Agenda item

i)             Councillor Hallam to propose and Councillor Marriott to second:

This Council notes that graffiti is an unwelcome sight in most towns and cities across the country. A town is often judged by how it responds to graffiti, particularly that of a racist or offensive nature. Council notes that there has previously been a robust informal policy and stance adopted regarding this, but now resolves to:

a)  Adopt a formal policy for the removal of graffiti in a quality manor, free of charge on private property where the appropriate permission has been provided in writing by the property owner;

b)  Prioritize and immediately tackle instances of racist or offensive graffiti;

c)  Continue the commitment to do all it can to remove graffiti in the town, including working closely with the police across the borough, Northampton Town Centre BID, Network Rail, and owners of other affected properties, to try and catch offenders;

d)  Relaunch the “name the tag” campaign and actively promote it within the Youth Forum and youth groups across the town;

e)  Urge people to report offenders and the location of graffiti on both public and private property when they see it, so it can be removed.

ii)            Councillor Stone to propose and Councillor Russell to second:

“This Council recognises that children’s services in the county are under pressure:-

There are more and more children coming into Local Authority care. There is growing child poverty. Children on free school meals are going hungry during the school holidays. Respite for parents caring for children with disabilities is under threat. Mental Health Services for children have long waiting lists. Universal services for the 0 -5 year olds are under threat as libraries close and money is withdrawn from the voluntary sector. Early help and prevention for families has declined over the last 4 years. We have a growing number of children living in temporary accommodation.

Northampton Borough Council resolves to oppose calls to outsource children’s services. Work with and resource partners to deliver multi-agency neighbourhood working. Develop a strategy to combat child poverty”.

iii)           Councillor Ashraf to propose and Councillor Duffy to second:

“We have been a fair trade Borough in the past. Can we reintroduce this and make sure we continue the fair trade policy in the future?”

iv)           Councillor B Markham to propose and Councillor Beardsworth to second:

“We call upon this Council to write to the Secretary of State for communities and local government, requesting that the election for the new unitary Council be trialled under proportional representation using the single transferable vote. Council believes this will produce a result which more closely reflects the views of a diverse Northampton community”.

v)            Councillor Sargeant to propose and Councillor Larratt to second:

“This Council recognises the concerns of residents and Parish Councils in areas where management companies are responsible for open space and other amenities. Council resolves to support residents and Parish Councils in resolving their concerns.

This Council also resolves to make it clear that, it too, has significant concerns regarding the establishment of management companies to manage open space and other facilities on new housing developments in the borough of Northampton, rather than them being formally adopted.

While resisting management companies, this Council will encourage developers to consider all the alternatives available for managing the facilities on new developments in the borough and Northampton growth area, including seeking for developments to be adopted with sufficient resources to ensure that the maintenance of these pieces of land is fully funded”.

vi)           Councillor Graystone to propose and Councillor Nunn to second:

“This Council notes the Government’s aims in encouraging a modal shift of freight from road to rail, which is a key aspect of its transport policy, and recognise that with effective implementation this modal shift can result in a reduction of carbon emissions, shorter and more efficient journeys, and fewer road casualties.

This Council further notes that the delivery of a national network of Strategic Rail Freight Interchanges (SRFIs) forms a key part of recognising this aim, and the criteria for these are set out in the National Policy Statement for National Networks (NPSNN) and the Strategic Rail Freight Interchange Policy Guidance documents.

This Council also notes that the NPSNN is clear that there is a need for an expanded network of large SRFIs across the regions to accommodate the long-term growth in rail freight, and that new rail freight interchanges, especially in areas poorly served by such facilities at present, are likely to attract substantial business, generally new to rail. However, the NPSNN also states that existing operational SRFIs and other intermodal RFIs are situated predominantly in the Midlands and the North, and that SRFI capacity needs to be provided at a wide range of locations, to provide the flexibility needed to match the changing demands of the market.

This Council believes that, as there is already around 39m sq. ft of SRFI-related warehousing either under construction or being proposed in the East Midlands alone, not including the existing SRFI warehousing capacity already present nor other SRFIs in the wider Midlands region, it is unclear whether the proposed local developments, Rail Central and Northampton Gateway, are compliant with the NPSNN.

This Council, therefore, resolves to write to the Secretary of State for Transport to ask for an urgent review of the NPSNN, and all other associated policy guidance, to ensure that SRFI capacity is deployed as a national network across the country, rather than being built in areas where developers have pre-existing land options”.

i)             Councillor Hallam propose and Councillor Marriott seconded:

This Council notes that graffiti is an unwelcome sight in most towns and cities across the country. A town is often judged by how it responds to graffiti, particularly that of a racist or offensive nature. Council notes that there has previously been a robust informal policy and stance adopted regarding this, but now resolves to:

a)  Adopt a formal policy for the removal of graffiti in a quality manor, free of charge on private property where the appropriate permission has been provided in writing by the property owner;

b)  Prioritize and immediately tackle instances of racist or offensive graffiti;

c)  Continue the commitment to do all it can to remove graffiti in the town, including working closely with the police across the borough, Northampton Town Centre BID, Network Rail, and owners of other affected properties, to try and catch offenders;

d)  Relaunch the “name the tag” campaign and actively promote it within the Youth Forum and youth groups across the town;

e)  Urge people to report offenders and the location of graffiti on both public and private property when they see it, so it can be removed.

