To receive any public questions, statements or petitions submitted in accordance with the Constitution. Further information on the requirements for submitting these is available to view at the following link: -
https://democracy.bcpcouncil.gov.uk/ieListMeetings.aspx?CommitteeID=151&Info=1&bcr=1
The deadline for the submission of public questions is mid-day Wednesday 9 October 2024 (3 clear working days before the meeting).
The deadline for the submission of a statement is mid-day Monday 14 October 2024 (the working day before the meeting).
The deadline for the submission of a petition is Tuesday 1 October 2024 (10 working days before the meeting).
Minutes:
The public questions and statements set out in the minutes below are printed as per the wording used within the submissions made in accordance with the constitution.
As a number of public questions were on a similar topic a single response was provided as set out below.
Public Question from Alex McKinstry
On 16 November 2023, in exempt session, the Planning Committee discussed the Highmoor Farm planning application, seemingly at the behest of officers, who had "serious concerns" about the Committee's refusal of that application. What options were put to the Committee at that meeting? The outcome, as paraphrased by the director of planning, was that officers were to go away and seek "external expert advice"; so why did 34 days elapse between that decision and 20 December 2023, when such advice was finally sought from planning barrister Stephen Morgan? Was this a tactic by officers to allow the applicants room to appeal on the grounds of non-determination, which may have proved less costly for the Council? (Such an appeal was indeed launched on 5 December 2023, during the 34-day hiatus.) Finally, is this matter being audited, this being the third non-determination appeal on a major application since 2022?
Response by the Leader of the Council, Councillor Millie Earl
During the exempt session of the Planning Committee on 16th November 2023 relating to the Highmoor Farm planning application, the options for Members formed part of an exempt report from which the public were excluded. That was in accordance with Paragraph 5 in Part I of Schedule 12A of the Local Government Act 1972. In particular Exempt information – Category 5 (information in respect of which a claim to legal professional privilege could be maintained in legal proceedings). That position remains and so the content of the report and related advice cannot be publicly disclosed.
Between the meeting on 2nd October 2023 and the matter being brought back to Members in January 2024, Officers continued to progress the instructions of Members. On or around 5th December 2023, an appeal against non-determination was lodged by the appellant which also then needed to be addressed and prior to Officers being able to conclude Members’ instructions. There was no tactic by Officers as stated and the process described accounts for the period in question.
This case is not currently being audited, but the Monitoring Officer is aware and will keep the position under review along with the Director of Planning.
Public Question from Soo Chapman
Mass death & suffering caused by climate breakdown is a crime of oblique intent. The ICC & all 123 signatory nations have the power to prosecute. The public should be warned of "global ecological collapse"*, and that, if we conserve global resources, there could be a survival trajectory.
Media, politics and the judiciary hypocritically condemn non-violent direct action while Broadmoor policies, including massive subsidies for mis-sold deadly fuels, guarantee Grenfelling damage and at the same time play down the £trillions of costs as systems collapse.
How quickly please can BCP implement a Safety Decarbonisation Programme for residents?
Response by the Portfolio Holder for Climate Response, Environment and Energy, Councillor Andy Hadley
Sue, thank you for your question and challenge.
This is a global and not just a local problem, but we have to do what we can locally to conserve resources, to adapt, and in your words, to create a survival trajectory. To support this we must transform our energy systems, our food production, reduce consumption and shift to circular economic models.
A number of my colleagues, Councillors from across the Chamber are currently taking up an offer of Carbon Literacy training, from the Southwest Net Zero team.
You will also know as you were there, that 4 of our 5 local MPs attended a meeting last weekend organised by local participants in the Climate Coalition, held in the Durley Environmental hub, to highlight the urgency of action, and I was heartened by the MPs assurances of renewed intent and action, 100 days into the new Government.
On providing decarbonisation coaching for residents, and visitors, we are looking to improve the information on the Council website, and I have expressed a keenness to use the Durley Hub and other venues, to deliver a programme. We have been recruiting to support this.
Public Question from Daniel Glennon
Bees pollinate 40% of leading food crops; less than 25% of the world’s leading food crop species are wind pollinated. Bees, especially solitary bees and bumblebees, are in serious decline in the UK. We have already lost around 13 species and another 35 are at risk. Pesticides are one of the key threats to bees, yet BCP council spray nearly 3,000l of pesticides, including glyphosates, on our roadsides, parks and open spaces annually. Exposure to glyphosate not only poses a risk to human health and other living organisms, it also threatens biodiversity and the future of agriculture.
Will BCP council pledge to help and support bees and all other pollinating insects by taking the following actions:
1) Stop spraying Council land with pesticides and other harmful chemicals;
2) Sign up to PAN UK’s Pesticide-Free Towns Campaign for advice and support to achieve this?*
* https://www.pan-uk.org/information-for-local-authorities/
Response by the Portfolio Holder for Climate Response, Environment and Energy, Councillor Andy Hadley
Daniel, thank you for your question.
