Agenda item

Knife related crime

 

Councillor Andrew Rule asked the following question of the Leader of the Council:

 

Following the welcome news that Police figures show a reduction in knife related crime across Nottingham compared with last year, would the Leader of the Council support the knife angel monument coming to Nottingham as a symbol against violence and aggression in our City and as a powerful message of the impact that knife crime has on victims and their families?

 

Councillor David Mellen replied as follows:

 

Thank you Lord Mayor, and can I thank Councillor Rule for his question. Keeping our City safe is a top priority and one that I am committed to delivering. The causes of crime often begin long before a crime is committed, and to truly make a difference we have to intervene early to prevent these underlying causes from emerging in our communities.  To do that it takes time, effort, resources and money, all of which is in short supply and needs to be spent on earlier intervention, as well as on catching criminals.

 

As long as citizens both young and old feel it is necessary to have a knife in their pocket to be safe, then there is more work to be done. A safer City won’t happen overnight, but I remain committed as Leader of the Council to ensuring that it remains a top priority for everyone in Nottingham.

 

It is important to be clear, we are making progress to reduce knife crime in our City. The latest figures from the Crime and Drugs Partnership show knife crime offences in the City fell by 17% over the past 12 months, but while this is welcome news this is still far too many cases of knife crime and we can never be complacent.

 

We are continuing to help rehabilitate those who might be at risk of repeat offending by working with Probation Services to create positive opportunities, including education, employment or training, and finding the right support for young people or adults.

 

Lord Mayor, if Councillor Rule is committed truly to supporting continued reductions in serious crime in our City, then perhaps he will join me in asking for greater protection of public services following nine years of sustained cuts to Police budgets, which have led to the loss of 10,000 Police Officers on the streets up and down the country. The Tories never learn. Whilst a Labour Government increased Police and Police Community Support Officer (PCSO) numbers, championing community policing, and crime fell hugely, the Tories have cut the Police numbers and, lo and behold, crime has risen.  We know that a Labour Government would invest in front line Police Officers and PCSOs that our cities and communities so desperately need.

 

Lord Mayor, the people across the country have a clear choice in the coming weeks: voting for a Government that has continually promised one thing whilst in office and delivered little for local people, cutting direct funding for Police forces by £3.6billion; or a Labour Government who will put thousands of Officers back on the streets, keeping our communities safe.

 

As for the knife angel, well, it may be imposing and striking, but I think the potential for it to be misunderstood is quite high. For every person who is made to think about knife crime when they see the statue, I feel there will be another person who will find the statue offensive.

 

We have proved that in partnership we can bring knife crime figures down in Nottingham and will continue to do everything we can to bring these numbers down further. There are no plans to bring the knife angel to Nottingham.

 

Recycled waste

 

Councillor Andrew Rule asked the following question of the Portfolio Holder for Energy, Environment and Democratic Services:

 

Can the Portfolio Holder confirm what processes and checks the Council has in place for ensuring that recycled waste does not end up in landfill?

 

Councillor Sally Longford replied as follows:

 

Thank you Lord Mayor, and thank you Councillor Rule for your interesting question. The Council has a statutory obligation to report on a quarterly basis to the Environment Agency on recycling statistics, including its end destination. Our contractor, ENVA, formally known as Wastecycle, provides a complete audit trail to us of all the presented and subsequently sorted material for recycling by type, including their ultimate end destination, and has a similar duty to report their input and output to the Environment Agency.  Data for 2018/19 shows that only 7.6% of waste paper and card was exported outside of the EU. ENVA are committed to landfill avoidance, reportedly sending less than 5% of all the waste that they collect at their facility to landfill.  A small proportion of our residual i.e. non-recyclable material is sent to landfill, most commonly during the Eastcroft Incinerator annual shutdown for essential maintenance work in the summer, but landfilling only occurs when the amount of material which is sent to ENVA in that annual period exceeds their ability to process it for recyclables.  Contamination, which includes non-target reject materials, is separated during the sorting process at Wastecycle ENVA from the recyclable material, and has to be separately treated. Rather than landfilling the seriously contaminated material, ENVA divert this waste-stream into a further process, where it is converted into refuse-derived fuel (RDF), which is an alternative fuel source for cement kilns, and so avoids landfill.  I believe Councillor Rule has had the opportunity to visit ENVA and witness the operation first hand, which I’m sure he found really interesting, as I have.

