To approve as a correct record the Minutes of the Meeting of the Council held on 26 July 2017 for signature by the Mayor as Chairman.

That the Minutes of the Meeting of the Council held on 26 July 2017, be approved as a correct record and signed by the Chairman.

To receive any announcements from the Mayor, Leader of the Council, Members of the Executive, Chairmen of Scrutiny Committees and the Head of Paid Service.

(a)        Director of Legal Services

The Mayor welcomed Janet Kealey, Director of Legal and Democratic Services and informed Members that Jane Le Fevre had been seconded to the position of Chief Legal Officer responsible for the Council’s Investments Programme.

(b)        Queens Award for Voluntary Service

The Mayor informed the Council that he had the pleasure of attending the Queen’s Award for Voluntary Service Presentations on 30 August at Gorton Monastery and was delighted that the Society for Abandoned Animals, based on Dane Road in Sale, was granted the coveted award.

(c)        Scrutiny Committee Update

Councillor M. Young, Chairman of Scrutiny reported that three Task and Finish Groups had commenced and were undertaking a review of the Council’s Customer Relationship Management System; a joint review with Health Scrutiny Committee on Loneliness in Trafford; and a review of the Service Level Agreements offered to Trafford schools. Councillor M. Young also took the opportunity to remind Members that Trafford was hosting the next Strategic Scrutiny Network meeting on 23 November 2017 at Trafford Town Hall.

(d)    Health Scrutiny Committee Update

Councillor Harding, Chairman of Health Scrutiny Committee reiterated what Councillor M. Young had just said that the Committee would be working with Scrutiny Committee on a joint piece of work around Loneliness. Health Scrutiny was continuing to work on themed areas and a meeting on Mental Health had been held with Integration next on the agenda. As Chairman, Councillor Harding would be meeting Care Quality Commission representatives in relation to inspections on Adult Social Care.

This is an opportunity for Members of Council to ask the Mayor, Members of the Executive or the Chairman of any Committee or Sub-Committee a question on notice under Procedure Rule 10.2.

The Mayor reported that 3 questions had been received under Procedure Rule 10.2.

(a)        Councillor Jarman asked the following question for which he had given notice:

“Could Trafford Council initiate a campaign amongst schools in the borough to make parents aware of the danger of car exhaust emissions on public health and to encourage them to turn off their car engines whilst picking up or dropping off their children at school?”

Councillor Lamb, the Executive Member for Health and Wellbeing thanked Councillor Jarman for the question and believed it raised a wider issue than just that of air quality, important though that was, as Public Health England and the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence had said that the people most at risk from vehicle exhaust fumes were the over 65’s and children.

The Executive Member considered that as many children as possible should be encouraged to walk to school where there was a reasonable alternative to being driven to and dropped off at school. The Council was involved at a Greater Manchester level in promoting the Living Streets Programme and a number of schools in Trafford were already involved. The aim was to reduce the number of parents who drove their children to school by encouraging the school to develop active travel among their pupils. This would have benefits for air quality, traffic congestion and importantly, physical activity. The scheme rewarded children who walked all or part of the way to school, at least once a week, with a monthly collectible badge and children logged their daily journeys on an electronic travel tracker, loaded onto a laptop in each classroom. On a national level the scheme had resulted in a 23% increase in daily walking journeys to school as well as a 30% decrease in cars outside school at pick-up and drop off times.

The Council would encourage schools to participate in the Living Streets programme. Councillor Lamb was very happy to seek to promote the programme along with the quite specific message about increasing parental awareness of the dangers of car exhausts and would exhort parents, as a minimum, to turn off their engines while picking up/dropping off children. Should parents or carers drive children to school, he would encourage them to drive at a slow, steady speed near schools and to park safely, with consideration for neighbours and other road users, away from the school gate, and undoubtedly to turn off their engine whilst waiting.

The Executive Member was in broad agreement with the thrust of the question and believed there were things the Council could do to encourage and persuade parents and carers to partake in better options for getting their children to and from school.

Acknowledging Councillor Lambs’ response and permitted a supplementary question, Councillor Jarman enquired whether or not a scheme could be initiated. Councillor Lamb confirmed that he was supportive of such an initiative and believed that there were things that the Council could do, suggesting a dialogue with schools to  ...  view the full minutes text for item 35.