We have a statutory responsibility to ensure the Highway is safe to use and its structural integrity is not adversely affected by vegetation. We are legally obliged to control certain types of invasive species including on our Countryside Stewardship Sites by DEFRA and are required to respond to Schedule 9 weed species of the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981, such as Japanese knotweed.
We use an integrated weed management approach to our land management working towards aligning itself with the Councils Climate and Ecological declaration in 2019, and I am concerned as you are, about collapse of Bee colonies, and other insect life. A range of other methods are used including mechanical and manual sweeping, manual hoeing, mulching, creating wild meadow habitats and nurturing volunteer efforts to remove weeds.
We recognise the growing concern about using chemical methods to control undesirable plant species. We are committed to reducing their use on Council managed land, whilst balancing the need to support maintaining safe spaces for our communities.
BCP Council & legacy Councils have trialled alternatives and remain open to emerging solutions that can be used at scale, meanwhile continuing to learn and share best practice as Councils adjust their programmes.
We are aware of the PAN UK campaign, however a commitment to banning the use of all pesticides is not considered feasible at this time, balancing effectiveness and meeting the conurbations cost and resource constraints for the circumstances where they are currently in use.
We do need to keep challenging ourselves on this.
Public Question from Philip Stanley Watts
Will the cabinet member please specify how many heritage assets BCP council is responsible for?
Also is poole civic centre one of these heritage assets?
Response by the Portfolio Holder for Finance, Councillor Mike Cox
Based on the Asset Register BCP Council is responsible for four heritage assets, Poole Civic Centre is not one of them. For reference however, the four heritage assets are: -
- The Caro sculpture and viewing platform
- Baden-Powell monument
- Christchurch Quay place Mill 1
- Christchurch Quay Place Mill 2
Public Question from Sarah Ward
BCP council’s civic apparatus are demonstrably not fit for purpose – recently leaving the council unable to review its twinned status with a town in the apartheid state of Israel - currently under investigation at The Hague for genocide, with a reported death toll exceeding 100k across Palestine and Lebanon Can you assure the public that the governance review will not prevent the urgent action needed to ensure the council can and will act swiftly in accordance with ICJ rulings and therefore not risk complicity in supporting war crimes?
Public Question from Feda Shanin
Considering the International Court of Justice (ICJ) ruling on the illegality of Israeli settlements, how does the Council plan to ensure its compliance with international law in maintaining the twinning with Netanya? Other cities have paused or ended their twinning with Israeli cities in light of these legal and ethical concerns. Will Bournemouth follow suit and review or pause its twinning with Netanya?"
Public Question from Isabelle Hargreaves (Read by Diane Magnetico)
Israel is committing plausible genocide in Gaza according to the ICJ. The prosecutors at the ICC have asked for the arrest warrants for at least 2 Israeli government officials, the prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu and the minster of defence, Yoav Gallant. Given the community concern over the twinning with Netanya in Israel, can the Council assure us that this matter will be addressed as a priority and with urgency in upcoming meetings? What steps are being taken to ensure this issue is considered promptly?
Public Question from Lisa Lobo
Can BCP council advise on how decisions on twinning arrangements are made within BCP structures, given the Charter of Trustees recently found it has no authority to make these decisions. Bournemouth is twinned with an Israeli town, a state found guilty by the ICJ of: apartheid, illegally occupying Palestinian territory and breaches of international humanitarian law. It remains on trial for committing genocide. The ICJ/UN General Assembly also makes clear that we have a duty to impose sanctions on Israel for its ongoing breaches of IHL. Remaining twinned with Netanya risks complicity in war crimes and crimes against humanity.
Public Question from Charlie Burt
Given the ongoing investigation into Israel for potential acts of genocide by the ICJ, why does Bournemouth continue to maintain its twinning relationship with Netanya? How does the council justify this partnership in light of such serious allegations, and has any consideration been given to reviewing or suspending this twinning agreement?
Public Question from Bashar Alsayyed (Read by Bilal Yasin)
1 - Given the growing community concern over the twinning with Netanya, can the Council assure us that this matter will be addressed as a priority and with urgency in upcoming meetings? What steps are being taken to ensure this issue is considered promptly?"
2- How does the Council plan to address the ethical concerns raised by the community about the twinning with Netanya, considering the ongoing human rights violations in the region? Will this issue be reviewed in light of Bournemouth's commitment to international justice?"
3- Can the Council confirm if there was a public consultation before the twinning with Netanya was formalized? If not, will the Council consider holding one to gather the views of Bournemouth residents on this matter?"