 

I’m glad to report to Council that there is a great deal of work currently underway to improve our recycling rate, reduce contamination and, therefore, achieve a higher return on recyclable goods and a greater recovery of material contributing to our carbon-neutral goal.  ENVA is supporting us in engaging with contamination work by providing us with funding to employ staff who can tackle this persistent problem, they are as keen as us to reduce contamination.  The current Nottingham University Student Union Officer responsible for the environment is also working hard to educate students on how to recycle right, and I was recently happy to join a group of volunteer students talking to other students about waste-management issues in Lenton.  Our Community Protection officers are always out in neighbourhoods spreading the word about how to recycle and manage waste, supporting citizens to live sustainably.  We also have a review underway of how we collect, what we collect and how we can improve the recycling service in the City. This will obviously be influenced by government policy and I’m hoping a future government will provide adequate funding to implement any such plans.

 

I have to say that I am concerned that despite a decent stab at a waste resources strategy that the last Tory government put together, they do not have a good record of funding local government, as we all know, and therefore could not be relied upon to provide adequate resources to implement their plans for food waste collection and other important steps.  I hope that things will change after 12 December and that our ambitious plans to press on towards a carbon-neutral city will not be further held back by debilitating years of Tory austerity and mis-rule.

 

Robin Hood Energy

 

Councillor Andrew Rule asked the following question of the Portfolio Holder for Finance, Growth and the City Centre:

 

Would the Portfolio Holder for Finance agree with me that following the reported injection of circa £9.5million the Council had to provide to Robin Hood Energy, it would be prudent for the Council to establish a resilience reserve to ease any unforeseen financial liabilities that may arise in respect of Council owned companies?

 

Councillor Sam Webster replied as follows:

 

Thank you Lord Mayor. It is an interesting suggestion. Nottingham City Council is a large and complex organisation, as you’ll appreciate.  Severe reductions in Government funding for councils to deliver public services over the Tory decade of austerity have undoubtedly had an effect on the financial resilience of local authorities, and there certainly are greater financial risks for councils, probably more so now than ever before due to chronic under funding of councils by the Government.

 

When we compare ourselves to a number of Conservative-run councils, we’ve done things differently: firstly by investing locally; secondly by retaining our assets for the benefit of Nottingham people for example Nottingham City Transport, Nottingham City Homes, the Royal Centre, the National Ice Centre, and earning income to fund frontline services from those assets; and thirdly by acting responsibly in respect of the Council’s finances.  So where as we all know that Conservative-led Northamptonshire used up all of its reserves and, therefore, effectively went bankrupt, that is not the case in Nottingham.

 

So I take the point on board Councillor Rule, and you’re correct that reserves to cover both the expected and unexpected are essential but, when you raise as a concern unforeseen financial liabilities, please understand that the biggest financial liability for this City, for this Council, for the people we employ and for the people who rely on local public services, the biggest financial liability by a long way has been the Conservative Government that he supports and promotes.  Our core funding from government is now over £100million less per year than it was when his Party took office, £100million per year taken away from Nottingham residents. If your concern for your City, Councillor Rule, is genuine, that’s the kind of liability you should be highlighting.

 

Potholes

 

Councillor Andrew Rule asked the following question of the Portfolio Holder for Adult Care and Local Transport:

 

The Council Plan includes a pledge from the Nottingham Labour manifesto to fix 50,000 potholes over the next four years. Given that over the last four years, 41,236 potholes have been filled, and in the last two years, the number of potholes filled has declined year on year, whilst the cost has increased, how does the Portfolio Holder envisage that this pledge will be delivered?

 

Councillor Adele Williams replied as follows:

 

Thank you Councillor Rule, thank you for your question. The data you quote is actually about pothole temporary repairs, not the permanent repairs that are obviously preferable.

 

What we plan to do in the course of implementing the manifesto promises that we were elected on is aligned with good practice and with the asset management approach that is encouraged by the Department for Transport (DfT). We don’t want to be doing temporary repairs, we want to be maintaining our highway assets in a way that gets the most from our resources and keeps Nottingham moving with the least disruption.