To note the result of the Poll held on 14 September 2017 for the Bucklow St Martins Ward of the Borough and the new political make-up of the Council.

The Chief Executive submitted a report on the result of the Poll held on 14 September 2017 for the Bucklow St. Martins Ward of the Borough and to advise on the political composition of the Council and the position in relation to the constitution of Council Committees for the remainder of the 2017/18 municipal year.

The Mayor congratulated Cllr Aidan Williams on his election and welcomed him to his first Council meeting.

RESOLVED –

(1)        That the election of Aidan James Williams as an elected Member for the Bucklow St. Martins Ward be noted.

(2)        That the current composition of the political groups on the Council, as set out in the report, be noted.

(3)        That the Council notes that there will be no consequential change to the allocation of Committee places.

To note the following changes to the Membership of Committees, as agreed by the Chief Executive under delegated authority:

Councillor Mrs. Bruer-Morris appointed, with effect from 14 September 2017, as a replacement for former Councillor Smith on the Licensing Committee, Public Protection Sub-Committee and Licensing Sub-Committee.

RESOLVED: That the Council notes the following changes to the Membership of Committees, as agreed by the Chief Executive under delegated authority:

Councillor Mrs. Bruer-Morris appointed, with effect from 14 September 2017, as a replacement for former Councillor Smith on the Licensing Committee, Public Protection Sub-Committee and Licensing Sub-Committee.

To inform Council of the proposals for a new University in Trafford and the strategy for securing the revitalisation of Stretford Town Centre and to note the associated decisions of the Executive on 2 October 2017.

(For further background, Members are requested to refer to the reports of the Executive Member for investment and the Executive Member for Housing and Strategic Planning which were presented to the Executive Meeting on 2 October 2017, items 3 and 4 respectively.)

The Council was invited to discuss the proposals for a new University in Trafford and the strategy for securing the revitalisation of Stretford Town Centre which had been approved by the Executive on 2 October 2017.

The Refreshed Stretford Masterplan was the Council's vision for the area which included University Academy 92, leisure facilities, public spaces, and the former Essoldo cinema. The Masterplan aimed to create jobs, attract people into the town centre and enhance the local economy.

Members were largely supportive of the plans and considered them to be a once in a life time opportunity to regenerate the area but were also cautious about the impact of large scale changes on the existing community.

Positive comments concerned the educational opportunities; new construction and jobs; new retail business and the impact on the economy, not only locally but regionally; new housing; new residents attracted to the area; improved leisure facilities and opportunities; improvements to the public realm and night time economy; and the rejuvenation of historical buildings.

Matters on which reassurance was required included the impact of such a large student population on the local community; an increase in the number of houses of multiple occupation and a new large scale tower block; the relocation of existing businesses and the uncertainty of leases not being renewed; the loss of green pockets of land and trees along the A56 which already had high levels of pollution; the Stretford Library site and future provision; a suitable mix of shopping and entertainment outlets to complement the night time economy that was not at odds with the close proximity of residential housing; impact on the infrastructure, including roads, parking and access to medical practices; access to and affordability of leisure facilities for local residents; and guarantees that existing residents had the opportunity to access education and jobs locally.

The Leader of the Council welcomed the contributions of Members and thought them opportune at the outset of the consultation period. Consultation with the local community over the plans commenced on 10 October and was set to run until 19 December 2017.

RESOLVED: That the comments of Members this evening and the decisions of the Executive on 2 October 2017, be noted.

This Council expresses alarm at the rise in antisemitism in recent years across the UK. This includes incidents when criticism of Israel has been expressed using antisemitic tropes. Criticism of Israel can be legitimate, but not if it employs the tropes and imagery of antisemitism. This Council therefore welcomes the UK Government’s announcement on December 11th 2016 that it will sign up to the internationally recognised International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) guidelines on antisemitism which define antisemitism thus:

This Council notes that: Antisemitism is a certain perception of Jews, which may be expressed as hatred toward Jews. Rhetorical and physical manifestations of antisemitism are directed toward Jewish or non-Jewish individuals and/or their property, toward Jewish community institutions and religious facilities. To guide IHRA in its work, the following examples may serve as illustrations: Manifestations might include the targeting of the state of Israel, conceived as a Jewish collectivity. However, criticism of Israel similar to that levelled against any other country cannot be regarded as antisemitic. Antisemitism frequently charges Jews with conspiring to harm humanity, and it is often used to blame Jews for “why things go wrong.” It is expressed in speech, writing, visual forms and action, and employs sinister stereotypes and negative character traits. Contemporary examples of antisemitism in public life, the media, schools, the workplace, and in the religious sphere could, taking into account the overall context, include, but are not limited to:

•   Calling for, aiding, or justifying the killing or harming of Jews in the name of a radical ideology or an extremist view of religion.

