Agenda, decisions and minutes

1.1  Apologies for absence were received from Councillors Adejare, Billington, Garasia, Goldberg, Ozsen, Ross, Samatar (dispensation) and Wrout.

1.2  Apologies for lateness were received from Councillors Conway and Race

2.1  The Speaker informed the Council of recent civic events and projects which she had supported since the last Council meeting, which included:

·  A Chanukah service and lighting of the menorah.

·  Turning on the Christmas lights in the Town Hall Square and attending pantomime at Hackney Empire as well as other pantomimes and concerts across the borough.

·  The Salvation Army Christmas meal and community projects.

·  Breakfast with ex-servicemen.

·  Carols in Broadway Market.

·  Welcoming several school groups as well as many community groups to the Speaker’s Parlour.

·  The Winter Toy Appeal.

·  Hosting the Merry Cheesemas event in the Assembly Halls.

·  Meeting Emdad Rahman from the Book Bike Project, who had set up a homeless book club. and delivered over 20,000 free books on his bike.

Forthcoming events for which tickets could be purchased via the Speaker’s Office included:

·  ‘Bright Art, Healthy Minds’ variety show at Hoxton Hall.

·  A comedy evening at the Moth Club.

·  The annual De Beauvoir dinner.

2.2  The Speaker thanked all staff that assisted in citizenship ceremonies and events hosted on Council premises. Concluding, she welcomed the Jo Cox Foundation's report on civility in politics, which highlighted both the problems and also suggestions on how politics could become a more welcoming and inclusive place in which to serve. 

Members are invited to consider the guidance which accompanies this agenda, having particular regard to the restrictions on voting for Members with council tax arrears and make declarations of interests as appropriate.

3.1  There were no declarations of interest.

To consider the minutes of the meeting held on 29 November 2023: Enclosed

RESOLVED:

That the minutes of the meeting held on 29 November 2023, be agreed as a true and accurate record of proceedings.

RESOLVED: That the minutes of the meeting held on 29 November 2023, be agreed as a true and accurate record of proceedings.

- Report of the Returning Officer and Interim Chief Executive:  This report is to follow as the by-election date falls after the date of the agenda publication.

RESOLVED: To note the results of the recent by-election in Cazenove Ward as set out in Appendix 1 of the report.

5.1  The Speaker congratulated and welcomed to the Chamber Conservative Cllr Ian Sharer, who had been elected to the Cazenove Ward following the by-election held on 18 January 2024

RESOLVED: To note the election results as set out at Appendix 1 of the report

.

6.1  To the Cabinet Member for Community Safety and Regulatory Services from Kofo David

Has there been an increase in Hate Crime, Anti-Semitism or Islamophobia within the borough since the Israel and Gaza conflict and how is the Council dealing with it?

6.2   To the Mayor from Heather Mendick

As a Jewish resident I am appalled by the actions of Israel and I want to see Hackney's twinning with Haifa ended. How would the Mayor explain the Council’s failure to do this?

6.3  To the Cabinet Member for Climate Change, Environment and Transport from Ruth Jenkins

Would the Council act to safeguard children of Southwold Primary School and park users, as parents have repeatedly requested over at least 5 years, by either installing a zebra crossing between Millfields Park North across Southwold Road towards the school, or putting in place a school crossing patrol / lollipop person?

6.4  To the Cabinet Member for Climate Change, Environment and Transport from Theo Hinton-Hallows

As an alum of Hackney New School, I would like to know why the council is prioritising car parking over providing children with safe means to cycle to school by not choosing option 2 for the Downham Road redesign, despite the council’s commitment to reducing car use in the borough.

6.5  To the Cabinet Member for Housing Services and Resident Participation from Leslie-Ann Saunders

Can the Cabinet Member for Housing please provide an update to the achievements and outputs of the Better Homes Partnership over the past 12 months and its plans for the next year?

6.6  To the Cabinet Member for Climate Change, Environment and Transport from Ifeoma Mkparu

Please could you explain why the recycling bins, located opposite St. Mary’s of Eton Church, Eastway E9 have been removed and what the Council’s plans are to combat the continued dumping of rubbish within the vicinity and nearby estate?

6.1  To the Cabinet Member for Community Safety and Regulatory Services from Kofo David

Has there been an increase in Hate Crime, Anti-Semitism or Islamophobia within the borough since the Israel and Gaza conflict and how is the Council dealing with it?

Response from the Cabinet Member for Community Safety and Regulatory Services

Cllr Fajana-Thomas noted the conflict in Gaza had touched residents in Hackney and deepest sympathies were conveyed to all those affected. The national counter terrorist threat level remained substantial which meant an attack was likely in the UK. This category remained unchanged since before the Hamas and Israeli conflict.

Since 7th October 2023, London and Hackney had seen an increase in reported hate crimes for antisemitism and to a lesser extent Islamophobia with community tensions in both communities moderately heightened. Thanks were expressed to the wider community and faith communities across the borough who had worked together throughout this time in support of community cohesion. During December 2023, the number of reported anti-semitic and Islamophobia incidents had started to reduce, however, it was noted that the incidents had remained higher than in previous years.

The Council prioritised maintaining social cohesion and had undertaken a number of activities to support this objective. This included: the relaunch of the No Place for Hate campaign which was attended by Mayor Woodley, the Chief Executive, faith groups and the wider community standing in solidarity with affected communities. Additionally, No Place for Hate posters had been installed around the borough. The Council and the police had held weekly meetings with community leaders from the Jewish community and responded to their feedback.  Subsequently there were 250 council enforcement patrol hours around schools and synagogues since the beginning of the conflict, 2 sergeants and 12 constables dedicated daily, to Stamford Hill and Upper Clapton areas to respond quickly to reports of antisemitism and Islamophobia.

The police had set up a Hate Crime Response Unit in the Borough Command Unit (BCU), and officers from the Community Safety Team had been included in Jewish WhatsApp forums helping to dispel rumours and offer support and reassurance. The Council had regular contact with mosques across Hackney and had provided them with a named community safety contact that ensured a fast response to concerns raised. Weekly meetings in conjunction with the police had been offered to Muslim community representatives and low key patrols had been provided. The CCTV team had supported police investigations into hate crime incidents and in December an individual had been charged with an offence.

Supplementary Question:

Has the Council set out specific funds for these projects?

Cllr Fajana-Thomas noted that the costs for activities were contained within the Community Safety budget.

6.2  To the Mayor from Heather Mendick

As a Jewish resident I am appalled by the actions of Israel and I want to see Hackney's twinning with Haifa ended. How would the Mayor explain the Council’s failure to do this?

Response from the Deputy Mayor and Cabinet Member for Delivery, Inclusive Economy  ...  view the full minutes text for item 6.

7.1  From Cllr Binnie-Lubbock to the Mayor

Beloved soft-play small business Kidzmania has served Hackney children for over two decades. Before dropping objections to development of their Powell Road site, they were told they could return to a like-for-like space when completed. Will you work with Peabody to ensure a proper fit-out to accommodate this Hackney institution?

