Agenda item

 

To receive any questions from members of the public addressed to Members of the Executive in accordance with Council Procedure Rule 11.  There is up to 5 minutes for each question, one supplementary question may be asked arising from the original question.

 

Questions must relate to any matter the Council has power or which affects the Borough, except no questions may be asked in relation to

 

a)    A specific planning or licensing application

b)    A specific staffing appointment or appeal, or Standards determination

 

Public question time will last up to 30 minutes; questions will be taken in the order of receipt.

 

The deadline for submission of questions is Friday 15 October 2021 at 12 noon. Questions to be submitted to democratic.services@adur-worthing.gov.uk

The Mayor advised that a number of questions had been received in advance of the meeting that were substantially the same, in relation to former councillor Tim Wills.

 

Councillor McCabe proposed a motion without notice, under Council Procedure Rule 15.1(p), to suspend Council Procedure Rule 11 so that the 30 minute time limit for public questions could be suspended. The motion was seconded by Councillor Bob Smytherman and unanimously supported by Council. 

 

A statement was read out by the leader by way of response to the questions received:- 

 

The Leader responded that a number of questions had been received prior to Mr T Wills resignation, asking why he had not resigned, had he been asked to resign, would he be forced to resign etc. The Leader advised that Mr T Wills had now resigned and all the political groups that made up the Council had contacted Mr T Wills to say that he should resign. This was the least he could do in the circumstances and that a by-election for that vacancy was the right way to move forwards.

 

The Mayor invited those who had submitted questions, to ask a supplementary question.

 

Supplementary questions were received from

 

Susan Pepper - Tim Wills, in his postings, mentioned others in the Conservative Party who were onside. What investigations were planned to ensure there were no other white supremacists on the Council?

 

The Leader replied that he hadn’t got the foggiest idea what he was talking about, if he had said that, and that he had absolute faith in the rest of this group that no one else was onside with those views.

 

Margaret Harris - Tim Wills resigned because he is a racist and white supremacist, can you detail the lessons learned and reassure us that you will review your selection procedures and monitor social media accounts to ensure that this type of incident will never happen again, within Worthing Borough Council.

 

The Leader replied that he did not get a vote or say in who was selected to be a Conservative candidate and did not know what the process was in other parties. Although that was not a matter for this Council, he had no doubt that political parties around Worthing, and wider, are considering their approach to selection and scrutiny of those candidates.

 

Andrew Whight - You alluded in your earlier comments that you had made a call for Mr T Wills to resign. When and where did you make a public call for Mr T Wills to resign?

 

The leader replied that when he had first heard about these allegations, he contacted Mr T Wills. When Mr Wills didn’t deny the allegations, he explained the party's disciplinary procedures to him and he was immediately suspended from the Conservative Group. When, a few days later,  the Leader had still not received any form of denial, he followed up with an email stating that if Mr T Wills was not going to deny the allegations, it was the group's view that he should resign. 

 

The Mayor advised that 4 questions had been received in advance of the meeting.

 

1)     Question submitted to the Leader of the Council by Vicki Wells, a Worthing Resident

 

As the leader of this Council, how are you ensuring that those associated with far right hate groups have no place representing the constituents of Worthing.

 

The Leader responded that the Council itself had no administrative powers to remove a Councillor from office.

 

The councils had mandatory training for all members of staff to be able to identify and report any concerns about extremism and radicalisation. The Council liaised with West Sussex County Council to keep abreast of new and emerging ideologies and to be able to spot the signs. The Council regularly audits its PREVENT duties and had implemented all required measures.

 

The Safer Communities Partnership had Community Cohesion as a priority and from November the Council would have increased its anti social behaviour and hate crime resource from one to two full time members of staff.

 

The Council worked closely with West Sussex Victim Support to ensure it was  aware and supported communities impacted by hate and intolerance.

 

The Leader was asked to clarify when he had formally sought Mr Will’s resignation as a supplementary question.

 

The Leader responded that the whip had been removed on the 6th October and the call to resign (as Mr Will’s had not denied the allegations) was made on the 11th October.

 

2)     The Mayor read out a question on behalf of Irena Stupar, a Worthing Resident 

 

How does the council engage with underserved, deprivileged people in regards to climate emergency. Just to give one example: where we live people don't have recycling bins. Also we live in flats and we have less opportunity to plant trees, grow plants, easily to feel excluded in what we can contribute (except through purchasing power). There are other types of neglect in our society which can result in people feeling powerless or discouraged in how they could contribute to climate emergency response.

 

Also, Adur & Worthing Climate Assembly asked the council to make a strong commitment in opening a one stop shop  where citizens would access easy to understand information about climate emergency. Is there a plan in place how this will be delivered? Information on https://www.adur-worthing.gov.uk/sustainable-aw/ are very valuable. However, one stop shop would make practical information, such as grants, tree planting schemes, events readily available for everyone.