 

All of the Government guidance, quite rightly, asks us to prioritise prevention, and because we’re turning our resources to prevention, we’re actually doing more with our resources. So I hope that Councillor Rule will join with us in asking for more for our City.

 

So as I mentioned, the reported data is only for temporary potholes.  In Highways we try to do the permanent repairs where we can. This is positive and we’ve seen an increase in permanent small-scale repairs, which is a good direction of travel.  As such, that means that the temporary pothole repairs have fallen over the last four years, but that’s no bad thing because we don’t want to be repeatedly fixing potholes with temporary measures do we?

 

Highway maintenance follows recommendations from ‘Prevention and a Better Cure - Potholes Review’ document which came from the DfT, and it highlights three main themes:

·  prevention being better than cure - intervening at the right time prevents more potholes forming, obviously costing us more later;

·  right the first time - do it once and do it right - so rather than face continuous bills, just do the job right the first time, and with our Highways staff I’m confident that we’re able to do that and I thank them for the work they do;

·  the last point they ask us to do is provide clarity for the public, so I hope this pledge really helps with that. Local highways authorities need to communicate to the public what’s been done, and how and why they’re doing it.

So I think the public, and perhaps even Councillor Rule, will be happy to know that we’re meeting our pledges by using our resources to the best effect, and I hope he’ll join with us in asking for more for Nottingham, enough for Nottingham, because the Tory Government has stripped the funding from our City.

 

Will he join with us in asking for more: more for our schools, more for our adults who need support to live their fullest lives, and more for our children in need, because of course, while the Tories have managed to find enough money for tax cuts for the rich, they didn’t find a money tree for Nottingham. Nottingham people will remember that when the choice is made in December.

 

Robin Hood Energy

 

Councillor Kevin Clarke asked the following question of the Portfolio Holder for Finance, Growth and the City Centre:

 

It has been with great concern and unease that we in the Nottingham Independents have watched the recent developments at Robin Hood Energy. Whilst we strongly believe that any attempt to battle fuel poverty should be applauded, the situation at this council-owned company seems to get more precarious by the day. Now reportedly needing a council loan of just short of £10million just to keep operating and reportedly bringing the total council exposure to an estimated £50million, can the Portfolio Holder in all honesty tell us that he still maintains that Robin Hood Energy provides value for money for the Nottingham taxpayer?

 

Councillor Sam Webster replied as follows:

 

Thank you Lord Mayor and thank you for your question Councillor Clarke. I suppose it really depends on your definition of value for money. It’s true that this Council has issued loans to Robin Hood Energy. Those loans are interest bearing. Loan repayments deliver a revenue benefit to the Council and that revenue benefit supports front-line services for many of the people we represent and rely on.

 

Summerwood Day Centre

 

Councillor Maria Watson asked the following question of the Portfolio Holder for Adult Care and Local Transport:

 

The Portfolio Holder will be aware of the fantastic and invaluable work of Summerwood Day Centre, located within my own ward of Clifton. Summerwood, the only day centre in an area of upwards of 28,000 people, provides opportunities and support to people with physical, sensory and learning disabilities to help them lead healthy independent lives. The centre offers activities focusing on recreational, educational and life skills, with the aim of developing, maintaining and preventing the loss of a person's independence.  Will she join us in acknowledging the incredible work that Summerwood Day Centre and its staff do, and give us the assurance that they will continue to be provided the direct funding they need to carry on providing this service long into the future?

 

Councillor Adele Williams replied as follows:

 

Thank you Councillor Watson for that question. I really welcome your question and the opportunity to thank staff for the great work they do in partnership with the citizens there and their families.

 

I’ve visited Summerwood Day Centre as a Portfolio Holder and spoken with some of the citizens who attend the service. I’ve also met with the staff and I really recognise the quality of the work they do and the value that brings to the citizens and their families.