7.2  From Cllr Patrick to the Cabinet Member for Health, Adult Social Care, Voluntary Sector and Culture

Following years of Tory cuts on Adult Social Care and an increase in demand, can the Cabinet Member give examples of the challenges the Council is facing because of this, highlighting the overall effect of the past 13 years?

7.3  From Cllr Garbett to the Cabinet Member For Employment, Human Resources and Equalities

The UK has some of the longest working hours in Europe but one of the least productive economies. Does the administration agree with the data that suggests a four-day, 32 hour working week with no loss of pay would benefit Hackney Council, its employees, our local economy, society and environment?

7.4  From Cllr Lufkin to the Cabinet Member for Climate Change, Environment and Transport

The Council's Community Energy Fund has initiated the second round of funding to assist community organisations transition to net zero. Could the Cabinet Member confirm how community energy aligns with the overall energy and environmental objectives of the borough?

7.5  From Cllr Binnie-Lubbock to the Cabinet Member for Community Safety and Regulatory Services

Following several incidents of serious violence and tragic fatalities in the borough over the last months, what measures are the Council and its partners taking to ensure residents feel safe?

7.6  From Cllr Laudat-Scott to the Cabinet Member for Employment, Human Resources and Equalities

Does the Council have plans to transition from celebrating Black History Season to integrating Black history consistently into the year-round curriculum, events, and discussions, emphasising the importance of recognising Black contributions and experiences throughout the year?

7.7  From Cllr Garbett to the Mayor

To consolidate its first-in-the-country scheme for community parklets, can the Council confirm how many parklets have been constructed to date, and whether there are plans to make the process less onerous on applicants - to allow more diverse communities to participate?

7.8  From Cllr Turbet-Delof to the Cabinet Member for Health, Adult Social Care, Voluntary Sector and Culture

This year is Hackney Carnival, one of the most anticipated, inclusive, culturally diverse and vibrant events in the country. Can we hear updates on how communities, businesses and residents will be able to participate, apply for available funds and make this another amazing year for our borough's carnival?

7.9  From Cllr Rathbone to the Deputy Mayor for Delivery, Inclusive Economy & Regeneration

Could the Deputy Mayor please let us know what is happening about The Tram Depot in Upper Clapton Road which has recently been put up for auction, and what the Council intends to do to ensure it is preserved, along with 25 businesses and 50 jobs?  ...  view the full agenda text for item 7.

The Speaker noted that the Monitoring Officer had advised that question 7.1 had been withdrawn as there was a current live planning application with respect to the site accommodated by Kidzmania.

7.2  From Cllr Patrick to the Cabinet Member for Health, Adult Social Care, Voluntary Sector and Culture

Following years of Tory cuts on Adult Social Care and an increase in demand, can the Cabinet Member give examples of the challenges the Council is facing because of this, highlighting the overall effect of the past 13 years?

Response from the Cabinet Member for Health, Adult Social Care, Voluntary Sector and Culture

Cllr Kennedy explained that several councils across the country had issued S114 Notices, which effectively declared authorities bankrupt; all authorities had cited Adult Social Care (ASC) cost pressures as one reason for issuing the Notice.  The ASC pressures had been as a result of many factors which included people living longer, more complex needs, and increased unit costs per patient. The average weekly cost of a week in a nursing home had risen from £766 in 2019/20 to £1,172 4 years later, an increase of over 50%.

In addition, the Council had lost 40% of central government funding since 2010 and government funding had moved to one-off payments with no guarantee of continued funding year-on-year. Funding available was insufficient to bridge the gap in funding required.

7.3  From Cllr Garbett to the Cabinet Member for Employment, Human Resources and Equalities

The UK has some of the longest working hours in Europe but one of the least productive economies. Does the administration agree with the data that suggests a four-day, 32 hour working week with no loss of pay would benefit Hackney Council, its employees, our local economy, society and environment?

Response from Cabinet Member for Employment, Human Resources and Equalities

Cllr Williams noted the Council aspired to be an employer of choice with established procedures for flexible working requests which included compressed hours, hybrid working, and term time only working, regardless of the length of service. The policies included statutory safeguards such as a robust reason required to decline requests for flexible working and for decisions within a reasonable timescale.

There had been significant changes in working patterns since the pandemic. Staff working from home one day a week or more increased from 30% to 81% over the last 5 years. The Council had no plans to undertake trials of a four day working week in the Council. The Council had participated in the Timewise Fair and Flexible Council Programme that supported flexible working.

The Council had currently undertaken an engagement survey with staff to reflect on what worked well and what improvements had to be made to support staff.

Supplementary Question:

Would the Cabinet Member agree for the appropriate Cabinet Member and senior officers to meet with the 4 Day Working Week campaign group to explore how the four day working week would benefit the Council and taxpayer?

Cllr Williams advised that advice was taken from employment  ...  view the full minutes text for item 7.

8.1  Mayor Woodley welcomed everyone to the first Full Council of 2024 with special recognition to Cllr Ian Sharer following his election at the recent by-election. It was noted that he had previously served Hackney as both a Labour and Liberal Democrat Councillor. The Mayor thanked staff who had worked during the festive period to deliver essential services. She highlighted the importance of intentional rest, respite and wellbeing in order to continue working in a sustainable and healthy way.

8.2  The Mayor highlighted that the safety of residents remained a priority. She expressed sadness concerning three recent unconnected fatalities in the borough. Condolences were offered to the families of Lianne Gordon, Michael Murphy and Kobi Macharia Dooly, whose families were being supported by the Council’s teams and partners. The Mayor thanked Cllr Fajana-Thomas OBE, Cabinet Member for Community Safety and Regulatory Services for demonstrating excellent leadership as well as Council officers who had acted with compassion and professionalism. 

8.3  Mayor Woodley reaffirmed the administration’s commitment to making the borough safe and outlined a number of steps that would be undertaken to achieve this. The Serious Violence Duty Strategy, approved by Cabinet on 22 January was an integral part of this work. Mayor Woodley emphasised the importance of politicians standing in solidarity against violence and hate and their responsibility to protect and bring communities together. She proceeded to outline various motions that the Council had passed in recent years in support of Hackney’s diverse communities.

8.4  In reference to the Conservative Government’s decade plus of austerity measures, cuts to public services and the ongoing cost of living crisis, the Mayor acknowledged the financial pressures and hardships faced by local residents. As well as the challenges faced by the Council to address these in light of no sign of a sustainable financial settlement. Mayor Woodley pledged to do all in her power to protect services for those most in need. Members were informed that the Government had so far failed to renew the Household Support Fund after March 2024. This was worth £5.6m to Hackney in 2023/24 and had been used to help fight food poverty and provide vital advice to residents in financial difficulty.

