1) To consider the following Notice of Motion (7/19), submitted by Councillor J Rust
“Council are asked that the Borough Council of King's Lynn & West Norfolk
(i) recognises that councils can play a central role in creating sustainable communities, particularly through the provision of locally generated renewable electricity;
(ii) further recognises
· that very large financial setup and running costs involved in selling locally generated renewable electricity to local customers result in it being impossible for local renewable electricity generators to do so,
· that making these financial costs proportionate to the scale of a renewable electricity supplier’s operation would create significant opportunities for councils to be providers of locally generated renewable electricity directly to local people, businesses and organisations, and
· that revenues received by councils that became local renewable electricity providers could be used to help fund local greenhouse gas emissions reduction measures and to help improve local services and facilities;
(iii) accordingly resolves to support the Local Electricity Bill, currently supported by a cross-party group of 115 MPs, and which, if made law, would make the setup and running costs of selling renewable electricity to local customers proportionate by establishing a Right to Local Supply; and
(iv) further resolves to
§ inform the local media of this decision,
§ write to local MPs, asking them to support the Bill, and
§ write to the organisers of the campaign for the Bill, Power for People, (at 8 Delancey Passage, Camden, London NW1 7NN or info@powerforpeole.org.uk) expressing its support.”
2) To consider the following Notice of Motion (8/19), submitted by Councillor J Rust
“Our council resurrected the Freedom of the Borough award in 2003 after a long period of absence. The criteria for the nomination of the award only state that the nominee must have given outstanding service to the borough. The leader of the council has previously stated that “they” have set the bar high. Based on those who have been awarded the freedom compared to those who have been nominated and not granted it, that bar could be deemed to have been set at a measure invisible to most and arbitrary at best. This motion sets to change that and instead, provide clearer guidelines on what could be considered to fulfil the criteria.
This council is asked to adopt the following criteria when awarding this honour.
The conferment of the Honorary Freedom of the Borough is a mark of distinction upon the person or persons whom the council wishes to honour. The freedom itself carries no privilege and is purely an honour, reflecting the eminence of the person on whom it is conferred or as recognition of significant and/or valuable services rendered to the borough by that person. It is normally an honour bestowed on those of note who have lived or worked in the borough and who are proud to be a part of the history of that borough through that freedom. It should not be awarded to serving councillors.
What criteria should be used to award this status?
The principle is that these awards should be made on merit, defined as:
· Achievement
· Exceptional Service
Awards should not be given merely for a job well done or because someone has reached a particular level. They should be awarded because an individual has gone over and above what is expected or what has previously been seen as the standard, being seen to have demonstrated “Service Above Self” and to stand above others in what has been achieved before.
To be considered for the award a nominee should meet at least two of the following criteria:
1. Delivered in a way that has brought distinction to borough life and enhanced the reputation of the borough in the area or activity concerned
2. Contributed in a way to improve the lives of those less able to help themselves
3. Demonstrated innovation and entrepreneurship which is delivering discernible benefits to the area or activity concerned.
For candidates to be considered they must be able to demonstrate a strong and continuing connection with, and commitment to, the borough or to have made a major contribution to national life and, in doing so, have enhanced the reputation of the borough.
People from all walks of life and all sections of society who have made a difference to the community and the borough are eligible to be nominated, provided that, at the time of nomination, they are living in the borough.
It could be include the following
Ø Artistic and cultural endeavours
Ø Business, economic growth and prosperity
Ø Charitable work
Ø Improvement to built and natural environment
Ø Religious and spiritual life
Ø Sports activities
Ø Civic service
Nominations for persons or organisations to be granted the Freedom of the Borough may be made by any resident of the borough who are on the electoral roll. Each nomination must be supported by at least 5 referees to testify to the nominee's worthiness, two of whom at least should be currently resident citizens of the Borough.
A form shall be drafted which enables the nominating person to set out clearly the necessary details for the award and should include the following
Nominees details – information about the person being nominated . Surname, forename, nickname, Title Address, Telephone Number, Email address
The recommendation – the details of how the nominees has made a significant contribution in their area of activity – giving as much detail as possible
What role they have excelled in?
How have they demonstrated service worthy of recognition?
How has the nominee contribution impacted on their particular filed, locality, group or the community at large?
Over what time period did the nominee make their contribution or major commitment?
What makes this person stand out from others doing similar work?
