Agenda item

Motion A

Proposed by: Councillor Wilkinson and seconded by: Councillor Clucas

 

“Council notes with concern the Government's antipathy to the renewable energy industry. In particular, council condemns the removal of support for popular technologies such as solar and wind which, between 2010 and 2015, helped the UK become a world leader in renewable energy.  Council resolves to write a letter to the Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change encouraging her to reconsider the decision to make such drastic cuts to the subsidy for the industry.”

 

Motion B

Proposed by: Councillor Harman and seconded by Councillor Mason

“That this Council commends the initiative of the "Wombles" group of volunteers and other groups of volunteers in tackling the issues of litter and general grot which plagues our Town and calls upon the Borough Council to raise its game in tackling these issues.

Whether litter, graffiti, etc is on public or private land it detracts from our splendid Town and it is surely the duty of all of us to show leadership backed by practical steps I hope that Council will support this motion today and instruct the Cabinet to bring forward an action plan.”

 

Motion C

Proposed by: Councillor Whyborn           and seconded by Councillor Flynn

“Cheltenham Borough Council notes that many councils across the country, of various party political control, have implemented or are now implementing 20mph speed limits over wide areas without traffic calming. Over 14 million people now live in areas, where 20 mph has become the default speed limit in residential and urban streets, except for arterial roads.

 

Council recognises that 20 mph limits have the potential to promote increased road safety, particularly for young and elderly pedestrians and cyclists, as well as to enable active and sustainable travel. Nationally Public health and other bodies such as NICE, Public Health England, the LGA and the WHO all support such a policy. It is described as the most cost-effective way to improve health equality by tackling inactivity, obesity and isolation, whilst also being child, disability, elderly and dementia friendly.

 

Council notes that the report of the Cycling and Walking Scrutiny Group includes recommendations to "initiate a review to assess the appetite for a 20 mile speed limit across town from residents, businesses, and visitors”.

 

Council requests that Cabinet consider the recommendations of the Cycling and Walking Scrutiny Group, and include provision for a consultation exercise in the 2016/17 corporate work plan to establish where there is potential for 20 mile per hour limits in Cheltenham and that the Council use its best endeavours in conjunction with Gloucestershire County Council to work towards trials in suitable areas where public support exists.”

Motion A

 

Proposed by: Councillor Wilkinson and seconded by: Councillor Clucas

 

“Council notes with concern the Government's antipathy to the renewable energy industry. In particular, council condemns the removal of support for popular technologies such as solar and wind which, between 2010 and 2015, helped the UK become a world leader in renewable energy.  Council resolves to write a letter to the Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change encouraging her to reconsider the decision to make such drastic cuts to the subsidy for the industry.”

 

In proposing the motion Councillor Wilkinson said that between 2010 and 2015 renewable energy generation soared. There were dramatic increases in the amount of energy generated from solar, wind and other renewable sources, largely thanks to government support for these initiatives. The UK was now exceeding renewable energy targets set by European directives. However, he expressed concern that in the past few months things have changed and he was extremely concerned about the direction of government policy on renewable energy with reduced support for wind generation, solar power generation, a U-turn on a pledge to ban fracking in national parks, axing regulations encouraging zero carbon homes, closing the green deal energy efficiency scheme, scrapping the tax reductions on less polluting  vehicles and adding a climate change levy to renewable energy generation.

 

Councillor Wilkinson referred to an opinion survey produced by the Department for Energy and Climate Change - the government department charged with energy generation policy and tackling climate change which highlighted that solar was supported by more than 80% of people and opposed by less than 5%, Offshore wind was supported by almost 75% and opposed by fewer than one in ten and Onshore wind was supported by almost 70% and opposed by only 10%.

He said that according to the leading think tank Policy Exchange only 1% of the average household bill went towards paying the feed in tariffs but despite this, and despite the fact that subsidies make up a relatively small proportion of spending by the DECC and a small proportion of overall public spending, the government was planning subsidy cuts which were likely to have profound implications for the future of the energy generation industry.

 

Councillor Wilkinson reminded Members that solar panels installed by Cheltenham Borough Homes gave energy bill savings of between £100 and £200 per year per tenant. Whether this success could be replicated in future council housing developments would seem in doubt.

Councillor Wilkinson made reference to the potentially ground-breaking project in Bath Terrace car park and explained that part of the scheme involved installing solar panels, which would generate electricity to be consumed locally. He warned however that unfortunately, the renewable energy aspect of the project may now not be affordable due to proposals to cut the Feed in Tariff..

Councillor Wilkinson highlighted that these subsidy cuts were taking place while the government progressed with new nuclear generation at Hinkley Point.

He urged Members to support the motion to demonstrate that Cheltenham was a forward thinking town that cared about the biggest threat to human existence.

 

In debating the motion the following points were raised :

 

·         There was a consultation currently running on the feed in tariff with the closing date of 23 October;

·         The feed in tariff consultation process was triggered by the EU in investigating whether the private sector could be subsidised by Government under EU state aid laws; Members recognised the importance of the consultation and the Leader pledged to respond to it in the form of a letter containing this motion if adopted; it was important to do this to reflect the views of residents and tenants who had benefited from having solar energy panels installed on their properties;

·         The excellent work being undertaken in Bath Road Terrace car park was commended;

·         The motion was deemed by some to be political and not factually correct;

·         Some members mentioned the impact the reduction in feed in tariff would have on the solar panel industry and the resultant lack of a stable policy framework;

·         Members highlighted the importance of the work Cheltenham Borough Homes had done in investing £3 million to install solar panels on its properties leading to annual savings in energy bills for tenants;

·         1000 households in Cheltenham had benefited from the feed in tariff and the opportunities for green energy; renewable energy was vital to the future of all residents;

·         Some members believed that the subsidies put in place by Government were too generous in the first place and thought that industries should now be in a position where they were self-funding;

·         The council did buy green energy but some questioned whether Combined Heat and Power should be considered renewable.