8.5  Mayor Woodley reported that she and Cllr Chapman had written a letter condemning among other things, the underfunding of social care. She was pleased to advise that the Secretary of State had backtracked and allocated more money for this area; however a long term solution was still awaited. Despite the financial challenges, the Mayor was pleased to announce that the Council would be able to balance its books and continue to provide many services alongside local partners.

8.6  In reference to the housing crisis, Mayor Woodley informed the Chamber that the Hackney Homeless and Rough Sleeping Strategy had been approved by Cabinet. The Council would continue to look for opportunities to bring in additional funding for this area. Work would also extend to working with the Private Rented Sector. The Council had recently secured  ...  view the full minutes text for item 8.

-  Report of the Cabinet Member for Finance, Insourcing and Customer Service: Enclosed

Members should be aware of the provisions of Section 106 of the Local Government Finance Act 1992, which applies to all elected members

RESOLVED: In recognition of the ongoing cost of living crisis in Hackney and the financial constraints placed on the Council, agree to revise the Council’s current Council Tax Reduction Scheme by reducing the minimum contribution which all working age CTRS claimants have to pay from 15% to 10% of their Council Tax liability from the 1 April 2024

This report was covered by section 106 of the Local Government Finance Act 1992. The Speaker advised Members of the action they were required to take if section 106 was applicable to them. Members were informed that this would be a recorded vote and only those present in the Chamber for the duration of its consideration would be eligible to vote.

9.1  Cllr Chapman, Cabinet Member for Finance, Insourcing and Customer Service introduced the report that set out the authority’s localised Council Tax Support Scheme. The scheme was in recognition and response to the cost of living crisis. Cllr Chapman highlighted that a manifesto commitment was made in 2022 to give low income households a bigger discount each year an increase to Council Tax was made. The proposals set out to deliver a 90 percent Council Tax discount by 2026 and a full 100 percent by 2030 to those eligible. The first stage of implementation was for the 2024/25 Municipal Year.  Thanks were relayed to Scrutiny who helped provide understanding and context on the impact of the proposals.

9.2  Cllr Gordon spoke in support of the report and explained the Scrutiny engagement that was undertaken in devising the recommendations. Deputy Mayor Bramble and Cllr Coban also welcomed the report.

9.3  Cllr Steinberger raised concerns about the implementation of the recommendations owing to the far reaching ramifications of the cyber-attack.

On a recorded vote, there being:

For: (43 Members) Mayor Woodley, Cllr Adams, Cllr Adebayo, Cllr Baffour, Cllr Binnie-Lubbock, Deputy Mayor Bramble, Cllr Chapman, Cllr Coban, Cllr Conway, Cllr Desmond, Cllr Etti, Cllr Fajana-Thomas, Cllr Garbett, Cllr Gordon, Cllr Hayhurst, Cllr Joseph, Cllr Kennedy, Cllr Laudat-Scott, Cllr Lisser, Cllr Maxwell, Cllr McKenzie, Cllr Moema, Cllr Narcross, Deputy Mayor Nicholson, Cllr Ogundemuren, Cllr Oguzkanli, Cllr Pallis, Cllr Patrick, Cllr Potter, Cllr Premru, Cllr Race, Cllr Rathbone, Cllr Sadek, Cllr Selman, Cllr Sizer, Cllr Smyth, Cllr Steinberger, Cllr Suso-Runge, Cllr Troughton, Cllr Walker, Cllr Webb, Cllr Williams and Cllr Young.

Abstentions: 0

Against: 0

Not present in the Chamber: (4 Members) Cllr Krautwirt, Cllr Lufkin, Cllr Papier, Cllr Sharer

The resolution was declared CARRIED

RESOLVED: In recognition of the ongoing cost of living crisis in Hackney and the financial constraints placed on the Council, agree to revise the Council’s current Council Tax Reduction Scheme by reducing the minimum contribution which all working age CTRS claimants have to pay from 15% to 10% of their Council Tax liability from the 1 April 2024

-  Report of the Cabinet Member for Finance, Insourcing and Customer Service: This report is to follow due to the Government’s recent introduction of changes to the Business Rates system, additional time is required to process information for inclusion in the report.

Members should be aware of the provisions of Section 106 of the Local Government Finance Act 1992, which applies to all elected members

RESOLVED:

1.  That in accordance with the Local Authorities (Calculation of Council Tax

Base) (England) Regulations 2012, the amount calculated by Hackney

Council as its Council Tax Base for 2024/25 shall be 77,766.9 Band D

equivalent properties adjusted for non-collection. This represents an

estimated collection rate of 93.5%.

2.  That in accordance with The Non-Domestic Rating (Rates Retention)

Regulations 2013 Hackney’s non-domestic rating income for 2024/25 is

£179,559,273 subject to verification by the Academy (our Revenues

Software supplier) software release. This comprises three elements.

·  £66,209,106 which is payable in agreed instalments to the Greater

London Authority

·  £54,298,802 which is retained by Hackney Council and included as

part of its resources when calculating the 2024/24 Council Tax

requirement.

·  £59,051,365 which is payable in agreed instalments to Central Government.

3.  The proposal to levy a council tax premium equal to a 100% of the

Council tax charge in 2024/25 on any liable property which is

unoccupied and substantially unfurnished for a continuous period of

at least one year.

4.  The proposal that we signal our intent prior to 1st April 2024 that we

will levy second homes premium from 1st April 2025.

5.  To note that changes are proposed to the current CTRS scheme in

2024/25 and that this is covered by another report on this agenda.

This report was covered by section 106 of the Local Government Finance Act 1992. The Speaker advised Members of the action they were required to take if section 106 was applicable to them. Members were informed that this would be a recorded vote and only those present in the Chamber for the duration of its consideration would be eligible to vote.

The Conservative group were not present for this agenda item having previously given apologies detailed at agenda item 8.8.

10.1  Cllr Chapman, Cabinet Member for Finance, Insourcing and Customer Service introduced the report which was a key component of setting the Budget and Council Tax for the forthcoming financial year. An increased Council Tax collection rate of 93 percent was forecasted. In light of the housing crisis, owners of empty properties would be encouraged to bring them back into use. It was therefore proposed to levy a Council Tax premium equal to a 100% of the Council Tax charge in 2024/25 on any liable property. Additionally, it was proposed to signal the intent prior to 1 April 2024 to levy a second homes premium from 1 April 2025. Detailed proposals for its implementation would follow. These measures would assist with future revenue funding,

10.2  Cllr Moema and Cllr Desmsond welcomed the report. The commitment to work with the private sector housing team was highlighted as was the need to deploy some flexibility to those who genuinely wanted to pay arrears.

10.3  Cllr Binnie-Lubbock asked a question relating to whether there was any more the Council could do to provide business rates relief or reduction for small businesses. In response, Cllr Chapman advised that a small business relief was available to businesses that occupied premises with a rate of a value of less than £1500. The business rate was a national tax, which had very little local discretion. There was no specific relief that could be made outside of legislation. General support was available through the Hackney Business Network and Hackney Impact.