Background Info
Full details of post(s) held by nominee, paid or voluntary, which support or are relevant to your nomination. Start and end dates, or if they’re still involved.
Letters of support – one letter of support may be submitted. Confidentiality must be maintained and details of the nomination must not be discussed with any others persons or with the nominee.
Details of the person making the nomination
Surname
Forename
Address
Telephone Number
Email address
Relationship to nominee
Signature
Date
Confidentiality statement”
3) To consider the following Notice of Motion 9/19 – submitted by Councillor S Squires
“Council notes that the annual report on carbon emission from the Department for Business Energy & Industrial Strategy (BEIS) reports that the per capita impact for the King’s Lynn & West Norfolk area was 8 tonnes per capita, well above the Norfolk average of 5.7 tonnes and the UK average of 5.4 tonnes.
This council acknowledges that trees are a vital resource in helping to combat climate change and for carbon sequestration.
Therefore this council agrees to plant the equivalent of one tree for every Resident in the Borough, spread over a period of 4 years, creating community woodlands, which will not only reduce our carbon impact but will benefit wildlife and provide valuable green space to improve the lives of West Norfolk residents in years to come.”
4) To consider the following Notice of Motion 10/19 – submitted by Councillor T Parish
‘This Council requires all dialogue within Full Council and that of Panels, Committees, and Task Groups to be recorded digitally as soon as possible.
The digital recordings to be made available to all who would normally have access to written minutes. In addition, the minutes of Council and the other bodies must not be signed off until any queries have been addressed, with reference to the recording, should that prove necessary.
Digital recording should at least reduce and, hopefully, remove members’ concerns that some matters pertinent to themselves or to the party or group they belong to, are not lost within the difficult task of balancing the length of written minutes with the need to keep them succinct.’
Minutes:
1) Notice of Motion (7/19)
Councillor J Rust proposed the Notice of Motion, this was seconded by Councillor Jones.
“Council are asked that the Borough Council of King's Lynn & West Norfolk
(i) recognises that councils can play a central role in creating sustainable communities, particularly through the provision of locally generated renewable electricity;
(ii) further recognises
· that very large financial setup and running costs involved in selling locally generated renewable electricity to local customers result in it being impossible for local renewable electricity generators to do so,
· that making these financial costs proportionate to the scale of a renewable electricity supplier’s operation would create significant opportunities for councils to be providers of locally generated renewable electricity directly to local people, businesses and organisations, and
· that revenues received by councils that became local renewable electricity providers could be used to help fund local greenhouse gas emissions reduction measures and to help improve local services and facilities;
(iii) accordingly resolves to support the Local Electricity Bill, currently supported by a cross-party group of 115 MPs, and which, if made law, would make the setup and running costs of selling renewable electricity to local customers proportionate by establishing a Right to Local Supply; and
(iv) further resolves to
§ inform the local media of this decision,
§ write to local MPs, asking them to support the Bill, and
§ write to the organisers of the campaign for the Bill, Power for People, (at 8 Delancey Passage, Camden, London NW1 7NN or info@powerforpeole.org.uk) expressing its support.”
Councillor Long urged Councillors not to support the motion which was submitted by a lobby group. He considered the Motion premature, and did not agree that the majority of the population welcomed on shore wind farms as opposed to off shore.
Councillor A Tyler expressed his support for the proposal. Councillor Joyce considered the pros and cons of the argument but supported it in principle.
Councillor Dark spoke against the motion due to the number of disadvantages such as unpredictable speeds, variable directions not most efficient use of the turbines, noise and the danger to birds, less efficient than off shore turbines. He acknowledged the need to move to cleaner energy but could make things worse.
Councillor Parish drew attention to the Government statement that there would not be more on shore wind turbines due to the impact on people and bird life. The off shore option was more efficient.
Councillor Ayres drew attention to the large campaign in his ward against a wind turbine, and the fact that Scotland required a turbine to be 1.5Km away from a property.
In summing up, Councillor Rust thanked members for the feedback but urged members not to dismiss because it had been put forward by a lobby group. She considered that many of the community would benefit from this energy sold to them.
On being put to the vote the motion was lost.
RESOLVED: That the Motion is lost.
2) Notice of Motion (8/19)
Councillor J Rust proposed the Motion, seconded by Councillor Howman.