 

You’ll be aware that in Adult Social Care we’ve developed a new strategy called ‘Better Lives, Better Outcomes’ and one of the key principles of this is to ensure citizens are supported to develop independence and to be part of the local community.  The Nottingham Pathway Service that we’ve discussed in this Chamber before has been supporting delivery of this by enabling citizens with learning disabilities to learn new skills and live independently.  In Clifton that means undertaking travel training, allowing them to travel safely around Clifton and into the City, developing independent living skills to reduce their reliance on others, take on volunteering, access to get involved in wider social networks, local social community networks and assets.  I’ve visited some of the community activities as well that citizens taking part in the Pathways Initiative have been accessing.  So that service is to be expanded over the next 12 months and we’ll build on the work that’s already been achieved to ensure that learning-disabled citizens across the City are able to reach their full potential, including employment wherever possible.

 

I believe in an inclusive society where everyone is welcome, valued and expected to be part of all the activities that most of us do in our everyday lives. I think disabled young people and their families should be able to confidently expect that they’ll have opportunities to get into employment, volunteering, social and leisure activities just like anyone else.  Our ‘Better Lives, Better Outcomes’ strategy commits us to planning to meet these expectations and I expect that we’ll continue to review our services to make sure they are set up in such a way as to support this direction of travel.  There will always be a need for day services though.  We expect day services to change over time as they have been doing in Clifton and across the City, but I can confirm that we will continue to be committed to ensuring day services will keep being supported and to support our citizens with learning disabilities.

 

Again, I do welcome this question because I hope Councillor Watson’s interest in adult social care might prompt her to join with us in reminding the Conservatives here and elsewhere that their Party has five times delayed the Adult Social Care Green Paper. Even after Matt Hancock gave himself a very firm deadline of Easter.  No doubt, there’ll be more promises from that Party this election but people, and perhaps Councillor Watson, will join me in being sceptical because if they’re planning further tax cuts for the richest, if they’re planning to keep letting the big corporations off with paying more than a gesture towards their fair share, then where is the money coming from? And also, after many, many years in power, where’s the plan?  You might be aware that the Tory Government has stripped out £8billion from adult social care budgets nationally. It’s sting is worse for us here in Nottingham because we’re not a wealthy corner of the South-East, so have more citizens with complex needs and fewer citizens able to pay to meet their care needs.  When, as they have done in some previous years and perhaps this might be the plan again, the Tories offer us the dubious bounty of the opportunity to ask our hard-pressed citizens to pay a social care precept, what they are really doing is pushing this cost back to the poorest areas, so those least able to pay, pay more. On top of that, we would get less, as 1% on our council tax raises less than it would in wealthier local authorities. So this is another example of the Tories leaving those with the greatest need having to shoulder the burden of the financial crisis and their ongoing commitment to those with plenty.  So please join with us in asking for more: more for Nottingham, more for the people we want to support to live the best lives they can.

 

Knife related crime

 

Councillor Maria Watson asked the following question of the Leader of the Council:

 

I’m sure every councillor here, and indeed every citizen of Nottingham, has welcomed the news that the latest police figures show a significant drop in knife-related crime across the city, and across Nottinghamshire as a whole. The success should be a great source of pride for everyone involved in the fight against violent crime, whether they be from the Council, the Police, voluntary and youth organisations, or from the local community.  However, we shouldn’t become complacent due to short-term success. Knife-related crime is still a dangerous and prevalent problem within Nottingham. Can the Leader assure us that tackling this type of crime will remain a long-term priority of the City Council, even in the face of reduced budgets and financial challenges?

 

Councillor David Mellen replied as follows:

 

Thank you Lord Mayor, and can I thank Councillor Watson for her question. I obviously covered some of this in my answer to Councillor Rule earlier but I’m hoping that reduced budgets and financial challenges are going to be something that we have less of in the future, rather than more of.

 

I agree that the latest figures showing a significant decrease in knife crime in Nottingham are very welcome and I can assure Councillor Watson and colleagues across the Chamber that Nottingham City Council and our partners are not complacent about tackling knife crime and the underlying causes.  We are committed to maintaining our public health approach in partnership with all key agencies, including public protection, Police, social care, schools, voluntary and community organisations and other groups working in this area.  Reducing the risk of knife crime and youth violence includes work that we have done with our Youth Justice Service, a specially formed dedicated knife crime hub (to support and reach young people locally). We are also working with the County Council, with a nationally funded Violence Reduction Unit and the Office of the Police and Crime Commissioner.

