Agenda item

Motion 1 – proposed by Councillor Clucas and seconded by Councillor Parsons

“This Council recognises the hardship that is being caused by gender and age related changes to State Pensions and calls upon the Government to make fair transitional state pension arrangements for all women born on or after 6th April 1951, who have unfairly borne the burden of the increase to the State Pension Age (SPA) with lack of appropriate notification."

Motion 2 – proposed by Councillor Colin Hay and seconded by Councillor Wilkinson

“This council notes the decision of Oakley Neighbourhood Project and Oakley Regeneration Partnership to close due to the current finances being unsustainable. It further notes the substantial benefit to residents the project has had in the ward, which has some of the highest indices of deprivation not only in Cheltenham but the whole County.

The loss of services, provided by the project, will have a significant negative effect on the local community, which will almost certainly create greater demand on statutory services.

Therefore, this Council - which is most closely associated with the project, should call a meeting of the statutory bodies, CCG, the County Council, the Police, Cheltenham Borough Homes and other relevant organisations with an interest in the local area to identify what services are required and how best to deliver them. That this meeting is called with some urgency to ensure residents have some continuity. That council also ensures that local councillors are fully involved in the discussions.”

Motion 3 – proposed by Councillor Willingham and seconded by Councillor Sudbury

Preventing Coerced Debt and Financial Abuse

“Cheltenham Borough Council notes the important and valuable work performed by the Gloucestershire Domestic Abuse Support Service (GDASS) across the County. 

This Council is concerned that whilst many areas of Domestic Abuse are addressed by primary legislation, have well-defined best practice to try to prevent them and have support services that can provide assistance to victims; the victims of Coerced Debt and Financial Abuse can be left with little redress against their abuser, can experience poverty and can become secondary victims of the debt collection industry, and that there is currently little guidance and best practice for lenders and financial services providers about the necessary checks and balances to incorporate into their lending and debt recovery procedures to avoid facilitating or exacerbating Coerced Debt and Financial Abuse.

This Council notes that it has limited powers to act directly to address Coerced Debt and Financial Abuse, but calls upon the Leader of the Council, or his delegated Cabinet Member, to ensure that the matter is raised with the Local Government Association both to raise the profile of this issue and to lobby the government to introduce primary legislation to require lenders, financial services providers and the debt recovery industry to put safeguards in place to try to minimise the occurrence of Coerced Debt and Financial Abuse, and to investigate what measures can be put in place to reduce the impact of Coerced Debt on the victims of Financial Abuse. 

However, in areas such as Housing, Council Tax, Benefits and staff training, which locally are in the control or influence of this Council; Cheltenham Borough Council resolves to work with partners including, but not limited to, GDASS and CAB, to explore how measures can be incorporated into Council processes and procedures to minimise the risk of Coerced Debt and Financial Abuse occurring in our interactions with the people of Cheltenham, and to seek to develop and implement a “best practice” policy”.

Motion 1 – Changes to State Pensions

The following motion was proposed by Councillor Clucas, seconded by Councillor Parsons:

“This Council recognises the hardship that is being caused by gender and age related changes to State Pensions and calls upon the Government to make fair transitional state pension arrangements for all women born on or after 6th April 1951, who have unfairly borne the burden of the increase to the State Pension Age (SPA) with lack of appropriate notification."

In proposing the motion, Councillor Clucas highlighted that this was an important issue affecting many women who for various reasons did not mange 40 years of contributions. The motion was asking government to look again at this issue and the same request had been made by many other councils. In the previous week, 197 petitions had been presented at the House of Commons.

She referred to the amendment which had been circulated by Councillor Babbage and seconded by Councillor Savage. She indicated that she would be happy to accept the amendment provided it made reference to the other parties that have made similar representations and the 197 petitions. Th additional wording would then read

“This Council supports the work done by Cheltenham's MP Alex Chalk together with MPs from all parties in presenting 149 petitions signed by local residents calling for fairer transitional pension arrangements and debating the issue in Parliament.

This Council also welcomes the formation of the new All Party Parliamentary Group (APPG) on the State Pension Age of which Alex Chalk MP was a founding member.”

As Councillor Babbage was happy to accept the revised wording, this became the substantive motion.

In seconding the motion, Councillor Parsons said that it was an issue of great concern to many women and it was a matter of fairness and justice.

In the short debate that followed Members agreed that many women were suffering financial hardship and had lost out because of their date of birth and Members were happy to support the motion. A Member encouraged other members to sign the online petition if they had not already done so.

Councillor Clucas thanked Members for their support and hoped that Council's resolution would be passed to government so that the authority could be seen as one supporting fairness in pensions and encouraging to young people.

Upon a vote the motion was CARRIED unanimously

Motion 2 – Preventing Coerced Debt and Financial Abuse

The following motion was proposed by Councillor Willingham, seconded by Councillor Sudbury:

“Cheltenham Borough Council notes the important and valuable work performed by the Gloucestershire Domestic Abuse Support Service (GDASS) across the County. 

This Council is concerned that whilst many areas of Domestic Abuse are addressed by primary legislation, have well-defined best practice to try to prevent them and have support services that can provide assistance to victims; the victims of Coerced Debt and Financial Abuse can be left with little redress against their abuser, can experience poverty and can become secondary victims of the debt collection industry, and that there is currently little guidance and best practice for lenders and financial services providers about the necessary checks and balances to incorporate into their lending and debt recovery procedures to avoid facilitating or exacerbating Coerced Debt and Financial Abuse.

This Council notes that it has limited powers to act directly to address Coerced Debt and Financial Abuse, but calls upon the Leader of the Council, or his delegated Cabinet Member, to ensure that the matter is raised with the Local Government Association both to raise the profile of this issue and to lobby the government to introduce primary legislation to require lenders, financial services providers and the debt recovery industry to put safeguards in place to try to minimise the occurrence of Coerced Debt and Financial Abuse, and to investigate what measures can be put in place to reduce the impact of Coerced Debt on the victims of Financial Abuse. 

However, in areas such as Housing, Council Tax, Benefits and staff training, which locally are in the control or influence of this Council; Cheltenham Borough Council resolves to work with partners including, but not limited to, GDASS and CAB, to explore how measures can be incorporated into Council processes and procedures to minimise the risk of Coerced Debt and Financial Abuse occurring in our interactions with the people of Cheltenham, and to seek to develop and implement a “best practice” policy.”

In proposing the motion, Councillor Willingham gave examples of situations he had come across which had brought home to him the true nature and significance of the problems people experienced. It was important to raise the awareness of this important issue and he would like the council to aim to be a beacon authority in raising this issue and putting steps in place to address it

A Member highlighted that this was a very important issue which often fell below the radar and whilst welcoming the legislative changes it also required a change in culture to be dealt with effectively. They suggested a pre Council Seminar by GDAS could be arranged to raise Members awareness of the issue and this suggestion was supported by other Members.

In seconding the motion, Councillor Sudbury spoke of her personal experiences and how it was a strange thing to live through which many people are not prepared for. She felt it was more important to listen to people's experiences rather than expert opinion which could be seen as patronising and stereotypical. It was a very complex issue but patterns of behaviour in victims can be spotted and help given at the appropriate time.

In his summing up, Councillor Willingham thanked Members for their support and indicated that he could provide contacts who could deliver a Member Seminar.

Upon a vote the motion was CARRIED unanimously.

Motion 3 – Oakley Resource Centre

The following motion was proposed by Councillor Colin Hay and  seconded by Councillor Wilkinson:

“This council notes the decision of Oakley Neighbourhood Project and Oakley Regeneration Partnership to close due to the current finances being unsustainable. It further notes the substantial benefit to residents the project has had in the ward, which has some of the highest indices of deprivation not only in Cheltenham but the whole County.

The loss of services, provided by the project, will have a significant negative effect on the local community, which will almost certainly create greater demand on statutory services.

Therefore, this Council - which is most closely associated with the project, should call a meeting of the statutory bodies, CCG, the County Council, the Police, Cheltenham Borough Homes and other relevant organisations with an interest in the local area to identify what services are required and how best to deliver them. That this meeting is called with some urgency to ensure residents have some continuity. That council also ensures that local councillors are fully involved in the discussions”.

In proposing the motion, Councillor Hay gave some background to the issue which had led the trustees to take the view that the Neighbourhood Project and the Partnership were unsustainable as a project. His primary concern as a ward Councillor was for his residents who relied on the current services that were provided by the partnership and were a vital level of support in this deprived area of the town. Cheltenham Borough Council was the lead authority and owned the building but it needed the other statutory bodies to come together and find a solution. Whilst this could take several months, it was important to find a way to continue to deliver these vital services in the meantime. He read out several quotes from letters he had received from local residents who had benefited from those services which included food banks and help in education and finding jobs.

One Member speaking as a past Mayor, supported the motion as during their Mayoral year he had the opportunity to see what vital support to their communities these organisations could provide. Without this support there could be a cost to the council in real terms for dealing with such issues as homelessness and increased levels of crime and antisocial behaviour.

Another Member praised by Councillors Colin and Rowena Hay for their work in their ward which was one of the most deprived areas in the town and fully supported the proposals.

The Mayor added her support for the motion and praised all the volunteers in the town who helped at these community centres and Cheltenham was so fortunate to have them. 

The Cabinet Member Healthy Lifestyles advised that the council had been meeting regularly with the trustees over the last few months. The council and other parties currently provided £200 K pa of financial support and so there was the opportunity to use this funding in other ways to keep services going. Discussions were already under way to relocate the food bank. She highlighted that until the partnership surrendered the lease on the building, the council had no control over the use of the building. This was hoped to be completed next week and a meeting was planned in mid-November with partners and she would be happy to supply further updates to members.

Councillor Hay was disappointed that partners had not been brought together earlier to address the issue and put a solution in place before it reached the point where the trustees felt they had to take the decision to close.  Although he acknowledged the position with the lease, he still felt it was possible to have open discussions with partners now, ahead of the surrender. He was pleased with the assurances given by the Cabinet Member that her aim was to continue to provide as many services as possible but it was a shame that more detailed work could not have been done ahead of time and he hoped this would be a learning point for the future.

The Mayor added her support for the work that the ward Members for Oakley were doing.

Upon a vote the motion was CARRIED unanimously.