“Our council resurrected the Freedom of the Borough award in 2003 after a long period of absence. The criteria for the nomination of the award only state that the nominee must have given outstanding service to the borough. The leader of the council has previously stated that “they” have set the bar high. Based on those who have been awarded the freedom compared to those who have been nominated and not granted it, that bar could be deemed to have been set at a measure invisible to most and arbitrary at best. This motion sets to change that and instead, provide clearer guidelines on what could be considered to fulfil the criteria.
This council is asked to adopt the following criteria when awarding this honour.
The conferment of the Honorary Freedom of the Borough is a mark of distinction upon the person or persons whom the council wishes to honour. The freedom itself carries no privilege and is purely an honour, reflecting the eminence of the person on whom it is conferred or as recognition of significant and/or valuable services rendered to the borough by that person. It is normally an honour bestowed on those of note who have lived or worked in the borough and who are proud to be a part of the history of that borough through that freedom. It should not be awarded to serving councillors.
What criteria should be used to award this status?
The principle is that these awards should be made on merit, defined as:
· Achievement
· Exceptional Service
Awards should not be given merely for a job well done or because someone has reached a particular level. They should be awarded because an individual has gone over and above what is expected or what has previously been seen as the standard, being seen to have demonstrated “Service Above Self” and to stand above others in what has been achieved before.
To be considered for the award a nominee should meet at least two of the following criteria:
1. Delivered in a way that has brought distinction to borough life and enhanced the reputation of the borough in the area or activity concerned
2. Contributed in a way to improve the lives of those less able to help themselves
3. Demonstrated innovation and entrepreneurship which is delivering discernible benefits to the area or activity concerned.
For candidates to be considered they must be able to demonstrate a strong and continuing connection with, and commitment to, the borough or to have made a major contribution to national life and, in doing so, have enhanced the reputation of the borough.
People from all walks of life and all sections of society who have made a difference to the community and the borough are eligible to be nominated, provided that, at the time of nomination, they are living in the borough.
It could be include the following
Ø Artistic and cultural endeavours
Ø Business, economic growth and prosperity
Ø Charitable work
Ø Improvement to built and natural environment
Ø Religious and spiritual life
Ø Sports activities
Ø Civic service
Nominations for persons or organisations to be granted the Freedom of the Borough may be made by any resident of the borough who are on the electoral roll. Each nomination must be supported by at least 5 referees to testify to the nominee's worthiness, two of whom at least should be currently resident citizens of the Borough.
A form shall be drafted which enables the nominating person to set out clearly the necessary details for the award and should include the following
Nominees details – information about the person being nominated . Surname, forename, nickname, Title Address, Telephone Number, Email address
The recommendation – the details of how the nominees has made a significant contribution in their area of activity – giving as much detail as possible
What role they have excelled in?
How have they demonstrated service worthy of recognition?
How has the nominee contribution impacted on their particular filed, locality, group or the community at large?
Over what time period did the nominee make their contribution or major commitment?
What makes this person stand out from others doing similar work?
Background Info
Full details of post(s) held by nominee, paid or voluntary, which support or are relevant to your nomination. Start and end dates, or if they’re still involved.
Letters of support – one letter of support may be submitted. Confidentiality must be maintained and details of the nomination must not be discussed with any others persons or with the nominee.
Details of the person making the nomination
Surname
Forename
Address
Telephone Number
Email address
Relationship to nominee
Signature
Date
Confidentiality statement”
Under standing order 14.6 the Leader proposed that the item be referred to Corporate Performance Panel on the basis that the Council chamber was not the right place to develop new policy. This was seconded by Councillor Mrs Nockolds. Councillor Dark as Chair of the Panel confirmed he would be happy to consider the item.
On being put to the vote the proposal was agreed.
RESOLVED: That the Motion be referred to Corporate Performance Panel.
3) Notice of Motion 9/19
Councillor S Squires proposed the Motion, drawing attention to the importance of trees in the Borough’s performance against climate change. She reminded Members of the County Council and North Norfolk District Council’s decisions on tree planting. Councillor Squires offered Councillors a young native sapling to plant either in their gardens or in an area within their wards.
“Council notes that the annual report on carbon emission from the Department for Business Energy & Industrial Strategy (BEIS) reports that the per capita impact for the King’s Lynn & West Norfolk area was 8 tonnes per capita, well above the Norfolk average of 5.7 tonnes and the UK average of 5.4 tonnes.
This council acknowledges that trees are a vital resource in helping to combat climate change and for carbon sequestration.