 

We know that it’s really important that our young people have access to good youth opportunities and have hope that they can achieve an education and positive options for work.  School is a very important place to get the message out about the dangers of knife crime to all young people, and since 2018, through our programmes in schools, we have reached 2,637 primary school children and 1,352 secondary school children.  In 2018/19 we delivered the ‘Street Aware’ programme, providing awareness raising lessons across 55 primary schools, outlining to them the risk of criminal gangs, which included grooming, making good decisions and where and how to get help. We also covered issues relating to the law about knives and the risk of harm. We also provided awareness raising sessions, which included intensive 6-week programmes across 7 secondary schools and 3 alternative provisions. The sessions included work on the consequences of offending, joint enterprise, and county lines grooming.  For this current year, 2019/20, we have bookings across 25 schools so far, and we’ll be repeating that work programme outlined above. Initial evaluation for the programmes delivered in 2018/19 has been positive, and has demonstrated that children and young people are benefiting from the session.

 

In our play and youth service, sadly much smaller in size than it was, we are currently delivering 34 sessions per week across the City, supplemented by targeted sessions for those young people identified as being at risk from knife crime and child criminal exploitation.  From the Area Based Grants and money from the Police Commissioner’s Office, we also fund several local community-based organisations to provide universal services across the City that complement the targeted work delivered by our play and youth staff. 

 

Furthermore, the City Council is proud to be a member of the Violence Reduction Unit, a national organisation that has been funded from central government.  We are working with partners across the City and County to reduce violence. The initial priority of the Unit will be working with core provision and Police colleagues to reduce weapon-enabled violence in public spaces. In the longer term, the Unit is seeking to understand what causes violence so that we can prevent and intervene and treat those causes.  Because knife crime is not just a problem amongst teenagers, we have recently been able to grant-fund voluntary sector organisations working with 18-24 year olds where there is concern that knife crime is significant.  The Violence Reduction Unit will seek to understand the needs of our communities through identifying what works, commissioning and implementing evidence-based interventions, sharing evidence locally and nationally, and evaluating impact.  We believe prevention is better than cure, and in being part of the Violence Reduction Unit we hope to establish long-term sustainable solutions to serious violence, including knife crime. Intervening early builds resilience, reduces the aspects of adversity and changes community norms through educational policy to prevent issues emerging.

 

Unfortunately knives are often used regularly in domestic violence incidents and that is why this month’s ‘white ribbon’ campaign is so important, to raise the profile of violence behind closed doors and to make sure that people who find themselves in those situations know where to get help.

 

Goose Fair

 

Councillor Kirsty Jones asked the following question of the Leader of the Council:

 

I am sure I speak for every councillor here, when I congratulate everyone involved with the 725^th annual Goosefair. The event is undoubtedly one of the highlights of Nottingham’s cultural calendar. With its bright lights, the smells of the food stalls, the noise and the atmosphere, it has once again been a fantastic triumph.  Will the Leader of the Council join me in thanking the thousands of people who have made it such a success? The people who man the rides, the 100+ police officers who keep us safe, those who have to clean up the hundreds of tons of rubbish after it’s all over, everyone within the Council who help organise it, and our own Councillor Trimble. Will he also join me in a special thanks to the famous ‘Cock on a Stick’ vendor, who retires this year after 70 years of trading at the Goosefair?

 

Councillor David Mellen replied as follows:

 

Thank you Lord Mayor and can I thank Councillor Jones for her question wishing to thank everyone involved with the 725^th annual Goose Fair.  I’m of course delighted to echo this sentiment.

 

This year’s Goose Fair was an outstanding success, and has a positive effect on the cultural and economic offer for the City. It is one of Europe’s largest fairs, enjoyed by so many local people and visitors in a safe environment.  I wish to thank Councillor Trimble, the Showman’s Guild, which in spite of unprecedented rainfall still put on a great show, and of course the Council’s team supporting the fair, and clearing up so efficiently after the end of the fair.