Response by the Leader of the Council, Councillor Millie Earl
Following the motion to de-twin having been received to be considered by the Bournemouth Charter Trustees, we have been obtaining legal advice on the allocation of responsibility for Twinning between the Charter Trustees and BCP Council. We are anticipating that that his advice will be able to be issued to the Charter Trustees in the next few weeks and that this will give clarity about where this responsibility lies. Once we have confirmed that, it will be open to the appropriate body to consider the issue.
Public Statement from Diana Butler
Poole residents are not being consulted on the important issue of Poole Civic Centre. Just 2 weeks ago - BCP Cabinet voted 9:1 to sell this beautiful Grade 2 Listed building with decorative interior and central courtyard.
The Dorset Coroner is seeking a home, as Bournemouth Civic provision proved inadequate. Poole Civic Centre would be a well positioned, fitting venue with easy access, parking and good transport links. Poole Charter Trustees could use the Chamber at agreed times - saving proposed expense and alteration to Poole Guildhall.
Funds from the sale of Bournemouth Town Hall Annexe could be allocated to Poole Civic Centre - enabling scope for multi-use ( like Southampton Civic ) and potential for regular income. This would benefit Poole, the Council and the wider community - with space for Coroner services, room rental, exhibitions, events, training and hospitality.
The adjacent annexe site could be discussed separately.
Public Statement from Philip Gatrell (Read by the Chief Executive)
Following public issues at full Council and Audit and Governance Committee meetings this year:
· To conform with her previous practice, the Monitoring Officer will doubtless necessarily soon rectify an oversight by amending the Constitution to state correctly that Officer’s “1989 Act” duties. Including reporting actual contraventions of law to each Member.
· Hence ensuring Members’ awareness via the Constitution regarding Council’s self-regulation by primal legislation. Likewise, individual Councillors’ ultimate responsibility concerning Officers’ material failures that define governance weakness.
· Thus preventing damaging contraventions hitherto passing seamlessly and unchecked from Administration to Administration. For example -
· Not reporting the performance bellwether of “1974 Act” Ombudsman case decisions concerning maladministration and service failures.
· Not reporting “2014 Act” and “2015 Regulations” breaches concerning, respectively, local electors’ accounting information rights and Council’s inadequate fixed assets records.
· Potentially penalty bearing breaches of a basic tax regulation concerning agency Senior Officers - acknowledged to me 30 September 2024.
Public Statement from Robin Ede
"I am here to try and raise the profile and perception of Highcliffe-Walkford which seems to have been forgotten,
It has the first sandy beaches west of Southampton, is a well-loved beauty spot but is let down by cliff paths with scree slipping away underfoot and embarrassingly disgraceful toilets. it needs much TLC
If the former removed steps to the cliff top were replaced, it would improve the facilities for elderly residents and visitors alike and enhance the area. It would also be wonderful to take a short stroll using the steps to walk in a circular manner without using the roadway - a god send to the dog walking community.
I am suggesting the steps are replaced with a majestic style noting your new BCP Council custodianship, the regency designed steps representing the main entrance gateway to BCP using a little "Capability Brown" foresight and imagination !"
Public Statement from Antoinette Jones read by Lisa Weir
As BCP council’s policy ‘recognises that people have the right to be treated fairly and with dignity and respect’ and ‘…will not tolerate unjust, unfair, or unlawful discrimination’, one would expect this to also apply to who the council twins with.
Netanya is part of a state that has oppressed and discriminated against the Palestinian population.
On 19 July 2024 the ICJ declared Israel guilty of apartheid and affirms the legal obligation of all states to end complicity in Israel’s gross violations of human rights.
Remaining twinned with a town that does not respect the rights of all, results in Bournemouth being complicit, which questions Bournemouth’s commitment to their values and is quite damning.
Being critical of the actions of Israel is not antisemitic, and it is dangerous and harmful to conflate the two, as many Jewish people do not support the oppression and discrimination of the Palestinian people.
Public Statement from Nick Greenwood read by the Chief Executive
'I urge you to consider expanding the word limit for public statements during Council Meetings from the current 150 words to at least 300 words.
This change is essential as the current restriction significantly hampers genuine freedom of expression and undermines the very purpose of soliciting public opinion.
The BCP has garnered a reputation for inadequate consultation with local residents, and increasing the word limit would be a meaningful step toward improving this perception. Additionally, I understand that support for the United Nations Agenda 2030 guidelines may not resonate well with the community.
It appears that there is a tendency to limit feedback that could reveal concerns about this agenda. By fostering an environment that encourages open dialogue and longer statements, you would not only enhance transparency but also demonstrate a commitment to truly listening to the voices of the public. Such changes are vital for rebuilding Public trust.'