Therefore this council agrees to plant the equivalent of one tree for every Resident in the Borough, spread over a period of 4 years, creating community woodlands, which will not only reduce our carbon impact but will benefit wildlife and provide valuable green space to improve the lives of West Norfolk residents in years to come.”
This was seconded by Councillor de Whalley who drew attention to the fact that trees were the most socially acceptable means of carbon reduction in the fight against climate change.
In debating the item Councillor Devereux proposed the following amendment to the Motion:
To replace the third paragraph by:
“This council acknowledges a recent decision by Norfolk County Council in planting a net gain of 1 million trees over the next 5 years across the County.
King’s Lynn and West Norfolk Borough Council therefore endeavours to:
1) Commit full support to NCC in delivering its objective
2) Urge cabinet to incorporate its own tree planting plan within its ongoing climate change proposals”
He drew attention to the Council’s tree strategy and the work going on to plant trees and work being done with schools and as part of planning applications to encourage tree planting. He reminded members that as part of the CIL arrangements where parishes were awarded CIL finances they could spend the money on planting trees.
The amendment was seconded by Councillor Middleton who encouraged members to vote for the amendment whereby cabinet members could work with officers to deliver.
Councillor Squires asked if the Tree Strategy could be re-visited as it concentrated on King’s Lynn and the parks. Councillor Long drew attention to the fact that the Environment and Community Panel could request it to be looked at.
Councillor Moriarty sought reassurance that the matter would be treated urgently, in which case he would support it.
Councillor Squires accepted the amendment.
On debating the substantive motion Councillor Moriarty drew attention to the window for planting trees until March, and the fact there were organisations willing to offer saplings and land to plant them on.
It was confirmed it would be treated as urgent. The part time
nature of the Tree officer was drawn to members attention.
Councillor Squires informed Members that the County Council had
offered help if any was needed on the tree advice front.
RESOLVED: That the motion, amended as follows, be agreed.
“Council notes that the annual report on carbon emission from the Department for Business Energy & Industrial Strategy (BEIS) reports that the per capita impact for the King’s Lynn & West Norfolk area was 8 tonnes per capita, well above the Norfolk average of 5.7 tonnes and the UK average of 5.4 tonnes.
This council acknowledges that trees are a vital resource in helping to combat climate change and for carbon sequestration.
This council acknowledges a recent decision by Norfolk County Council in planting a net gain of 1 million trees over the next 5 years across the County.
King’s Lynn and West Norfolk Borough Council therefore endeavours to:
1) Commit full support to NCC in delivering its objective
2) Urge cabinet to incorporate its own tree planting plan within its ongoing climate change proposals”
4) Notice of Motion 10/19
Councillor T Parish proposed the following Notice of Motion stating that written minutes didn’t reflect the flavour of the meeting, and when challenged it relied on the memories of councillors.
‘This Council requires all dialogue within Full Council and that of Panels, Committees, and Task Groups to be recorded digitally as soon as possible.
The digital recordings to be made available to all who would normally have access to written minutes. In addition, the minutes of Council and the other bodies must not be signed off until any queries have been addressed, with reference to the recording, should that prove necessary.
Digital recording should at least reduce and, hopefully, remove members’ concerns that some matters pertinent to themselves or to the party or group they belong to, are not lost within the difficult task of balancing the length of written minutes with the need to keep them succinct.’
In seconding the Motion, Councillor Moriarty proposed that under standing order 14.6 the item be referred to Cabinet. This was seconded by Councillor Parish.
Councillor Long disagreed with the proposal to refer to Cabinet.
Councillor Joyce stated he felt it should be considered. By way of clarification, Councillor Parish confirmed he meant sound recording. Councillor Rust supported the proposal as she had asked for minutes to be amended and they had previously been sent out unamended. Councillor Lawton agreed with the proposal. Councillor Kemp agreed with the proposal and felt that it should be live streamed.
Councillor Mrs Nockolds drew attention to the fact that Cabinet did not do policy development.
Councillor Dark explained that the dynamics of whether it would work would be the Panel.
As a point of order Councillor Long explained that if the proposal had been to refer the Motion to Corporate Performance Panel he would have supported it.
In dealing with the proposal to refer to Cabinet, Councillor Moriarty accepted the suggestion that the Motion be referred to Corporate Performance Panel.
On being put to the vote, this was carried.
RESOLVED: That the Motion be referred to Corporate Performance Panel for consideration.