On a recorded vote, there being: 

For: (41 Members)  Mayor Woodley, Cllr Adams, Cllr Adebayo, Cllr Baffour, Cllr Binnie-Lubbock, Deputy Mayor Bramble, Cllr Chapman, Cllr Coban, Cllr Conway, Cllr Desmond, Cllr Etti, Cllr Fajana-Thomas, Cllr Garbett, Cllr Gordon, Cllr Hayhurst, Cllr Joseph, Cllr Kennedy, Cllr Laudat-Scott, Cllr Lufkin, Cllr Maxwell, Cllr McKenzie, Cllr Moema, Cllr Narcross, Deputy Mayor Nicholson, Cllr Ogundemuren, Cllr Oguzkanli, Cllr Pallis, Cllr Patrick, Cllr Potter, Cllr Premru, Cllr Race, Cllr Sadek, Cllr Selman, Cllr Sizer, Cllr Smyth, Cllr Suso-Runge, Cllr Troughton, Cllr Walker, Cllr Webb, Cllr Williams and Cllr Young.

Abstentions: 0

Against: 0

Not present in the Chamber:  Cllr Krautwirt, Cllr Lisser, Cllr Papier, Cllr Rathbone, Cllr Sharer, Cllr Steinberger,

The resolution was declared CARRIED

RESOLVED:

1.  In accordance with the Local Authorities (Calculation of Council Tax Base) (England) Regulations 2012, the amount calculated by Hackney Council as its Council Tax Base for 2024/25 shall be  ...  view the full minutes text for item 10.

-  Report of the Cabinet Member for Employment, Human Resources and Equalities: Enclosed

RESOLVED: To note the contents of the report.

11.1   Cllr Williams, Cabinet Member for Employment, Human Resources and Equalities introduced the seventh annual report, which was a requirement of  the Equality Act 2010. As of 31 March 2023 the gender pay gap remained in favour of women. It was highlighted that the most commonly used measure was the median. The report also included the ethnicity pay gap, measuring the difference in average salaries of white employees and those who are Black or of Global Majority ethnicity. Although there was not a legal requirement to publish this information, it was a way to hold the Council to account and evidence the impact of its anti-racism work. Despite the increase in  Black and Global majority staff in the lowest quartile of the organisation, it was noted that the mean ethnicity pay gap had marginally decreased.  In the coming years,  the focus would be on reducing the ethnicity pay gap and understanding the intersectional impact of pay gaps on gender in conjunction with other protected characteristics. There would also be a push to enhance data completeness and report the pensions pay gap by 2025.

11.2  Cllr Garbett asked a question about the low proportion of staff identifying as having a disability, not making declarations about disabilities and what the Council was doing to address this. Cllr Williams shared the concerns raised relating to the equity of the Council’s employment policies. Every effort was being made to remove barriers for staff with disabilities. Paragraph 7 of the report set out the next steps, one of which was to increase the percentage of staff who prefer not to disclose specific information by improving trust and confidence. However it was acknowledged that it was a matter of personal choice.

11.3  In response to a question from Cllr Coban regarding how many other London boroughs publish information relating to their ethnicity pay gap, Cllr Williams advised that there was not a legal requirement to do so. There was a national campaign to voluntarily publish their ethnicity pay gap. The figures of those reporting were very low, however London Councils did have some data relating to this.

RESOLVED: To note the contents of the report

-  Report of the Interim Chief Executive: Enclosed

-   

RESOLVED: To agree the report and the Members’ Allowances Scheme 2023/24 (Updated January 2024) at Appendix 1 of the report.

RESOLVED: To agree the report and the Members’ Allowances Scheme 2023/24 (Updated January 2024) attached at Appendix 1.

-  Report of the Licensing Committee : Enclosed

-   

RESOLVED: To note the report and appendix

13.1  Cllr Fajana-Thomas, Cabinet Member for Community Safety and Regulatory Services introduced the report, which had been considered by the Licensing Committee on 10 January 2024. There was a commitment to work with the relevant agencies to ensure that Hackney’s entertainment venues remained a safe place for all. Thanks were relayed to the Chair of Licensing, Members of the Licensing Committee, the Licensing Service and Amanda Nauth, Licensing Lawyer, for their commitment and ensuring that Licensing application hearings were well managed.

13.2  Cllr Smyth, Chair of the Licensing Committee, relayed his thanks to officers. He believed that the Licensing Service was a credit to the Council and ensured that the borough was safe and welcoming for all. He thanked Members of the Licensing Sub-Committees for their work to ensure that the needs of residents were balanced with supporting businesses and facilitating a vibrant day, evening and night time economy. He stated that the night time economy was an intricate part of Hackney’s reputation for being a vibrant place to live, work and visit. Cllr Smyth spoke about the Statement of Licensing Policy; Cumulative Impact Assessment; the review of fees;  the Late Night Levy; and the Hackney Nights Portal all of which he believed to be fundamental to achieving an inclusive and mixed economy.

13.3  Cllr Garbett, a member of the Licensing Committee welcomed the report and the work of the Chair of the Committee as well as the Night time Economy Team. She highlighted that Dalston Pubwatch had received an award for being the third best pubwatch in the country.  Dalston vendors were commended for their commitment to ensuring a safe night time economy. Cllr Garbett welcomed the possibility of Dalston being considered as a Special Consideration Area as opposed to a Special Policy Area and petitioned all Councillors to inform their constituents of the cumulative impact consultation to ensure that all voices were heard.

RESOLVED: To note the report and appendix.

-  Report of the Pensions Committee: Enclosed

RESOLVED: To note the report and appendix.

14.1  Cllr Chapan, Cabinet Member for Finance, Insourcing and Customer Services introduced the report. He highlighted the work the Pensions Committee had undertaken over the past two years relating to Climate Change.  He was pleased to report that the Pension Fund had reduced its exposure to fossil fuel reserves by 97% far exceeding the Fund’s original target to reduce exposure by 50% by 2022. This was achieved whilst the fund continued to perform well, with a funding level of 106%. He thanked the Pensions Committee Chair and Members of the Committee.

14.2  Cllr Adams, Chair of the Pensions Committee, thanked officers past and present and Members of the Pensions Committee for their commitment to the responsible management of the 1.87 billion pension fund. This was in spite of considerable challenges for the Local Government Pensions Scheme (LGPS) and the economy at large. In reference to Climate Change, Members were informed that carbon risk had been integrated into the strategy setting process. The committee’s ambition was for the Fund to achieve net zero emissions by 2040; with 3 shorter term targets to help monitor progress. The increased funding position from 92% in 2019 to 106% was due to better than expected investment return and had enabled the Council to reduce its contribution rate.  Cllr Adams highlighted the work of the administration team in collaboration with the Committee as set out within the report.