 

 

Upon a vote the motion was CARRIED (For: 22; Against: 4; Abstention: 9)

 

Motion B

Councillor Harman proposed the following motion. This was seconded by Councillor Mason :

“That this Council commends the initiative of the "Wombles" group of volunteers and other groups of volunteers in tackling the issues of litter and general grot which plagues our Town and calls upon the Borough Council to raise its game in tackling these issues.

Whether litter, graffiti, etc. is on public or private land it detracts from our splendid Town and it is surely the duty of all of us to show leadership backed by practical steps I hope that Council will support this motion today and instruct the Cabinet to bring forward an action plan.”

 

In proposing the motion Councillor Harman paid tribute to the work the Wombles, the Friends of the Honeybourne Line, Benhall Open Space and other volunteers made to tackling the litter issues in the town. It was generally acknowledged that there was a problem with litter on both public and private land which detracted from the attractiveness of the town. Cabinet was asked to draw up an action plan to address the issues and it was suggested that one low tech solution would be to install more bins and to educate the people where litter should be disposed of.

 

An amendment, proposed by Councillor McKinlay, seconded by Councillor Baker, to the motion had been circulated and read as follows :

 

Delete all of notice of motion B after:-

 "that the Council commends the initiative of the "Wombles" group of volunteers and other groups of volunteers in tackling the issues of litter and general grot which plagues our town."

 

And replace with:-

“Council notes with concern that one of the high profile "grot spots" identified in the press is owned by Gloucestershire County Council.

 

Council supports the proactive stance being taken by Cheltenham Borough Council's enforcement team under Section 215 and 219 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 and other legislation to tackle the problem of both land and buildings that are in poor condition in the Borough.

 

Council supports the use of all legal powers available to officers to ensure that land owners maintain their property in a satisfactory condition."

 

As proposer of the motion Councillor Harman spoke to the amendment. He believed every person who is part of our community should raise their game. A bigger challenge was tackling the problem where it was on private land as it was not known who was responsible for clearing the litter. Councillor Harman was disappointed that the amendment deleted reference to the action plan.

 

The proposer of the amendment, Councillor McKinlay, said that he did not want the motion to suggest that the council was not fulfilling its role in tackling litter and that it relied solely on volunteers to address the problem. This was simply not true. He accepted however to retain the inclusion of the action plan in the motion. With this addition to the amendment this became the substantive motion.

 

In the debate that ensued the following points were addressed:

 

·         Councillor McKinlay outlined the Council’s achievements and actions in this area over the last 12 months;

·         Tribute was paid to the hard work undertaken by the Friends of Springfield Park in Springbank; all volunteers should be publicly commended on their efforts;

·         The Cabinet Member Clean and Green Environment said that the action plan was an important piece of work. Grot spots in the town did give a negative impression but in general Cheltenham was a clean and tidy town. The street cleaners were exceptional and routinely praised, particularly after events such as The Festival.

·         Residents and businesses should work in partnership with the council;

·         One Member suggested there should be an increase in the number of enforcement officers to tackle the littering issue;

·         It was acknowledged that many council sites were cleaned on a regular basis but there was concern with those sites that were privately owned. It was also important to discuss with partners such as the County Council.

·         Education of the public in preventing littering in the first place was key;

·         Shops and businesses should be encouraged to look after their frontages and take pride in their premises.

 

In summing up the debate, the proposer of the motion, Councillor Tim Harman, said that the council did indeed play its part in addressing the problem but the wonderful volunteer resource in tackling the issue should be recognised. He believed however that there should be some new thinking in terms of engaging with the utilities companies, health and the County Council to improve the situation.

 

 

Upon a vote the amended motion was unanimously approved.

 

“That this Council commends the initiative of the "Wombles" group of volunteers and other groups of volunteers in tackling the issues of litter and general grot which plagues our Town. Council notes with concern that one of the high profile "grot spots" identified in the press is owned by Gloucestershire County Council.

 

Council supports the proactive stance being taken by Cheltenham Borough Council's enforcement team under Section 215 and 219 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 and other legislation to tackle the problem of both land and buildings that are in poor condition in the Borough.

 

Council supports the use of all legal powers available to officers to ensure that land owners maintain their property in a satisfactory condition.

 

Council instructs Cabinet to bring forward an action plan on this issue.”

 

 

Motion C- WITHDRAWN

Proposed by: Councillor Whyborn and seconded by Councillor Flynn

“Cheltenham Borough Council notes that many councils across the country, of various party political control, have implemented or are now implementing 20mph speed limits over wide areas without traffic calming. Over 14 million people now live in areas, where 20 mph has become the default speed limit in residential and urban streets, except for arterial roads.

 

Council recognises that 20 mph limits have the potential to promote increased road safety, particularly for young and elderly pedestrians and cyclists, as well as to enable active and sustainable travel. Nationally Public health and other bodies such as NICE, Public Health England, the LGA and the WHO all support such a policy. It is described as the most cost-effective way to improve health equality by tackling inactivity, obesity and isolation, whilst also being child, disability, elderly and dementia friendly.

 

Council notes that the report of the Cycling and Walking Scrutiny Group includes recommendations to "initiate a review to assess the appetite for a 20 mile speed limit across town from residents, businesses, and visitors”.

 

Council requests that Cabinet consider the recommendations of the Cycling and Walking Scrutiny Group, and include provision for a consultation exercise in the 2016/17 corporate work plan to establish where there is potential for 20 mile per hour limits in Cheltenham and that the Council use its best endeavours in conjunction with Gloucestershire County Council to work towards trials in suitable areas where public support exists.”