•   Making mendacious, dehumanizing, demonizing, or stereotypical allegations about Jews as such or the power of Jews as collective  such as, especially but not exclusively, the myth about a world Jewish conspiracy or of Jews controlling the media, economy, government or other societal institutions.

•   Accusing Jews as a people of being responsible for real or imagined wrongdoing committed by a single Jewish person or group, or even for acts committed by non-Jews.

•   Denying the fact, scope, mechanisms (e.g. gas chambers) or intentionality of the genocide of the Jewish people at the hands of National Socialist Germany and its supporters and accomplices during World War II (the Holocaust).

•   Accusing the Jews as a people, or Israel as a state, of inventing or exaggerating the Holocaust.

•   Accusing Jewish citizens of being more loyal to Israel, or to the alleged priorities of Jews worldwide, than to the interests of their own nations.

•   Denying the Jewish people their right to self-determination, e.g., by claiming that the existence of a State of Israel is a racist endeavour.

•   Applying double standards by requiring of it behaviour not expected or demanded of any other democratic nation.

•   Using the symbols and images associated with classic antisemitism (e.g., claims of Jews killing Jesus or blood libel) to characterize Israel or Israelis.

•   Drawing comparisons of contemporary Israeli policy to that of the Nazis.

•   Holding Jews collectively responsible for actions of the  ...  view the full agenda text for item 39.

(Note: With the consent of the Council, Councillor Ross altered as follows, the third sentence of the Motion for which notice had been given.)

It was moved and seconded that:

“This Council expresses alarm at the rise in antisemitism in recent years across the UK. This includes incidents when criticism of Israel has been expressed using antisemitic tropes. Criticism of the Israeli Government, as with criticism of other Governments, can be legitimate, but not if it employs the tropes and imagery of antisemitism. This Council therefore welcomes the UK Government’s announcement on December 11th 2016 that it will sign up to the internationally recognised International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) guidelines on antisemitism which define antisemitism thus:

This Council notes that: Antisemitism is a certain perception of Jews, which may be expressed as hatred toward Jews. Rhetorical and physical manifestations of antisemitism are directed toward Jewish or non-Jewish individuals and/or their property, toward Jewish community institutions and religious facilities. To guide IHRA in its work, the following examples may serve as illustrations: Manifestations might include the targeting of the state of Israel, conceived as a Jewish collectivity. However, criticism of Israel similar to that levelled against any other country cannot be regarded as antisemitic. Antisemitism frequently charges Jews with conspiring to harm humanity, and it is often used to blame Jews for “why things go wrong.” It is expressed in speech, writing, visual forms and action, and employs sinister stereotypes and negative character traits. Contemporary examples of antisemitism in public life, the media, schools, the workplace, and in the religious sphere could, taking into account the overall context, include, but are not limited to:

•   Calling for, aiding, or justifying the killing or harming of Jews in the name of a radical ideology or an extremist view of religion.

•   Making mendacious, dehumanizing, demonizing, or stereotypical allegations about Jews as such or the power of Jews as collective  such as, especially but not exclusively, the myth about a world Jewish conspiracy or of Jews controlling the media, economy, government or other societal institutions.

•   Accusing Jews as a people of being responsible for real or imagined wrongdoing committed by a single Jewish person or group, or even for acts committed by non-Jews.

•   Denying the fact, scope, mechanisms (e.g. gas chambers) or intentionality of the genocide of the Jewish people at the hands of National Socialist Germany and its supporters and accomplices during World War II (the Holocaust).

•   Accusing the Jews as a people, or Israel as a state, of inventing or exaggerating the Holocaust.

•   Accusing Jewish citizens of being more loyal to Israel, or to the alleged priorities of Jews worldwide, than to the interests of their own nations.

•   Denying the Jewish people their right to self-determination, e.g., by claiming that the existence of a State of Israel is a racist endeavour.