14.3  Cllr Binnie-Lubbock stated that although commendable, the reduction to the exposure to fossil fuel risk was not an actual reduction to fossil fuel company investment. He stated that the call from divestment campaigners was to divest from fossil fuel companies. Cllr Binnie-Lubbock asked if a country was found to be committing genocide in the international criminal court, or in violation of resolutions by the United Nations Security Council, whether the Pensions Committee would consider as part of that review, (following its recent actions to divest from Russian stocks) taking the precedented step of looking to divest from stocks in such countries. Cllr Adams explained that the Pensions Committee followed guidance from the Law Commission. Divestment was permitted where there was no risk of significant financial detriment and where scheme members and employers share concerns. The Committee had noted the legal position with regard to divestment, boycott and sanctions. It had become clear that the UK Government had prohibited divestment that was motivated by political or moral disapproval of the foreign state. The Fund was able to divest from its holdings in Russia due to a number of reasons including long term financial concerns relating to assets and the alignment with the United Kingdom’s foreign policy.

14.4  Cllr Garbett asked how the Pensions Committee was engaging with pension holders with regard to how they want their pensions invested and whether there could be seats reserved for union representatives on the committee, considering how many members they represent. Cllr Adams advised that scheme members had not been solicited on their views in the recent past. Occasionally, questions are  ...  view the full minutes text for item 14.

-  Report of the Acting Director of Legal, Governance and Electoral Services: Deferred to February’s meeting.

The Speaker advised that this report had to be deferred to the next meeting, to allow Group Leaders and Whips sufficient time to consider and present nominations to seats.

The Speaker advised that this report had to be deferred to the next meeting, to allow Group Leaders and Whips sufficient time to consider and present nominations to seats.

This Council notes that:

·  On 2 May 2023 the final stages of the Public Order Bill passed through the House of Lords, which gives the Police greater powers to restrict people’s democratic right to protest in England and Wales.

·  The Act grants the Police new powers to prevent protests occurring outside of major transport networks, oil and gas and energy supplies, making “locking on” a new criminal offence, expanding Stop and Search to include suspicionless stop and search, and enacts new individual protest bans under ‘Serious Disruption Prevention Orders’.

·  Article 11 of the Human Rights Act 1998 enshrines the Right to Peaceful Assembly into British law, guaranteed by Articles 10 and 11 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR)

·  A Legislative Scrutiny Report published by the Joint Committee on Human Rights called for key measures in the Public Order Bill to be amended or removed in order to reverse the “chilling effect” it is likely to have on the right to protest.

·  This report found that these offences have a very wide scope and criminalise those legitimately exercising their Article 10, 11, 8 and Article 6 rights.

This Council also notes that:

·  The Public Order Act 2023 has been criticised by Amnesty International, Liberty, Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC), and the UN Human Rights Commissioner.

·  It follows on from the Police, Crime, and Sentencing Act 2022 which was also accused of infringing upon democratic freedoms by human rights organisations.

·  The Government lost a vote in the Lords on the Public Order Bill 2023 to change the interpretation of ‘serious disruption’ of other people’s day-to-day activities to mean ‘anything more than minor’. The Lords opposed this change by 254 votes to 240 in May

·  The government reintroduced the change by Statutory Instrument.

·  Green peer, Jenny Jones, put forward a fatal motion to stop this unprecedented and anti-democratic move by the government. Unfortunately, Labour peers abstained, so it passed.

The Council further notes that:

·  The Right to Protest is a fundamental pillar of democracy.

·  The objective of a protest is to peacefully disrupt and agitate for change. The anti-apartheid and Civil Rights Movement, Women’s Suffrage, Gay Pride, workers’ rights and a government commitment to carbon zero by 2050 have been achieved through protest and public disruption.

·  The Public Order Act is already having a ‘chilling effect’ on our right to protest.

·  The King's Coronation in May saw over 60 people arrested by the Police, many of those on grounds of public nuisance and breaches of the peace for holding signs, chanting, reporting on the protests and standing in close proximity to those protesting.

·  The police initially used the ‘lock on’ ban in the Public Order Act to justify some of these arrests and deployed the largest ever use of live facial recognition technology in the UK

·  Police have written to residents of the Hackney area, warning them that Live Facial Recognition will be deployed at an unknown time and location in September 2023.

·  This technology is over 80% inaccurate according  ...  view the full agenda text for item 16a

The Labour Amendments to the Motion were Carried

RESOLVED:

This Council notes that:

·  On 2 May 2023 the final stages of the Public Order Bill passed through the House of Lords, which gives the Police greater powers to prevent serious disruptions caused by protests in England and Wales.

·  Article 11 of the Human Rights Act 1998 enshrines the Right to Peaceful Assembly into British law, guaranteed by Articles 10 and 11 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR)

·  A Legislative Scrutiny Report published by the Joint Committee on Human Rights called for key measures in the Public Order Bill to be amended or removed in order to reverse the “chilling effect” it is likely to have on the right to protest.

·  This report found that these offences have a very wide scope and criminalise those legitimately exercising their Article 10, 11, 8 and Article 6 rights.

·  Some aspects of the Public Order Act 2023 have been criticised by Amnesty International, Liberty, Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC), and the UN Human Rights Commissioner.

·  The Right to Protest is a fundamental pillar of democracy.

·  The objective of a protest is to peacefully disrupt and agitate for change, such as the anti-apartheid and Civil Rights Movement, Women’s Suffrage, Gay Pride and workers’ rights.

·  Baroness Casey’s Report into the Metropolitan Police Service found that there was a deepening mistrust of the force which is institutionally racist, sexist, homophobic and ‘broken', compounded by a culture of denial and obfuscation.

·  The Administration's ongoing work with the Metropolitan Police Service, MOPAC and local Borough Commander on improving standards through the Community Resilience Partnership and after the Casey Report and City and Hackney Safeguarding Children Panel Child Q reports.

·  The co-production of a local action plan with Hackney communities, the Met and the Council on improving trust and confidence.

This Council resolves to:

·  Work towards Hackney’s local action plan on policing includes consideration of alternative ways to keep communities safe, and community education on the Police, Sentencing and Crimes Act 2022, and the Public Order Act 2023, so that Hackney residents are aware of  their rights.

·  Refer local issues concerning the Right of Protest to the Hackney’s Cabinet Member for Community Safety.

·  Not agree to the deployment of Live Facial Recognition in Hackney until the Council is satisfied that the potential benefits to crime reduction will not lead to a further erosion of trust and confidence in policing in Hackney.

Proposed by: Cllr Fajana - Thomas

Seconded by: Cllr Joe Walker

Amendments to the motion had been received from the Labour Group and contained in the tabled papers circulated. The proposed amendments had not been accepted by the Green Group.

Cllr Garbett stated that all should be outraged at the continued assault on democracy and on the rights of citizens. In the interest of time, she decided to forego the right to make a speech.

Cllr Binnie-Lubbock, as seconder to the motion, reserved his right to speak until later in the debate.

