Decision details

Petition Review: Safer, Active, Greener Streets

Decision status: Recommendations Approved

Is Key decision?: No

Is subject to call in?: No

Decisions:

The Chair invited Stephen Gerrard, Interim Monitoring Officer, to present the report.

 

The committee discussed the wording of the petition scheme, the approach taken to refer the petitions to the appropriate committee, and whether or not the petitioners had been disadvantaged.

 

Following debate, Councillor Neil Garratt moved a motion to amend the recommendations such that recommendation 2.1 would be as follows:

 

To note that a petition with more than 1,500 signatures should be debated at full Council, that this petition was not debated at full Council, and that the petitioners were not told that it could be.

 

This was seconded by Councillor James McDermott-Hill. The proposed amendment was put to the vote and fell.

 

Councillor Neil Garratt then moved a motion to amend the recommendations such that recommendation 2.2 would be as follows:

 

To agree that although the petitioners were afforded the opportunity to make their representations to the committee, their representation should have been heard at full Council and therefore the petitioner is entitled to an apology and to a debate at full Council if they so wish.

 

This was seconded by Councillor James McDermott-Hill. Following debate, and with the consent of the seconder, Councillor Neil Garratt withdrew the motion to amend the recommendations.

 

Following debate, Councillor Ruth Dombey moved a motion to amend the recommendations such that recommendation 2.2 would be as follows:

 

To agree that although the petitioners were afforded the opportunity to make their representations to the committee, their representation could have been heard at full Council and therefore the petitioner is entitled to an apology that the constitution is not clearer on this matter.

 

This was seconded by Councillor Mo Saqib. The proposed amendment was put to the vote and carried.

 

RESOLVED:

1.    To note the procedures followed in handling the petitions.

2.    To agree that although the petitioners were afforded the opportunity to make their representations to the committee, their representation could have been heard at full Council and therefore the petitioner is entitled to an apology that the constitution is not clearer on this matter.

3.    To agree that a review of the council’s petitions scheme be undertaken and reported back to the Strategy and Resources Committee following consultation with the Constitutional Working Group.

Publication date: 16/02/2021

Date of decision: 08/02/2021

Decided at meeting: 08/02/2021 - Strategy and Resources Committee

Accompanying Documents: