Agendas, Meetings and Minutes - Agenda item

Agenda item

Notices of Motion - Notice of Motion 3 - Climate Change (Agenda item 10)

Minutes:

On being put to the vote, it was agreed that Notice of Motion 3 – Climate Change be brought forward for consideration on the agenda.

 

The Council had before it a Notice of Motion set out in the agenda papers standing in the names of Mrs E B Tucker, Prof J W Raine, Mrs F M Oborski and Mr M E Jenkins.

 

The motion was moved by Mr M E Jenkins and seconded by Mrs E B Tucker who both spoke in favour of it, and Council agreed to deal with it on the day.

 

In the ensuing debate, the following points were made:

 

·         The science was clear about the impact of planetary warming. Difficult decisions needed to be made now to protect future generations. The motion asked Council to declare a “Climate Emergency” and to take action now by setting tough targets to reduce emissions

·         The Council had a good record on sustainability but must do more. For the Council to reach net zero emissions would mean making all council property more energy efficient, increased use of renewable energy, the Council fleet using non-fossil fuel power, the implementation of smart energy storage solutions and increased tree planting. Up-front investment would lead to long-term savings. The process needed to be speeded up and the Council should sign up to the pledge to be carbon neutral by 2030

·         The Council’s sustainability team should have an adequately resourced plan that set out all available options to address the “Climate Emergency”.

 

The following amendment was then moved by Mr A P Miller and seconded by Dr K A Pollock:

 

The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) in their October report stated that if the planet wants to avert dangerous climate breakdown, we need to cut emissions in half by 2030, and hit zero by the middle of the century.

 

Worcestershire is already committed to reducing emissions from our own estate and activities by 20% from a 2015/16 baseline by the end of March 2021. Our performance so far has exceeded this goal.

 

The IPCC's report suggests that the world has just a dozen years left to restrict global warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels.  Should they increase by 2 degrees Celsius, humanity's capacity to prevent catastrophic food shortages, floods, droughts, extreme heat and poverty will be severely impaired.

 

The IPCC says that limiting Global Warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius may still be possible, but only with ambitious action from national and sub-national authorities, civil society, the private sector and local communities.

 

The Climate Change Committee, in their report published two weeks ago, recommends that the Government aim for a zero carbon society by 2050, replacing the existing target of an 80% reduction, as required in the 2008 Climate Change Act. 

 

As a result, we call on Worcestershire County Council to:

 

1.    Note the Government has declared a "Climate Emergency";

2.    Pledge to make Worcestershire County Council in all areas where it is directly responsible, carbon neutral by 2050, taking into account both production and consumption emissions;

3.    Call on Westminster to provide the powers and resources to make the 2050 target possible;

4.    Continue to work with partners across the county and region, such as district, town and parish councils and Worcestershire LEP, to deliver this new goal; and

5.    Request the Economy and Environment Panel monitors the progress made by Worcestershire County Council towards this goal."

 

A point of order was raised that the amendment was a “wrecking motion” and negated the original motion and should be ruled out of order. The Head of Legal and Democratic Services advised that there was no mention in the constitution of the term “wrecking motion”. The constitution was clear that an amendment must not negate the motion before Council ie nullify or make it ineffective. The purpose of an amendment was to find the most accurate statement of the democratic will. He considered that a lot of the commentary in the amendment was either identical or very similar and the amendment overall followed the same direction of travel of the original motion. The main change was to note another party's declaration of a climate emergency rather than declare one, and pledge carbon neutrality by 2050 rather than 2030.  Therefore he concluded that this amendment was relevant to, did not negate the original motion and was therefore valid.

 

Those in favour of the amendment made the following comments:

 

·         The Cabinet Member for Environment commented that he had the role of the champion for the Environment for the Council, liaising with all interested bodies to ensure the Council met its sustainability targets. The Council had received a number of awards for achievements in sustainability. The Council had reduced its carbon emissions in the last two years by 24%, over and above the expected target. 39 schools had a green flag eco status. 94% of schools were registered with the eco-school programme. The Council provided and would continue to provide advice and guidance and work with partner organisations to deliver these new goals. The Council had helped over 5k homes to reduce energy consumption and worked with 400 businesses to save over 3,500 tonnes of CO2 and had reduced their energy costs by 25%. 150 businesses had been supported in the green sector with 7k employees working in green and blue sectors. The creation of an additional scrutiny task group was unnecessary when the Economy and Environment Panel was already carrying out this scrutiny function. The Council had reduced CO2 emissions by 34% since 2005 in the county with a 28% decrease in CO2 emissions from street lighting in the last two years. Savings of over 80k had been achieved by investing in renewable energy systems

·         The Climate Change Committee had recently released a report that suggested that the Government should change its target from an 80% to 100% reduction in carbon emissions by 2050. This was the target that the Council would aim for ahead of the Government. The Chairman of that Committee had indicated that to attempt to achieve zero carbon ahead of that timescale would not be feasible. There was a great deal of emotion surrounding the subject of climate change and the target of 2030 was not achievable and was unreasonable

·         The use of water from the River Severn to heat and cool the Hive was a prime example of the forward-thinking sustainability work of the Council. The Council had altered mileage rates to penalise drivers of larger vehicles, encouraged working from home, introduced electric charging points, bought green energy, and increased recycling rates. The Council included sustainability as an aim throughout its actions. To achieve the zero carbon emissions target by 2030 would have a severe impact on the use of county buildings and more generally on people’s lives

·         There was a balance to be struck between a top down approach to tackling climate change and a bottom up process based on community action

·         Parish and town councils had a process for raising petitions which might be a more appropriate means of increasing the profile of climate change

·         The Cabinet Member for Environment indicated that the motion had been submitted too early. Officers had not had time to disseminate the findings of the Climate Change Committee report. He gave an assurance that the Council would improve and achieve. The timescale set out in the amendment gave the Council more breathing space to take the necessary action. He encouraged members to attend relevant meetings and access the available biodiversity grants in their divisions

 

Those against the amendment made the following comments:

 

·         It was Parliament not the Government that had declared a “Climate Emergency”. This amendment appeared to be based on a misinterpretation of what Parliament had agreed

·         The amendment unnecessarily delayed the urgent action needed to prevent a “Climate Emergency”. It was acknowledged that the 2030 deadline was challenging and risks would need to be taken to achieve it

·         It was queried whether it was possible to move an amendment to the amendment. The Head of Legal and Democratic Services advised that it was not possible under the constitution to move an amendment to an amendment currently under debate. If the amendment were passed by Council, it would become the substantive motion and further amendments could then be moved

·         Although it was acknowledged that the Council had won awards and had a good track record for its sustainability work, it continued to build and widen roads and allowed bus services to fail. There remained much work to be done to improve performance

·         This amendment merely provided the existing Economy and Environment Panel with a general overview role on climate change which was unsatisfactory

·         The proposed actions in the amendment were too little, too late and took away the urgency element of the original motion

·         The Government had taken away incentives for people to tackle the impending “Climate Emergency” by disinvesting in wind turbines and withdrawing incentives for households to install solar panels

·         The amendment was passive in nature, lacked any commitment to action and seemed complacent. The Council needed leadership to recognise and tackle its responsibilities as community leaders by addressing climate change as a matter of urgency

·         How would the views of children and young people on climate change be taken into account without the establishment of a specific task group?

·         The Council was not doing enough to address climate change and the target date of 2050 date was far too late to address the “Climate Emergency”. The outcome of the Climate Change Committee might be politically expedient but it was not scientifically accurate and did not deal with the “Climate Emergency”. 

 

The mover and seconder of the amendment accepted the alteration to wording of the amendment for accuracy so that “the Government” was replaced by “Parliament”.

 

At the conclusion of the amendment debate and on a named vote the amendment as altered was carried and became the substantive motion.

 

Those voting in favour of the amendment were Mr A A J Adams, Mr R C Adams, Mr A T Amos,  Mr T Baker-Price, Mr R W Banks, Mr R M Bennett, Mr G R Brookes, Mrs J A Brunner, Mr B Clayton, Ms R L Dent, Mr N Desmond, Mrs E A Eyre, Mr S E Geraghty, Mr P Grove, Mr I D Hardiman, Mr A I Hardman, Mr P B Harrison, Mr M J Hart, Mrs A T Hingley, Mrs L C Hodgson, Dr A J Hopkins, Mr A D Kent, Mr S M Mackay, Ms K J May, Mr P Middlebrough, Mr A P Miller, Mr R J Morris, Mr J A D O'Donnell, Ms T L Onslow, Dr K A Pollock, Mrs J A Potter, Mr A C Roberts, Mr C Rogers, Mr J H Smith, Mr A Stafford, Mr C B Taylor, Mrs R Vale, Ms S A Webb. (38)

 

Those voting against the amendment were Ms P Agar, Mr C J Bloore, Mr P Denham, Mr A Fry, Ms P A Hill. Dr C Hotham, Mr M E Jenkins, Mr R C Lunn, Mr P M McDonald, Mr L C R Mallett, Mrs F M Oborski, Prof J W Raine, Mrs M A Rayner, Ms C M Stalker, Mrs E B Tucker, Mr R M Udall, Mr T A L Wells. (17)

 

A further amendment was then moved by Mr R M Udall with the following wording inserted at the start of the substantive motion: “Council declare an immediate “Climate Emergency” and calls on Council, our partners, and district councils to do likewise.” In addition, any reference to 2050 be replaced by 2030. The Head of Legal and Democratic Services advised that Council had just decided not to adopt the target for zero carbon emissions by 2030 but instead had adopted the target of 2050.  Therefore to revert to the target of 2030 was negating the decision taken by Council and was therefore ruled out of order. Council had decided not to declare a “Climate Emergency” therefore to request Council to call a “Climate Emergency” would also be a negation of the Council decision and was also out of order.

 

An amendment was moved that the word “Emergency” be replaced with the word “Crisis” and reference to 2050 be replaced with the wording “at a date to be determined”. The Head of Legal and Democratic Services advised that this proposed amendment to the target date for zero carbon emissions which Council had just decided represented a negation of the decision made by Council and was therefore ruled out. He advised that it was possible for Council to consider whether there was a “Climate Crisis” as the wording did not represent a negation of the substantive motion which referred to a “Climate Emergency” and there was sufficient distinction between the 2 states.

 

The following amendment to the substantive motion was then moved by Mr R M Udall and seconded by Mrs F M Oborski that the wording in 1. of the newly substantive motion be amended to read:

 

“Council recognises there is a “Climate Crisis” and urges district council authorities to similarly recognise a “Climate Crisis”.”

 

Council agreed to extend the 90 Minute deadline for the consideration of Notices of Motion by a maximum of a further 30 minutes to conclude the debate on this particular Notice of Motion.

 

Those in favour of the amendment made the following comments:

 

·         It was hoped that if this amendment was passed that the Council could encourage all district councils and schools to enable young people to plant trees to mitigate the impact of climate change

 

Those against the amendment made the following comments:

 

·         The Cabinet Member for Environment commented that the proposed amendment was unnecessary and Council should have faith in the work already being undertaken and future proposals to address climate change.

 

At the conclusion of the debate and on a named vote the amendment was lost.

 

Those voting in favour of the amendment were Ms P Agar, Mr C J Bloore, Mr P Denham, Mr A Fry, Ms P A Hill, Dr C Hotham, Mr M E Jenkins, Mr R C Lunn, Mr P M McDonald, Mr L C R Mallett, Mrs F M Oborski, Prof J W Raine, Mrs M A Rayner, Ms C M Stalker, Mrs E B Tucker, Mr R M Udall, Mr T A L Wells. (17)

 

Those voting against the amendment were Mr A A J Adams, Mr R C Adams, Mr A T Amos,  Mr T Baker-Price, Mr R W Banks, Mr R M Bennett, Mr G R Brookes, Mrs J A Brunner, Mr B Clayton, Ms R L Dent, Mr N Desmond, Mrs E A Eyre, Mr S E Geraghty, Mr P Grove, Mr I D Hardiman, Mr A I Hardman, Mr P B Harrison, Mr M J Hart, Mrs A T Hingley, Mrs L C Hodgson, Mr A D Kent, Mr S M Mackay, Ms K J May, Mr P Middlebrough, Mr A P Miller, Mr R J Morris, Ms T L Onslow, Dr K A Pollock, Mrs J A Potter, Mr A C Roberts, Mr C Rogers, Mr J H Smith, Mr A Stafford, Mr C B Taylor, Mrs R Vale, Ms S A Webb. (36)

 

On being put to the vote, the substantive motion was agreed by a strong majority.

 

RESOLVED: “The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) in their October report stated that if the planet wants to avert dangerous climate breakdown, we need to cut emissions in half by 2030, and hit zero by the middle of the century.

 

Worcestershire is already committed to reducing emissions from our own estate and activities by 20% from a 2015/16 baseline by the end of March 2021. Our performance so far has exceeded this goal.

 

The IPCC's report suggests that the world has just a dozen years left to restrict global warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels.  Should they increase by 2 degrees Celsius, humanity's capacity to prevent catastrophic food shortages, floods, droughts, extreme heat and poverty will be severely impaired.

 

The IPCC says that limiting Global Warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius may still be possible, but only with ambitious action from national and sub-national authorities, civil society, the private sector and local communities.

 

The Climate Change Committee, in their report published two weeks ago, recommends that the Government aim for a zero carbon society by 2050, replacing the existing target of an 80% reduction, as required in the 2008 Climate Change Act. 

 

As a result, we call on Worcestershire County Council to:

 

1.    Note Parliament has declared a "Climate Emergency";

2.    Pledge to make Worcestershire County Council in all areas where it is directly responsible, carbon neutral by 2050, taking into account both production and consumption emissions;

3.    Call on Westminster to provide the powers and resources to make the 2050 target possible;

4.    Continue to work with partners across the county and region, such as district, town and parish councils and Worcestershire LEP, to deliver this new goal; and

5.    Request the Economy and Environment Panel monitors the progress made by Worcestershire County Council towards this goal."