Cllr Fajana-Thomas, proposed amendments to the motion which were seconded by Cllr Walker. The amendments were primarily made on the belief that the Public Order Act did not undermine the intention to peacefully protest; but strengthened police powers to tackle dangerous tactics and protect victims of crime. 

Cllr Binnie-Lubbock believed that the motion as amended did not protect the right to protest. He expressed disappointment that the amendments removed reference to the Police, Crime and Sentencing Act 2022 which he believed to be discriminatory to the Traveller Community. 

Cllr Walker, as seconder of the amended motion outlined what the administration had done to protect residents’ rights. This included making representations against the deployment of live facial recognition (LFR) in Hackney, without proper consultation and welcoming the police’s decision to suspend plans for this.

Following a vote, the Speaker declared the amendments to the motion CARRIED

The Speaker proceeded to the substantive motion which was not debated.  Cllr Binnie-Lubbock had reserved his right to speak. He stated that the motion, as amended, did not protect the right to protest; and did not oppose Government regulation which he felt criminalised and made protesting more difficult for Hackney’s marginalised communities.

Following a vote, the Speaker declared the motion as amended by Labour CARRIED

RESOLVED: That Labour amendments to the motion be carried.

This Council notes that:

·  On 2 May 2023 the final stages of the Public Order Bill passed through the House of Lords, which gives the Police greater powers to prevent serious disruptions caused by protests in England and Wales.

·  Article 11 of the Human Rights Act 1998 enshrines the Right to Peaceful Assembly into British law, guaranteed by Articles 10 and 11 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR)

·  A Legislative Scrutiny Report published by the Joint Committee on Human Rights called for key measures in the Public Order Bill to be amended or removed in order to reverse the “chilling effect” it is likely to have on the right to protest.

·  This report found that these offences have a very wide scope and criminalise those legitimately exercising their Article 10, 11, 8 and Article 6 rights.

·  Some aspects of the Public Order Act 2023 have been criticised by Amnesty International, Liberty, Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC), and the UN Human Rights Commissioner.

·  The Right to Protest is a fundamental pillar of democracy.

·  The objective of a protest is to peacefully disrupt and agitate for change, such as the anti-apartheid and Civil Rights Movement, Women’s Suffrage, Gay  ...  view the full minutes text for item 16a

Hackney Council notes that:

·  The pressure on organisations to pay their fair share of tax has never been stronger.

·  Polling from the Institute for Business Ethics finds that “corporate tax avoidance” has, since 2013, been the clear number one concern of the British public when it comes to business conduct.

·  Two thirds of people (66%) believe the Government and local councils should at least consider a company’s ethics and how they pay their tax, as well as value for money and quality of service provided, when awarding contracts to companies.

·  Around 17.5% of public contracts in the UK have been won by companies with links to tax havens.

·  It has been conservatively estimated that losses from multinational profit-shifting (just one form of tax avoidance) could be costing the UK some £17bn per annum in lost corporation tax revenues.

·  The Fair Tax Mark offers a means for business to demonstrate good tax conduct, and has been secured by a wide range of businesses across the UK, including FTSE-listed PLCs, co-operatives, social enterprises and large private businesses.

Hackney Council believes that:

·  Paying tax is often presented as a burden, but it shouldn’t be.

·  Tax enables us to provide services from education, health and social care, to flood defence, roads, policing and defence. It also helps to counter financial inequalities and rebalance distorted economies.

·  As recipients of public funding, local authorities should take the lead in the promotion of exemplary tax conduct; be that by ensuring contractors are paying their proper share of tax, or by refusing to go along with offshore tax dodging when buying land and property.

·  Where councils hold substantive stakes in private enterprises, influence should be wielded to ensure that such businesses are exemplars of tax transparency and tax avoidance is shunned.

·  More action is needed, however, as current and proposed new UK procurement law significantly restricts councils’ ability to either penalise poor tax conduct (as exclusion grounds are rarely triggered) or reward good tax conduct, when buying goods or services.

·  UK cities, counties and towns can and should stand up for responsible tax conduct - doing what they can within existing frameworks and pledging to do more given the opportunity, as active supporters of international tax justice.

·  The following local authorities have approved the “Councils for Fair Tax Declaration” to date: Barnet, Brent, City of Westminster, Enfield Council, Hammersmith & Fulham, Haringey, Lambeth, London Borough of Richmond upon Thames, Royal Borough of Greenwich, Southwark Council in addition to thirty-nine other Councils across the UK and the London Assembly.

Hackney Council resolves to:

·  Approve, and publicly declare its support for, the Councils for Fair Tax Declaration and enact the Declaration through the points below.

·  Lead by example and demonstrate good practice in our tax conduct, right across our activities.

·  Ensure IR35 is implemented robustly and contract workers pay a fair share of employment taxes.

·  Not use offshore vehicles for the purchase of land and property, especially where this leads to reduced payments of stamp duty.

·  Undertake due diligence to ensure  ...  view the full agenda text for item 16b

RESOLVED:

Hackney Council notes that:

·  The pressure on organisations to pay their fair share of tax has never been stronger.

·  Polling from the Institute for Business Ethics finds that “corporate tax avoidance” has, since 2013, been the clear number one concern of the British public when it comes to business conduct.

·  Two thirds of people (64%) believe the Government and local councils should at least consider a company’s ethics and how they pay their tax, as well as value for money and quality of service provided, when awarding contracts to companies.

·  Around 17.5% of public contracts in the UK have been won by companies with links to tax havens.

·  It has been conservatively estimated that losses from multinational profit-shifting (just one form of tax avoidance) could be costing the UK some £17bn per annum in lost corporation tax revenues.

·  The Fair Tax Mark offers a means for business to demonstrate good tax conduct, and has been secured by a wide range of businesses across the UK, including FTSE-listed PLCs, co-operatives, social enterprises and large private businesses.

·  Labour and Co-operative MPs and councillors have been at the forefront of the fight for a fairer tax system, with numerous Labour London boroughs having signed up.

Hackney Council believes that:

·  Paying tax is often presented as a burden, but it shouldn’t be.

·  Tax enables us to provide services from education, health and social care, to flood defence, roads, policing and defence. It also helps to counter financial inequalities and rebalance distorted economies.

·  As recipients of public funding, local authorities should take the lead in the promotion of exemplary tax conduct; be that by ensuring contractors are paying their proper share of tax, or by refusing to go along with offshore tax dodging when buying land and property.

·  Where councils hold substantive stakes in private enterprises, influence should be wielded to ensure that such businesses are exemplars of tax transparency and tax avoidance is shunned.

·  More action is needed, however, as current and proposed new UK procurement law significantly restricts councils’ ability to either penalise poor tax conduct (as exclusion grounds are rarely triggered) or reward good tax conduct, when buying goods or services.

·  Hackney Council can and should stand up for responsible tax conduct - doing what they can within existing frameworks and pledging to do more given the opportunity, as active supporters of international tax justice.

·  Hackney Council’s administration has long been a proponent for fair taxation and welcomes the Shadow Chancellor’s statements on fair tax.