                       

The Leader replied that the Council recognised that there was particular challenges for some residents and communities in being able to respond to the climate emergency, and their ability to feel they could contribute and get involved. 

 

In July this year an update report was provided to the Joint Strategic Committee outlining the substantial community engagement the Council’s sustainability team undertook following on from the Climate Assembly held in late 2020.  The team found a highly active community and identified 60 actions underway across a network of 200 organisations, now reflected in the refreshed SustainableAW strategy.

 

The Council would be very happy to help connect community members with opportunities to get involved in its wonderful community organisations.

 

In particular, with regard to trees, gardens and growing, the Council would highly recommend Adur & Worthing Green Spaces Partnership and their GreenTides website could help connect people with opportunities.  The Council could see there might be a role for the council in making these opportunities more accessible online, and would be looking into this.

 

The Council was developing an initiative for a new kind of shared collaborative community space called Fabric, and the Council intended to make the climate emergency and biodiversity loss key themes that would inform how Fabric was delivered, and the information and activities that were provided there.  The Council very much agreed that physical spaces to learn and discuss climate change issues was vital.

 

The Council aimed to provide comprehensive recycling facilities to all its residents and the vast majority of flats had easy access to recycling bins.  In a small number of locations it was difficult to locate bins as buildings were not designed with enough storage capacity.  Again in a minority of cases the Council had had to remove bins where there had been problems with high levels of contamination despite targeted communication and engagement.  Contamination risks whole loads of recycling having to be disposed of.  

 

The Council was currently carrying out a review of recycling facilities in flats to find solutions with landlords and residents.  As part of this work a member of the Waste & Recycling Team would be happy to meet with the questioner on site to look at the situation in relation to where the questioner lived and work on possible solutions.

 

3)     Question submitted to the Leader of the Council by Mr Conell Loggenberg, a Worthing Resident

 

In light of the fact that the Equality Act 2010 places specific duties on local authorities and that Council Members have a central role to play in ENSURING that EQUALITY ISSUES are INTEGRAL TO THE LOCAL AUTHORITY’s PERFORMANCE and strategic aims, and that there is a strong vision and PUBLIC COMMITMENT to EQUALITY across public services…

 

Would it not be prudent for THIS COUNCIL, with a perceivable INHERENT “PROBLEM” in representing fairly the Rights and Needs of People of Black and Asian Ethnicity…to engage Positive Action pursuant to Section 158 (1)(a)(b)(c) and subsection 2(a)(b)(c) of the Equality Act 2010, to ENSURE that a Person or Persons of Black Ethnicity is:

Enabled and Supported to Actually Become an Elected Member of Council, by removal of the barrier of people of white ethnicity simultaneously standing for office particularly in Marine Ward in view of the evident unacceptable already in the public domain, on grounds of the evident disproportionate lack of representation or participation in the role of Councillors and the very real disadvantage People of Black Ethnicity suffer on account of their protected characteristic, to be in such roles?

 

The Leader replied that the planning and delivery of elections was the responsibility of the Returning Officer.  It was not a responsibility of the Council and therefore this was not a question that could be answered by a member of this Council.  Ensuring electoral processes are fair, transparent and accessible is a key responsibility of the Returning Officer to whom your question has been forwarded. 

 

Councillor Martin McCabe proposed a motion without notice, under Council Procedure Rule 15.1(e), requesting the following:-

That the Council appoints an 8 person Committee arising from Mr Connell’s question, a Committee for Community Cohesion, tackling harmful ideologies and radicalisation in our community, chaired by Councillor Hazel Thorpe. The proposed remit of the Committee would be to liaise with and consider suggestions from Community Groups, Outside Bodies and Political Parties on issues pertaining to tackling harmful ideologies and radicalisation in our community. As well as advising the Council’s Leadership on the implementation of those recommendations that fall within their remit.  

 

The Motion was seconded by Councillor Bob Smytherman and unanimously supported by the Council.

 

Mr Loggenberg asked a supplementary question in regards to those being able to stand in a by-election in Marine Ward.

 

The Leader replied that the running of elections was not determined by Councillors and therefore the question would need to be directed to the Returning Officer or the Electoral Commission.

 

 

4)     Question submitted to the Executive Member for Health and Wellbeing by Mr Conell Leggenberg, a Worthing Resident

 

According to Section 45E (1) of the Public Health (Control of Disease) Act 1984, regulations for domestic or international purposes cannot require a person to undergo medical treatment…and medical treatment under subsection 2 of the same section includes vaccination and other prophylactic treatment.

 

Everybody, whether you’re a patient or a worker in Hospital or a Care Home or a Member of the General Public, has the Right to Bodily and Psychological Integrity and not to be subjected to any medical or scientific experiments and or treatments without your informed consent.