 

This year’s event attracted over 421,000 people, an increase of 60,000 people on 2018. Many visitors used public transport to travel to the event, with NET tram ticket sales increasing by 2.3% year on year and an additional 3,600 riders on the Queens Drive Park and Ride service.  Digital discount ride vouchers and the single-use plastic policy were launched this year and we hope both will be developed in future years to reduce the carbon footprint.  A flavour of Europe was introduced with Hungarian pastries, called Chimney Cakes, and a large number of other stalls selling food as diverse as Swiss raclette, German bratwurst and French crepe, and despite our concentration on Brexit, they were all very popular.  This year we had a great mix of traditional and thrill rides, with not 1 but 2 ‘star flyers’ and the first year for a ‘Jumper Jumper’ ride - I missed that one!

 

The live stream on Facebook of you, Lord Mayor, and Councillor Trimble, being involved in the traditional opening and bell ringing had over 3,500 views on the ‘What’s on Nottingham’ site, what a wonderful way to share the tradition and the profile of the City.  And whilst it will be sad to see that this particular ‘Cock on a Stick’ seller may not be a part of Goose Fair for another year, although there is some controversy about whether that is the case, if he is retiring I wish him well in his retirement and I’m sure traditions will continue with new show characters coming forward, and I’m sure the event will get bigger and bigger each year.

 

Domestic violence refuge beds

 

Councillor Lauren O’Grady asked the following question of the Portfolio Holder for Housing, Planning and Heritage:

 

Could the Portfolio Holder for Housing, Planning and Heritage tell us how many refuge beds Nottingham needs to meet new national rules for domestic violence and if they know whether Government funding will be made available to meet the gap?

 

Councillor Linda Woodings replied as follows:

 

Thank you Lord Mayor and thank you Councillor O’Grady for your question.  As outlined in the Queen’s Speech on 14 October this year, the Government intended to change the landmark Domestic Abuse Bill to include for the first time a statutory duty on councils to provide support.  We welcome this as long as it comes with a sufficient level of funding.  The duty was scheduled to come into effect in April 2021, and it’s understood that the duty was to be funded from April 2021 as well, but sadly they added the caveat that this was subject to future spending review discussions, so don’t hold your breath!  The Bill was at second reading stage before the illegal suspension of Parliament by Boris Johnson, and then it was re-announced in the pointless Queens Speech held just days before Boris started to argue for a General Election.  Sadly the Domestic Abuse Bill failed to complete its passage through Parliament before dissolution, that means it will make no further progress and will have to be re-introduced in the next Parliament.

 

However, in anticipation of the Bill, in the summer I asked officers to put together a detailed set of costings so that we know what funding will be required once the statutory duty comes into effect, and it’s this piece of work that I am quoting from now.  Nottingham City Council currently commissions three refuges containing 31 bed spaces, based on the Government’s recommendation which dates back to 1975 based on one refuge place per 10,000 of population. We do have a further six complex-needs places, funded by a separate Government grant, successfully bid for from the ‘Response to Complexity’ fund as well, but that’s run by central refuge, which is not a commissioned refuge.  Now, just to clarify, there is a discussion at national level about which measures will be used to calculate refuge numbers. The Local Government Association believes that the Council for Europe recommendation of 1997, of one refuge space per 7,500 head of population, may be used for the duty. That will mean a requirement of 41 bed spaces in Nottingham, so that’s an additional 10. Each commissioned bed space costs £15,000 per year, so in Nottingham that means an additional £150,000 per year for the accommodation alone.

 

But we believe it’s likely the statutory duty will also require a local authority to assess the need and demand for accommodation-based support for all victims and their children, including those who require cross-border support, and to develop and publish strategies for the provision of support to cover the locality and diverse groups of victims.  So this could mean additional costs of voluntary sector children’s workers, up to 12 ‘move on’ bed spaces and also specialist therapeutic services for adults and for children, and there may also be a need for additional translation and interpretation services, and those additional costs are estimated to be just over £800,000, in addition to the bed spaces of £150,000.

 

So as I said at the beginning of my contribution, we welcome the eventual enactment of this Bill, because it is a scandal that the austerity programme of this Government, deliberately taking money away from local authorities, has meant that cuts in funding to councils have led to domestic violence funding and refuge spaces falling dramatically across the country.  I’m very proud of the fact that here in Nottingham, Labour has committed again and again to protect our Nottingham domestic violence services. In March this year, Women’s Aid nationally produced a report outlining the need to protect domestic violence services as a statutory duty. Their report found a shocking national decrease in most domestic violence services in the country - this was in December 2018. It concluded that formal counselling services had fallen by 18% since May 2017 and that the number of refuge bed spaces in England fell far short of the minimum recommended by the Council of Europe, 1,715 bed spaces short. 30% of services reported that since 2015 they’d had to reduce the level of support they were able to give to each survivor due to funding.  Most shockingly of all, 60% of all referrals, so 6 out of 10 referrals, to request refuge spaces were declined, and the reason they were declined was a lack of space or capacity to support that survivor. Over half of survivors in 2017 and 2018 had children, and 6% were pregnant. However, just half of the refuge space vacancies could accommodate a woman with two children, and only one-fifth (20%) could accommodate a woman with three children.

 

Colleagues, these are frightening statistics. The systematic under-funding of council services across the UK by this Tory Government has left women and children at risk, and we still live with the grim statistic, highlighted at the weekend by the ‘reclaim the night’ march here in Nottingham, that two women every week are killed by a partner or a former partner.  That statistic has never changed – 2 women a week, dead because they couldn’t get refuge.

 

So colleagues, I’m certain that in Nottingham we have quantified exactly how much extra funding will be needed. What I’m not certain of with this current Tory Government is whether they have the decency to actually fund the necessary extra services.  Colleagues, real change is needed to save the lives of women and children, and let’s hope in December we see that change.

 

Fire safety in high-rise blocks

 

Councillor Sam Gardiner asked the following question of the Portfolio Holder for Housing, Planning and Heritage:

 

How much funding has the Government given for fire safety improvements to high-rise blocks in Nottingham?

 

Councillor Linda Woodings replied as follows:

 

Nothing.

 

Food banks

 

Councillor Jawaid Khalil asked the following question of the Portfolio Holder for Communities:

 

Could the Portfolio Holder for Communities tell us how many people used Nottingham food banks in the past year and how this compares with the last four years?

 

Councillor Rebecca Langton replied as follows:

 

Thank you Lord Mayor and can I thank you Councillor Khalil for his question.  Exact figures on the number of people using food banks in Nottingham are difficult to come across because food banks are run by a range of different local charities, and there isn’t one definitive list.  However the figures we do have paint an alarming picture of the worsening situation ordinary Nottingham people are facing.  Last year, across the country, the Trussell Trust distributed 1.6million parcels to people in need, that’s a 73% increase in just 5 years. 26,678 of these food parcels were distributed in Nottinghamshire, that’s up from 23,000 the year before. Across the East Midlands, food bank use is up 54% since 2015.  The story is the same in other food banks in the City. The Bestwood and Bulwell food bank have had their busiest summer ever, with more and more children facing hunger in the school holidays. Their figures show a 35% increase in food bank use since 2015.

 

The top three reasons why people visited food banks in the last year were income not covering essential costs, benefit delays and benefit changes. These things are not inevitable.  Increasing demand for food banks, driven by the rising costs of living, inadequate and insecure wages and cuts to benefits that are supposed to keep families out of poverty are a political choice.  At our last full Council meeting, Councillor Power brought forward a motion, supported by Labour councillors in this Chamber, expressing our commitment to supporting food banks as a lifeline for many in this City. In that debate, many of us expressed our disgust at a Government that has overseen rising poverty levels and worsening economic conditions for ordinary people in Nottingham.  After all, this is the fifth richest country in the world, and in this country, food banks should not be a necessity. They are a by-product of decisions made by out of touch Conservative politicians, many backed up by the Lib Dems, that favour a small number of people who are already doing well in life. They fail to recognise that many people work harder than they ever will, have overcome obstacles that they can’t imagine, but their starting point and opportunities are very different.

 

In 2010, the Trussell Trust distributed 41,000 food parcels in the whole country; the latest figures show that in the last 9 years, under the Conservatives, demand for their support has increased by 3,802%. I double-checked that figure – a 3,802% in 9 years.