Hackney Council resolves to:

·  Reaffirm its commitment to the Councils for Fair Tax Declaration and enact the Declaration through the points below.

·  Lead by example and demonstrate good practice in Hackney Council’s tax conduct, right across our activities.

·  Reaffirm IR35 is implemented robustly and contract workers pay a fair share of employment taxes.

·  Shun use of offshore vehicles for the purchase of land and property, especially where this leads to reduced payments of stamp duty.

·  Undertake due diligence to ensure that not-for-profit structures are not being  ...  view the full decision text for item 16b

Amendments to the motion had been received from the Labour Group and contained in the tabled papers circulated. All of the proposed amendments had been accepted by the Green Group. Subsequently, the proposer and seconder amended their original motion to reflect this.

Cllr Binnie-Lubbcok stated that the motion was not controversial and in accordance with the beliefs of Councillors across the political parties. In the interest of time, he decided to forego the right to make a speech.

Cllr Garbett, as seconder to the motion, reserved her right to speak until later in the debate.

Cllr Chapman spoke in support of the motion highlighting that a crucial part of the amendment was to update what is likely to be known as the Council’s Sustainable Insourcing and Procurement Strategy. The strategy would recognise the principles of fair tax.

Cllr Garbett, as seconder implored all members to vote for the motion.

Following a vote, the Speaker declared the motion as amended by the Greens UNANIMOUSLY CARRIED

RESOLVED: That the Greens’ amended motion be carried.

Hackney Council notes that:

·  The pressure on organisations to pay their fair share of tax has never been stronger.

·  Polling from the Institute for Business Ethics finds that “corporate tax avoidance” has, since 2013, been the clear number one concern of the British public when it comes to business conduct.

·  Two thirds of people (64%) believe the Government and local councils should at least consider a company’s ethics and how they pay their tax, as well as value for money and quality of service provided, when awarding contracts to companies.

·  Around 17.5% of public contracts in the UK have been won by companies with links to tax havens.

·  It has been conservatively estimated that losses from multinational profit-shifting (just one form of tax avoidance) could be costing the UK some £17bn per annum in lost corporation tax revenues.

·  The Fair Tax Mark offers a means for business to demonstrate good tax conduct, and has been secured by a wide range of businesses across the UK, including FTSE-listed PLCs, co-operatives, social enterprises and large private businesses.

·  Labour and Co-operative MPs and councillors have been at the forefront of the fight for a fairer tax system, with numerous Labour London boroughs having signed up.

Hackney Council believes that:

·  Paying tax is often presented as a burden, but it shouldn’t be.

·  Tax enables us to provide services from education, health and social care, to flood defence, roads, policing and defence. It also helps to counter financial inequalities and rebalance distorted economies.

·  As recipients of public funding, local authorities should take the lead in the promotion of exemplary tax conduct; be that by ensuring contractors are paying their proper share of tax, or by refusing to go along with offshore tax dodging when buying land and property.

·  Where councils hold substantive stakes in private enterprises, influence should be wielded to ensure that such businesses are exemplars of tax transparency and tax avoidance is shunned.

·  More action is needed, however,  ...  view the full minutes text for item 16b

This Council notes:

1.  Across Hackney residents have been horrified by the violent conflict in Israel and Palestine and are grief stricken at the loss of lives, including thousands of children. Many, especially in Jewish, Muslim and Arab communities, are concerned for the safety of friends, family and work colleagues in the region.

2.  Previous conflicts in the region have been associated with increases in community tensions, Islamophobia, antisemitism and hate crime in the UK.

3.  There has been a worrying rise in antisemitic and Islamophobic hate crime in Hackney since the attacks by Hamas on Israelis on 7th October and the latest siege, bombardment and ground invasion of Gaza.

4.  A range of international humanitarian organisations have been calling for a ceasefire, including Oxfam, Save the Children, Medecins Sans Frontières, Muslim Aid, War on Want, War Child and Amnesty International.

5.  Hackney is twinned with Haifa city in Israel. Haifa is 160km from the Gaza Strip.

6.  The brilliant work by faith and community groups and leaders across the borough to hold our community together, provide solace for today and hope for the future.

This Council believes:

7.  There must be an immediate ceasefire to end the violence. Humanitarian aid and basic services must be immediately restored. Hostages must be immediately released.

8.  A just and lasting peace in the region cannot and will not be brought about through violence, but will only be the result of a political negotiation based on democratic principles, equal rights for all and an end to occupation negotiated by the people of the region. Peace, justice and reconciliation in the region is likely to have a positive impact on community cohesion in Hackney.

9.  There can be no place for hate in our Borough. Hackney must be a safe place for those of all faiths and nationalities. We must support those whose families and loved ones are caught up in this conflict. And as a Borough of Sanctuary we extend a special welcome to those fleeing war and persecution and must do all we can to avoid that journey becoming a necessary last resort of many who would not otherwise wish to leave their homes.

This Council resolves:

10.To ask the Mayor to write to the UK government to:

a)  Ask them to call for an immediate ceasefire and immediate release of all hostages.

b)  Ask them to call for a renewed peace process to establish a political settlement that guarantees freedom, justice and safety for both Israelis and Palestinians.

c)  Request central government funding to support community cohesion and peace-making at a local level.

11.To continue to work with borough partners to ensure safety for our Muslim and Jewish communities, hold interfaith events more regularly, and to be ready to welcome refugees from the Occupied Palestinian Territories.

12.Encourage interfaith and community groups to bid for funding, like Local Initiative Funding, to support community cohesion, peace-making and celebrating how Hackney fosters harmony between our diverse communities.

Proposed by:  ...  view the full agenda text for item 16c

The Labour Amendments to the Motion were Carried

RESOLVED:

This Council notes:

1.  Across Hackney residents have been horrified by the violent conflict in Israel and Palestine and are grief stricken at the loss of lives, including thousands of children, following the terror attack on Israel by Hamas on 7th October. Many, especially in Jewish, Muslim and Arab communities, as well as those from other communities of all faiths and none, are concerned for the safety of friends, family and work colleagues in the region.

2.  Previous conflicts in the region have been associated with increases in

community tensions, Islamophobia, antisemitism and hate crime in the

UK.

3.  There has been a worrying rise in antisemitic and Islamophobic hate crime in Hackney since the terror attacks by Hamas on Israelis on 7th October and the siege, bombardment and ground invasion of Gaza.  Hackney stands against antisemitism, Islamophobia, xenophobia and all forms of racism and hate crime, passing motions to adopt the IHRA definition of antisemitism and the All-Party Parliamentary Group on British Muslims definition of Islamophobia.

4.  That a range of international humanitarian organisations have been calling for an urgent ceasefire on all sides and lasting peace in the region and for a two-state solution.

5.  That Hackney is twinned with Haifa city in Israel. Haifa is 160km from the Gaza Strip.

6.  The brilliant work by Council officers, faith and community groups and

partners including the Community Security Trust, Tell Mama, as well as

others, and the police across the borough to hold our community together, provide solace for today and hope for the future.