 

Currently available information by National Government and the manufacturers of injections against Covid-19, confirms that these injections do NOT prevent or absolve the person injected with these substances from becoming infected with Corona Virus Disease or being a carrier of the said virus — that obviously raises separate questions about efficacy which I won’t go into on this occasion.

 

Informed consent must be inclusive of information about other treatment options and one’s right to decline treatment — such options are barely specified or promoted by either National or Local Government.

 

Given the suggested threat by some Social Care Service Providers requiring, and in many cases qualifying as coercion, that their staff be injected with these substances to retain employment…despite the fact that many people having been injected with these substances having suffered severe adverse events attributed to these substances as reported on the UK Medicines Regulatory Authority’s Yellow Card Reporting System, and some business premises suggesting to require proof of having been injected with these substances as a condition of service…

 

What is Worthing Borough Council’s position on the Rights of People, be they patients in Hospital or Care Homes or any person Living and Working in Worthing who choose Not to have any of these substances at any time and what is the Council doing to ensure that such persons do NOT suffer direct or indirect targeted disincentives, exclusion from opportunities to work or participate in social and economic activities in Worthing as an equal representation of their rights and needs?

 

The Leader responded that the Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation (JCVI) was an independent expert advisory committee that advised United Kingdom health departments on immunisation, making recommendations concerning vaccination schedules and vaccine safety.

 

Currently both the JCVI and the Government encouraged the uptake of vaccinations due to the wide benefits on public health. The Council encouraged everyone who was eligible to take up the offer of vaccination, especially vulnerable groups, to improve the public health of its communities and reduce the risk of Covid-19.

 

However, the Council respected the informed decisions of those who chose not to.

 

To date, the Government had not legislated for the COVID-19 vaccine to be mandatory for anyone. The Government guidelines on vaccinations said that individuals must be given enough information to enable them to make a decision before they could give consent.  This was therefore entirely an informed decision for local people to make for themselves

 

Mr Loggenberg asked a supplementary question seeking clarification as to whether the Council would obstruct or withhold entry to the Council Chamber for persons who had not received a vaccine.

 

The Leader replied that the Council was not restricting entry if an individual had not taken up a vaccine.

 

Additional public questions were received as follows:-

 

Kelly Hannah-Rogers sought to ask a question which had been rejected prior to the meeting.

 

The Head of Legal Services and Monitoring Officer advised that the Council had to be very careful not to make any defamatory comments, that an investigation was ongoing and it was not possible to make any comment in relation to that matter.

 

Kelly Hannah-Rogers asked whether Worthing Borough Council would review all decisions that Mr Tim Wills had been involved in with a view to ensuring he has not discriminated against the residents he feels not to be worthy. 

 

The Head of Legal Services and Monitoring Officer advised that there was no legal reason for looking again at decisions which had been democratically made in this chamber.

 

Maureen Purcell asked whether the Leader of the Council had asked or had not asked Mr Tim Wills whether he was going to deny the allegations made against him.

 

The Leader of the Council replied that he had sent Mr Wills an email which said, if you are not going to deny the allegations, we think you should resign your seat on the Council.

 

Maureen Purcell asked the following supplementary question; as members of the public cannot trust your, Cllr Humphreys, ability to identify if there is a Conservative Councillor who holds racist views, as in this case. Can you now reassure us that there will be an independent investigation where pertinent questions are asked of all the Conservative Councillors.

 

The Leader replied that as Mr Wills was no longer a Councillor, there was nothing more we can do in that regard. The Conservative Party was conducting an investigation and that was not a matter for this Council.  

 

Councillor McCabe proposed a motion without notice, under Council Procedure Rule 15.1(d), to request that the issue raised under Maureen Purcell’s supplementary question, be referred to Joint Overview & Scrutiny Committee for consideration. The motion was seconded by Councillor Bob Smytherman and following a vote, approved by Council. 

 

* The meeting was adjourned at 7.21pm and reconvened at 7.35pm

 

Following an adjournment to request legal advice, the Mayor advised that the vote on the previous motion stands, with the matter being referred to JOSC. Accompanying the referral would be legal advice that the review, as requested, would be in relation to all Councillors, not just the Conservative Councillors, in order to comply with the Equalities Act.

 

Samuel Baeza asked whether the Executive Member for Digital & Environmental Services would say that he was wrong to support Mr Wills on a public platform during the previous election.

 

The Executive Member replied that clearly, knowing what we know now, he regretted any support previously offered to former Councillor Tim Wills. He had called out and would critique the comments as being abhorrent, if true, so it was not a matter for him to say anything other than hindsight was a great thing and clearly he would remove himself from any association with Mr Wills, whose views he did not share.   

 

As a supplementary question, Mr Baeza asked why Cllr Crouch didn’t say this when he found out?

 

The Executive Member replied that the matter was under consideration and that statements had been put out by the Conservative Party and the Leader of the Council. He was happy to condemn the comments, which were wrong and abhorrent.