Council debated the motion.

Upon a vote, the motion was carried.

ii)            Councillor Stone proposed and Councillor Russell seconded:

“This Council recognises that children’s services in the county are under pressure:-

There are more and more children coming into Local Authority care. There is growing child poverty. Children on free school meals are going hungry during the school holidays. Respite for parents caring for children with disabilities is under threat. Mental Health Services for children have long waiting lists. Universal services for the 0 -5 year olds are under threat as libraries close and money is withdrawn from the voluntary sector. Early help and prevention for families has declined over the last 4 years. We have a growing number of children living in temporary accommodation.

Northampton Borough Council resolves to oppose calls to outsource children’s services. Work with and resource partners to deliver multi-agency neighbourhood working. Develop a strategy to combat child poverty”.

Council debated the motion.

Upon a vote, the motion was lost.

iii)           Councillor Ashraf proposed and Councillor Duffy seconded:

“We have been a fair trade Borough in the past. Can we reintroduce this and make sure we continue the fair trade policy in the future?”

Council debated the motion.

Upon a vote, the motion was lost.

Mr Huffadine Smith addressed Council on motion iv) and explained his support for a more fair and democratic voting process. He stated that he believed strongly in democracy and as such considered proportional representation fairer than the current first past the post system and urged all Councillors to vote freely and fairly on the motion. 

The Mayor explained that as Councillor Beardsworth was unwell and not in attendance, motion iv) would be seconded by Councillor Meredith.

iv)           Councillor B Markham proposed and Councillor Meredith seconded:

“We call upon this Council to write to the Secretary of State for communities and local government, requesting that the election for the new unitary Council be trialled under proportional representation using the single transferable vote. Council believes this will produce a result which more closely reflects the views of a diverse Northampton community”.

Council debated the motion.

Upon a vote, the motion was lost.

Mr Dale Wallis addressed Council on motion v) and explained that he had purchased a property on an estate where management companies were responsible for the upkeep of open spaces and noted that some residents were paying a management fee of over £400 per annum on top; since purchasing their properties, some residents had experienced an increase over 350%.

Ms Maitland commented that the motion was a progressive step, but did not consider that it was going far enough to deal with the injustice that residents were subjected to. She reported that the management companies were not accountable to residents and requested that developers be strongly encouraged to share their financial calculation for time and costings and asked for this to be monitored.

Mr Huffadine Smith commented that he was aware of residents purchasing a property without the realisation that they would be subjected to additional costs of the management fees in addition to the Council tax. He reported that planning departments were able to stipulate conditions and explained that there had been instances where houses in the areas had been converted into HIMOs and passing on cost of management fees with its occupants which was unfair.

v)            Councillor Sargeant proposed and Councillor Larratt seconded:

“This Council recognises the concerns of residents and Parish Councils in areas where management companies are responsible for open space and other amenities. Council resolves to support residents and Parish Councils in resolving their concerns.

This Council also resolves to make it clear that, it too, has significant concerns regarding the establishment of management companies to manage open space and other facilities on new housing developments in the borough of Northampton, rather than them being formally adopted.

While resisting management companies, this Council will encourage developers to consider all the alternatives available for managing the facilities on new developments in the borough and Northampton growth area, including seeking for developments to be adopted with sufficient resources to ensure that the maintenance of these pieces of land is fully funded”.

Council debated the motion

Upon a vote, the motion was carried.

vi)           Councillor Graystone proposed and Councillor Nunn seconded:

“This Council notes the Government’s aims in encouraging a modal shift of freight from road to rail, which is a key aspect of its transport policy, and recognise that with effective implementation this modal shift can result in a reduction of carbon emissions, shorter and more efficient journeys, and fewer road casualties.

This Council further notes that the delivery of a national network of Strategic Rail Freight Interchanges (SRFIs) forms a key part of recognising this aim, and the criteria for these are set out in the National Policy Statement for National Networks (NPSNN) and the Strategic Rail Freight Interchange Policy Guidance documents.

This Council also notes that the NPSNN is clear that there is a need for an expanded network of large SRFIs across the regions to accommodate the long-term growth in rail freight, and that new rail freight interchanges, especially in areas poorly served by such facilities at present, are likely to attract substantial business, generally new to rail. However, the NPSNN also states that existing operational SRFIs and other intermodal RFIs are situated predominantly in the Midlands and the North, and that SRFI capacity needs to be provided at a wide range of locations, to provide the flexibility needed to match the changing demands of the market.

This Council believes that, as there is already around 39m sq. ft of SRFI-related warehousing either under construction or being proposed in the East Midlands alone, not including the existing SRFI warehousing capacity already present nor other SRFIs in the wider Midlands region, it is unclear whether the proposed local developments, Rail Central and Northampton Gateway, are compliant with the NPSNN.

This Council, therefore, resolves to write to the Secretary of State for Transport to ask for an urgent review of the NPSNN, and all other associated policy guidance, to ensure that SRFI capacity is deployed as a national network across the country, rather than being built in areas where developers have pre-existing land options”.

Council debated the motion

Upon a vote, the motion was carried.