7.  The vital and ongoing work undertaken by the Council with partners to ensure the safety of our communities, which includes:

·  The sending of a letter from the Mayor to the Prime Minister expressing our concerns about the impact the conflict in the Middle East is having on Hackney residents and community cohesion, calling on the Government to: focus all efforts on bringing an immediate cessation to hostilities in Israel and Palestine, including an immediate and sustainable humanitarian ceasefire on all sides, lasting peace in the region and a renewed peace process, the urgent release of all hostages and provide central government funding to support community cohesion and peace-making at a local level

·  Increasing the number of council enforcement patrols and deploying the council’s mobile CCTV van into vulnerable communities

·  Meeting with the borough commander and continuing to work closely with the police to support their work

·  Co-hosting, with the police, community stalls around the borough as part of national hate crime awareness week

·  Responding swiftly to hate incidents, crimes and anti-social behaviour

·  Writing to faith leaders to express our support

·  Reaching out to our Jewish and Muslim community partners in particular to reiterate the work the Council is undertaking with the police to keep the community safe

·  Writing to all schools and education settings, including faith schools, and offering ongoing security liaison, support, resource and guidance

·  Holding interfaith events.

This Council believes:

8.  ...  view the full decision text for item 16c

Amendments to the motion had been received from the Labour Group and contained in the tabled papers circulated. Some of the proposed amendments had been accepted by the Green Group. subsequently the proposer and seconder had amended their motion to reflect this. There remained a number of amendments that had not been accepted.

Cllr Binnie-Lubbock introduced the motion, highlighting the ongoing conflict had escalated to some of the poorest regions and countries. He believed saying nothing was to be silently complicit.  He thanked all those who had tirelessly protested to oppose a military machine aided by arms companies based in the UK and funded by public institutions and pension funds like that of the Council.

Cllr Binnie- Lubbock believed that freedom should not be contingent on Israel's approval and generosity but on the commitment and solidarity of others. He welcomed the early motion in parliament welcoming South Africa’s genocide case against Israel, which had been sponsored by Green MP Caroline Lucas and signed by Hackney North MP, Diane Abbot. This was yet to be signed by Hackney South MP, Meg Hillier

The importance of being partners for peace was highlighted, especially at such  a time which had seen hate crime as a direct result of the conflict. He thanked the Labour Councillors who had taken a stand at November’s Council meeting voting with the Green group for the motion to be heard

Cllr Binnie-Lubbock believed that supporting international institutions like the International Criminal Court and applying pressure on political parties to cease violence, free those being held unjustly including all people of Gaza were necessary steps in brokering peace.

Cllr Garbett, as seconder, reserved her right to speak until later in the debate.

Deputy Mayor Nicholson, proposed amendments to the motion which were seconded by Cllr Rathbone. The Deputy Mayor expressed sorrow relating to the ongoing conflict, the loss of life and the impact on local residents. The amendments to the motion were centred on the belief that elected Councillors were mandated to support the people by whom they were elected, He advised that the administration had undertaken a number of steps to bring communities together; ensure residents were safe; and intervene swiftly to violence and hate crime. The amendments captured the essence of what Councillors were elected to do and was within their remit to deliver. On international matters, the responsibility was for Councillors to call on national politicians to bring about peace which was a secondary responsibility. The essence of the amended motion focussed on the primary responsibility of elected members to ensure Hackney remained a safe and diverse place.

Following a vote, the Speaker declared the amendments to the motion CARRIED

The Speaker proceeded to the substantive motion which was not debated.Cllr Garbett, had reserved her right to speak. She recognized the mandate on local Councillors to represent their constituents; however,  many residents within the borough had been directly impacted by the conflict and had called on Councillors to take action. She expressed disappointment that  ...  view the full minutes text for item 16c

Reduce Glyphosate to Zero Now

Hackney Council notes:

·  The use of herbicides has a significant impact on the environment by removing plants that are an important food source for a wide variety of native insects. Pesticide product mixtures have also been shown to be toxic to bees and earthworms. There is also a risk of runoff from hard surfaces into waterways, putting aquatic ecosystems at risk. We not only face a climate emergency, we also face the related emergency of collapsing biodiversity that is increasingly referred to as the ‘sixth mass extinction’ (1):

·  That 99% of pesticides are made from fossil fuels (2). Furthermore, pesticides exacerbate the climate emergency throughout their lifecycle via manufacturing, packaging, transportation, application, and even through environmental degradation and disposal;

·  There is a growing body of scientific evidence showing a link between glyphosate exposure and an increased risk of cancer; the World Health Organisation (WHO) deemed glyphosate a ‘probable carcinogen’ (3). It has been also shown to worsen chronic conditions such as asthma, and particularly affects children and pregnant people. In addition, it poses a health hazard to workers who spray Hackney’s streets.

·  The spraying of glyphosate in Hackney is causing concern among residents and elected representatives about its potential harmful effects on children, animals, wildlife and biodiversity on our streets, housing estates and parks;

The contracting staff who carry out this work need to be protected from harm;

·  The Mayor of London’s commitment in the Environment Strategy to “reduce the use of pesticides and peat-based products, such as compost”;

·  The work of Transport for London (TfL) with suppliers and contractors to explore safer alternatives such as hot foam, for essential vegetation management and weed control.

·  Glyphosate, the most used herbicide was narrowly relicensed in the EU with the condition that Member States “minimize the use in public spaces, such as parks, public playgrounds and gardens.”

Hackney Council further notes:

·  The work of the council to date in reducing the use of glyphosate with a 50% reduction in on-street spraying against 2017 levels.

Hackney Council has demonstrated:

·  A commitment to further reducing spraying across the borough, including a total cessation of spraying in Hackney’s Town centres, by removing weeds by hand; a successful year-long pilot for more than 200 out of a total 237 green areas across Hackney’s housing estates which will now go glyphosate-free permanently, with an intention to upscale to all estate-based green areas; a change in how the council sprays, from operatives mounted on vehicles to spot-spraying with knapsacks; a no-spray 10x Green area around Daubeney Road to explore whether a no-spray approach is more beneficial to biodiversity by avoiding the removal of plants that support insect populations. These changes have been well received by the public.

The Council acknowledges:

·  Several councils around the country have gone fully glyphosate-free including in London. The London Borough of Hammersmith and Fulham was the first council in London to cease the use of glyphosate, to support biodiversity and protect habitat against any long-term chemical  ...  view the full agenda text for item 16d

In accordance with Part 4A Rule 16.4 of the Council’s Constitution, the Speaker advised that this motion which had not been debated would stand referred, without discussion, to the next ordinary meeting of Full Council.

In accordance with Part 4A Rule 16.4 of the Council’s Constitution, the Speaker advised that this motion which had not been debated would stand referred, without discussion, to the next ordinary meeting of Full Council.