting the friendly amendment to the motion. He stated that it was right to take a moment to thank the NHS and all the council staff, particularly the Public Health team, who have been so challenged. The NHS had been tested like never before, and only survived because staff had pushed themselves through the stress. It was important to remember that hundreds of front line staff had died of Covid-19.

Cllr Hodgkinson stated that the Chancellor of the Exchequer had proposed only a 1% pay rise for NHS staff. The NHS Pay Review Body would decide in May 2021 on a proposed pay rise and it would be right that the government listened to and acted on the recommendation from that body.

Members shared their personal experiences of living through the pandemic stated their thanks to both the local and national NHS, and other emergency services. Children’s Services and GFRS officers were also thanked for their work during this challenging time.

On being put to the vote the motion was carried.

RESOLVED

THAT This Council puts on record its thanks to the NHS teams leading on vaccination in this county, and to the firefighters, other council staff and volunteers who support them,

for their exceptional work in delivering the vaccine across our county.

Motion 873 – Social care funding

Cllr Iain Dobie proposed and Cllr Jeremy Hilton seconded the motion included on the agenda.

Cllr Dobie stated that Adult Social Care was a key service. The associated costs were significant and that it was time that this government took action to redress the consistent under-funding of this service. Adult Social Care needed to be put on a level footing. Cllr Dobie referred to the findings of the Dilnot Commission published in July 2011. The crisis in funding faced by this council was only going to deepen; the time to act was now.

Cllr Hilton stated that the financial impact on the council was unsustainable in the long term, and it was not clear how we could carry on providing the necessary level of support in the long term. Government was not providing the funding needed, and it was not appropriate for the council tax payer to continue to cover the cost. There was the potential for the council to run out of money to cover its statutory duties.

A member stated that whilst they had some sympathy that they could not support this motion. It was important to reflect that the government had had different priorities over the last 12 months so it was understandable that a paper had not been brought forward. It was important to have consensus on what the right answer was otherwise there could be repercussions for this council and some of the most vulnerable people in society. It would be important to have a solution that works for everyone.

A member disagreed with this statement stating that we had been waiting years for the government to provide a paper; we had waited long enough for this. It was important not to forget the ‘graph of doom’ with regard to adult social care funding. People in care homes had suffered disproportionately because of the lack of investment.

Cllr Dobie stated that people would be caught out by this cruel lottery. A recent report from the Health Select Committee had indicated that the system was at risk of collapse. This was a worrying issue for this council, and for social care providers and staff.

On being put to the vote the motion was lost.

The council broke for lunch reconvening at 14:05.

Supporting documents: