Agenda item

To receive the report of the Head of Legal and Democratic Services on any Notices of Motion received by him (Lilac pages).

Councillors are asked to note that any Notices of Motion must be received by the Head of Legal and Democratic Services no later than noon on Tuesday, 30 October 2018.   

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 F M Oborski who both spoke in favour of it, and Council agreed to deal with it on the day.

Those in favour of the motion made the following comments:

·         The IPCC had warned that the world was at a tipping point in terms of the impact of climate change and the WWF had reported its impact on the loss of biodiversity. If nothing were done now, there would be a devastating impact on eco-systems. Collective action was needed by communities and councils now. The Government response and targets had been inadequate. The proposals in this motion would keep the threat of climate change constantly in the Council's sight

·         The form that the proposed carbon scrutiny committee would take was open for discussion but it must be a permanent committee

·         Tackling climate change was an opportunity and a source of income generation, for example through renewable energy, although more work needed to be done in this area. The aim of the motion was raise the profile of climate change throughout the Council and provide a political focus for action

·         Rejection of the motion implied that the Council did not require any more ideas or leadership on climate change and would represent a missed opportunity. This motion would allow members to take ownership of the issue and provoke ideas for change 

·         Even if doubts about the impact of climate change were accepted, it did not mean that it was not sensible to take precautions to prevent it

·         To counter concerns about the impact of the additional carbon footprint created by the proposals in this motion, meetings could be held via a conference call

·         The work already being undertaken by the Council was welcomed but it was not being effectively communicated to members

·         It appeared that motions were being rejected by the administration on the basis that a small part of the motion was unacceptable. In these circumstances, the administration should propose an amendment to ensure that the aspects that were not contentious were adopted. This would encourage cross-party engagement and member involvement

·         It was alarming that two Cabinet Members with key responsibilities that impacted on the environment had such differing views on climate change

·         At the current rate the Council would not reach the carbon neutral target by 2040.  

Those against the motion made the following comments:

·         The Cabinet Member for Environment commented that the Council had led on numerous low carbon opportunity programmes to reduce the county's carbon emissions. A 24% reduction in carbon emissions had been achieved under the Council's Energy and Carbon Management Plan. The Council had reached its 2021 target to reduce emissions from Council owned estates by 20% within 2 years

·         Energy efficiency measures installed by the Council since 2011 had reduced energy costs by £400k per annum. 200 small businesses had reduced carbon emissions saving 2,000 tonnes of CO2. 5,000 households had been helped by Warmer Worcestershire to install energy efficient boilers Officers had been employed to monitor energy efficiency and a relevant scrutiny panel had been established. On the basis of the actions already being taken and the environmental impact of the additional work involved, the motion could not be supported

·         The alarm expressed about the implications of climate change had been over-stated and the motion was contrary to the policies that the Council should be promoting

·         There was no standard accepted view on climate change and members from all parties had different views on the subject

·         Consideration had been given by the administration to amending the motion but because parts of it were already being done and other aspects were not agreed with, any amendment would have neutralised it.

The motion was lost.