•   Applying double standards by requiring of it behaviour not expected or demanded of any other democratic nation.

•   Using the symbols and images  ...  view the full minutes text for item 39.

This Council recognises that there are merits in local authorities retaining the business rates they collect in their area.

However, Council also recognises:

•   That as this shift in Local Government Finance progresses, it is becoming increasingly clear that the full benefit in terms of long term stability of revenue, is being undermined by the need to set aside a significant sum year on year to ‘insure’ against business rate appeals.

•   That whilst Government is addressing imbalances between authorities through tariffs and top-ups so that business rate retention does not create unfair windfalls or losses, it is not addressing the fact that Councils with a large business rate base are having to set aside such large amounts that could otherwise be spent on services and supporting extra economic growth.

•  That Trafford is currently setting aside £40 million for this purpose.

Council therefore believes that since the nature of successful business rate appeals are most commonly based on issues outside the council’s control but are often highly local in their impact, it would be appropriate for national government to carry more of this risk.

Council therefore calls upon the Chief Executive to make representation to DCLG detailing the amount that Trafford is currently setting aside for Business Rate Appeals and calling upon the Secretary of State to make changes to relieve Trafford of this burden either through using revenue from the 'central list' or other sources.

(Note: As the owner of a company that had received a business rates reduction, Councillor Myers declared a personal interest in this matter and remained in the meeting during its consideration.)

It was moved and seconded that:

“This Council recognises that there are merits in local authorities retaining the business rates they collect in their area.

However, Council also recognises:

•   That as this shift in Local Government Finance progresses, it is becoming increasingly clear that the full benefit in terms of long term stability of revenue, is being undermined by the need to set aside a significant sum year on year to ‘insure’ against business rate appeals.

•   That whilst Government is addressing imbalances between authorities through tariffs and top-ups so that business rate retention does not create unfair windfalls or losses, it is not addressing the fact that Councils with a large business rate base are having to set aside such large amounts that could otherwise be spent on services and supporting extra economic growth.

•  That Trafford is currently setting aside £40 million for this purpose.

Council therefore believes that since the nature of successful business rate appeals are most commonly based on issues outside the council’s control but are often highly local in their impact, it would be appropriate for national government to carry more of this risk.

Council therefore calls upon the Chief Executive to make representation to the Department for Communities and Local Government detailing the amount that Trafford is currently setting aside for Business Rate Appeals and calling upon the Secretary of State to make changes to relieve Trafford of this burden either through using revenue from the 'central list' or other sources.”

Following speeches in support, the Motion was agreed unanimously by the Council.

RESOLVED: That this Council recognises that there are merits in local authorities retaining the business rates they collect in their area.

However, Council also recognises:

•   That as this shift in Local Government Finance progresses, it is becoming increasingly clear that the full benefit in terms of long term stability of revenue, is being undermined by the need to set aside a significant sum year on year to ‘insure’ against business rate appeals.

•   That whilst Government is addressing imbalances between authorities through tariffs and top-ups so that business rate retention does not create unfair windfalls or losses, it is not addressing the fact that Councils with a large business rate base are having to set aside such large amounts that could otherwise be spent on services and supporting extra economic growth.

•  That Trafford is currently setting aside £40 million for this purpose.

Council therefore believes that since the nature of successful business rate appeals are most commonly based on issues outside the council’s control but are often highly local in their impact, it would be appropriate for national government to carry more of this risk.

Council therefore calls upon the Chief Executive to make representation to the Department for Communities and Local Government detailing the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 40.

This Council notes the government’s new air quality framework, which requires local authorities to submit their initial schemes for tackling dangerously high levels of air pollution. This will require Trafford to produce an action plan by the end of March 2018.

As we are aware, the World Health Organisation has said that air in the Greater Manchester area contains levels of dangerous particles which are above the legally safe level to breathe. Air pollution increases the risk of lung cancer, it can worsen existing lung conditions and stunt the growth of children’s’ lungs.

The government plan has highlighted that local authorities like Trafford will need to identify Clean Air Zones for local air quality to be improved. In the borough there are two areas which are of particular concern, the A56 and M60 Motorway. The A56 traffic air pollution has attracted concern from residents for a long time, and the increasing traffic volume on the M60 and nearby Biomass plant is a worry in terms of the negative impact to the health and wellbeing of nearby residents, and especially to young children.

