1. Urgent Motion – Israel/Gaza
Councillor Richard Henry moved and Councillors Phil Bibby and Stephen Booth jointly seconded the following motion:
“This Council is united in expressing our deep shock and sadness at the act of terrorism perpetrated by Hamas on Israel on 7th October. Our thoughts and deepest sympathies are with all the innocent people in Israel and Gaza now caught up in the escalating violence.
We also recognise that there may be Stevenage residents who have
family, friends or loved ones facing danger and we offer our
heartfelt support and solidarity to our residents during these
troubling times.
This Council resolves to:
1. Express solidarity with the innocent people directly affected by the ongoing situation in Israel and Gaza.
2. Encourage and support good relations between our own Stevenage communities at this time of immense international tension to maintain community cohesion.”
The Mayor welcomed Mr Terry Wolfe and Rabbi Danny Rich to the meeting and advised that Imam Mohammed Moynul Islam of the Stevenage Mosque had also been invited but was unfortunately unable to attend due to a prior commitment. The Mayor then invited Rabbi Danny Rich to address the meeting.
Following debate, and upon being put to the vote, the motion was unanimously carried.
2. Maintenance of Roads in the Borough
Councillor Lloyd Briscoe moved and Councillor Simon Speller seconded the following motion:
“A Local Government Authority (LGA) analysis from March this year stated that the Government spent 31 times more per mile maintaining motorways and ‘A’ roads last year than they did on funding councils to repair crumbling local roads.
Figures from that same report show that the Government spent £192,000 per mile on maintaining strategic roads, such as motorways or major ‘A’ roads compared to just £6,000 per mile on fixing potholes on local roads.
This is despite local roads making up 180,000 miles of the UK’s overall network, with strategic roads making up just 4,800 miles.
Given that there are some 3,200 miles of roadway in the county, this equates to almost two potholes for every road in Hertfordshire.
In June this year, the Herts County Council secured some £4m extra funding from the Government to address the issue of potholes in our roads. Given that there are ten authorities within the County, then evenly distributed this equates to some £400k each.
This Council calls upon the Herts County Council to recognise that Stevenage is a priority case regarding the repair of potholes because of HCC’s neglect of our local roads and cycle tracks over the years and that at least £400k of the awarded funding is ‘ringfenced’ for the benefit and enhancement of the people and road users of the town.
We therefore move that this Council requests the County Council Highways Portfolio Holder to ensure fair shares and prompt action for Stevenage residents of repairs to potholes.”
The following amendment was moved by Councillor Phil Bibby CC and seconded by Councillor Bret Facey (additions and omissions in bold):
“A Local Government Authority (LGA) analysis from March this year stated that the Government spent 31 times more per mile maintaining motorways and ‘A’ roads last year than they did on funding councils to repair crumbling local roads.
Figures from that same report show that the Government spent £192,000 per mile on maintaining strategic roads, such as motorways or major ‘A’ roads compared to just £6,000 per mile on fixing potholes on local roads.
This is despite local roads making up 180,000 miles of the UK’s overall network, with strategic roads making up just 4,800 miles.
Given that there are some 3,200 miles of roadway in the county, this equates to almost two potholes for every road in Hertfordshire.
In June this year, the Herts County Council secured some £4m extra funding from the Government to address the issue of potholes in our roads. Given that there are ten authorities within the County, then evenly distributed this equates to some £400k each.
This Council calls upon the
Herts County Council to ensure that Stevenage receives its fair
share of this Pothole funding for the benefit of residents and road
users, but based primarily on technically driven
priority.” recognise that
Stevenage is a priority case regarding the repair of potholes
because of HCC’s neglect of our local roads and cycle tracks
over the years and that at least £400k of the awarded funding
is ‘ringfenced’ for the benefit and enhancement of the
people and road users of the town.
We
therefore move that this Council requests the County Council
Highways Portfolio Holder to ensure fair shares and prompt action
for Stevenage residents of repairs to
potholes.”
Following debate, and upon being put to the vote, the amendment was lost.
Following further debate, and upon being put to the vote, the original motion was carried.
3. London Day Travelcard
Councillor Phil Bibby CC moved and Councillor Bret Facey seconded the following motion:
This Council objects to the removal of the London Day Travelcard, as it would have a significant negative financial impact on Stevenage residents travelling to London.
This Council notes:
· Day Travelcards are tickets that allow local people to travel to London and then use public transport for free once they’re in the capital.
· Day Travelcards are a simple and convenient way to get into and around London, removing these tickets would mean having to purchase multiple tickets to get across the city.
· Removing the Day Travelcard would deter potential rail passengers from using the train which would go against this Council’s policy of encouraging sustainable transport.
· Research suggests that scrapping the Day Travelcards could cost at least an extra £9.30 per person, per visit to London.
· Unaffordable policies and mismanagement by the City Hall have left Transport for London (TfL) on the edge of bankruptcy. The proposal to removal Day Travelcards suggests that the Mayor is trying to get commuters and tourists to pick up the bill for his mistakes.
This Council resolves:
· To demonstrate its support for Stevenage commuters and tourists by calling on the Mayor of London and TfL to halt the withdrawal of the Day Travelcard.
· To request the Leader of the Council and Chief Executive write to the Mayor of London and ask that he reconsiders scrapping the Day Travelcard, as this proposal will negatively affect this Council’s policy of encouraging sustainable transport.
“This Council objects to the removal of the London Day Travelcard, as it would have a significant negative financial impact on Stevenage residents travelling to London.
This Council notes:
· Day Travelcards are tickets that allow local people to travel to London and then use public transport for free once they’re in the capital.
· Day Travelcards are a simple and convenient way to get into and around London, removing these tickets would mean having to purchase multiple tickets to get across the city.
· Removing the Day Travelcard would deter potential rail passengers from using the train which would go against this Council’s policy of encouraging sustainable transport.
· Research suggests that scrapping the Day Travelcards could cost at least an extra £9.30 per person, per visit to London.
· The failure of central government to properly fund Transport for London, including a failure to pay all appropriate receipts for travelcards to Transport for London.
·
Unaffordable policies
and mismanagement by the City Hall have left Transport for London
(TfL) on the edge of bankruptcy. The proposal to removal Day
Travelcards suggests that the Mayor is trying to get commuters and
tourists to pick up the bill for his
mistakes.
This Council resolves:
· To demonstrate its support for Stevenage commuters, day visitors and tourists by calling on the Mayor of London and TfL to halt the withdrawal of the Day Travelcard.
· To request the Leader of the Council and Chief Executive write to the Mayor of London and ask that he reconsiders scrapping the Day Travelcard, as this proposal will negatively affect this Council’s policy of encouraging sustainable transport.”
Following debate, and upon being put to the vote, the amendment was carried.
Following further debate, and upon being put to the vote, the substantive motion was carried.