There is a £255 million Implementation fund to support this process, and Authorities can then bid for further money from a competitive Clean Air Fund. This could support interventions such as improving concessionary travel, supporting cyclists and rethinking road infrastructure.

Council therefore agrees to:

•   Note the importance of this initiative to reduce air pollution levels to a minimum, and how it fits in with the wider Greater Manchester strategy and the objectives of the new Mayor.

•   Ensure that Trafford vigorously and quickly develops a local air quality framework, which involves extensive consultation and involvement of local people, to gain ideas on steps they would like to take to clean up the air in our areas.

•   Continue to monitor and develop other strategies to tackle dangerous levels of air pollution in Trafford.

•   Ensure that regular reports are provided to members and residents on the progress of the action plan and levels of air pollution in our Borough.

It was moved and seconded that:

“This Council notes the government’s new air quality framework, which requires local authorities to submit their initial schemes for tackling dangerously high levels of air pollution. This will require Trafford to produce an action plan by the end of March 2018.

As we are aware, the World Health Organisation has said that air in the Greater Manchester area contains levels of dangerous particles which are above the legally safe level to breathe. Air pollution increases the risk of lung cancer, it can worsen existing lung conditions and stunt the growth of children’s’ lungs.

The government plan has highlighted that local authorities like Trafford will need to identify Clean Air Zones for local air quality to be improved. In the borough there are two areas which are of particular concern, the A56 and M60 Motorway. The A56 traffic air pollution has attracted concern from residents for a long time, and the increasing traffic volume on the M60 and nearby Biomass plant is a worry in terms of the negative impact to the health and wellbeing of nearby residents, and especially to young children.

There is a £255 million Implementation fund to support this process, and Authorities can then bid for further money from a competitive Clean Air Fund. This could support interventions such as improving concessionary travel, supporting cyclists and rethinking road infrastructure.

Council therefore agrees to:

•   Note the importance of this initiative to reduce air pollution levels to a minimum, and how it fits in with the wider Greater Manchester strategy and the objectives of the new Mayor.

•   Ensure that Trafford vigorously and quickly develops a local air quality framework, which involves extensive consultation and involvement of local people, to gain ideas on steps they would like to take to clean up the air in our areas.

•   Continue to monitor and develop other strategies to tackle dangerous levels of air pollution in Trafford.

•   Ensure that regular reports are provided to members and residents on the progress of the action plan and levels of air pollution in our Borough.”

It was moved and seconded as an amendment that:

“This Council notes the government’s new UK plan for tackling roadside nitrogen dioxide concentrations, which requires local authorities to submit their initial schemes for tackling dangerously high levels of air pollution. This will require Trafford to produce an action plan by the end of March 2018.

As we are aware, the World Health Organisation has said that air in the Greater Manchester area contains levels of dangerous particles which are above the legally safe level to breathe. Air pollution increases the risk of lung cancer, it can worsen existing lung conditions and stunt the growth of children’s’ lungs.

The government plan has highlighted that local authorities including Trafford will need to identify Clean Air Zones for local air quality to be improved. In the borough there is one part of the A56 near M60 J7 identified as a potential Clean Air  ...  view the full minutes text for item 41.

Seeing our towns and villages thrive, and be attractive welcoming places to be is important to Trafford Council.  Council therefore encourages Trafford residents to support local businesses as we head into the festive period by shopping local.  To support this, Council welcomes the decision of this administration to introduce ‘Free After Three’ parking in Council maintained car parks across the borough this winter.

It was moved and seconded that:

“Seeing our towns and villages thrive, and be attractive welcoming places to be is important to Trafford Council. Council therefore encourages Trafford residents to support local businesses as we head into the festive period by shopping local. To support this, Council welcomes the decision of this administration to introduce ‘Free After Three’ parking in Council maintained car parks across the borough this winter.”

Following speeches in support, the Motion was agreed unanimously by the Council.

RESOLVED: That, seeing our towns and villages thrive, and be attractive welcoming places to be is important to Trafford Council. Council therefore encourages Trafford residents to support local businesses as we head into the festive period by shopping local. To support this, Council welcomes the decision of this administration to introduce ‘Free After Three’ parking in Council maintained car parks across the borough this winter.