 

Lord Mayor, one particularly alarming fact is that Universal Credit is a common thread for many of those who are pushed to use food banks in our City. Over the last year, 76% of the referrals Nottingham City Homes made to food banks were due to Universal Credit. Forcing households to wait five weeks with no income for their first payment leaves families, who already didn’t have much income, without anything at all. Nothing to pay their rent, their bills, to pay for travel, to pay for school uniforms or even to buy food. This is completely inhumane and Nottingham City Council has repeatedly called on the Government to halt the roll-out of Universal Credit until the five week wait has been eradicated.  But this December there is an opportunity to vote for real change. The Labour Party is the only Party pledging to scrap Universal Credit altogether.

 

Later on in this Council meeting, I’m proposing a motion which talks about money. It recognises the many challenges that face Nottingham people, as well as the resilience and generosity of spirit that we see in our City.  But we shouldn’t have to use our time at Council discussing these issues. We need a Labour Government that not only talks about tackling the burning injustices we all know exist, but that has actually shown a commitment to doing something about them.

 

Lord Mayor, I’m also concerned that for every person who does seek help and walks through the doors of a food bank, there may be many others who haven’t been able to get that support, don’t know where to turn to, or don’t feel able to take up that offer.

 

I want to finish by saying this. Since I was elected, I’ve spent time with the volunteers at Bilborough food bank and have recently started volunteering there myself. They are kind, friendly, ordinary people who want to be there for their neighbours and peers in their moment of crisis. But they’re also aware that there can be a stigma attached with seeking help, so they work hard to make Bilborough food bank welcoming and friendly. Indeed, many people pop in for a cup of tea and a chat, not necessarily a food parcel.  I know this is true of food banks across the City and I want to take a moment to thank the many volunteers without whom thousands of people in Nottingham wouldn’t get a meal.

 

And to anyone who is struggling for food to eat, let me say this: there is no shame or stigma in seeking help from one of the many food banks in Nottingham. I’m very confident that wherever you turn to you can be sure of a warm welcome, a smiling face, no probing questions and absolutely no judgement, because the only people who should feel ashamed about food bank use are the Conservative Government who have pushed Nottingham families to needing food banks to put food on their table.

 

Local government finance

 

Councillor Maria Joannou asked the following question of the Portfolio Holder for Finance, Growth and the City Centre:

 

Why does the Portfolio Holder for Finance, Growth and the City Centre think that the Government has cut £529 per Nottingham household since 2011, whilst at the same time giving an increase of £19 per household in Surrey?

 

Councillor Sam Webster replied as follows:

 

Thank you Councillor for your question.  It’s a very important question in my view as our residents prepare to vote on 12 December. Sadly, it’s a fact that over the last decade our people in Nottingham have been targeted for the deepest cuts: a Conservative Party policy.  Austerity as we know is a political choice; it’s a Conservative Party policy. Bad enough that we have a Government that chooses to prioritise the billionaires, the bankers and the big corporations over people struggling to make ends meet, over small independent businesses and over public servants working in our schools, hospitals and emergency services.  It’s not a coincidence, or something we have no control over, or just a theory, it is in fact a Conservative Party policy.  All bad enough, but when you realise that Conservative austerity has been applied in such a biased and overtly political way you realise that cities like Nottingham have been chosen to bear the brunt of austerity, that’s when it becomes obvious why our City and our residents are right to be outraged.

 

We need to let those numbers sink in and let them be understood.  These are official statistics, the Government’s own figures. Since 2011, the Conservatives and the Liberal Democrats in Government have taken away £529 per Nottingham household.

At the same time, they’ve cut nothing from some very wealthy areas of the country.  Take Surrey as an example, one of the wealthiest parts of the country, no cut, NO CUT. In fact £19 per household extra money for Surrey, £529 less per household for Nottingham; £529 less per household in Clifton, Bulwell, Bilborough, Radford, Wilford, Sneinton, St Anns and everywhere else in our great City, £529 taken away, but £19 more per household in Surrey.  A Conservative Party policy.

 

And it’s not just us, our City now gets over £100million per year less than it did when the Conservatives came to power, that’s led to a quarter of a billion pounds worth of savings that we’ve had to make.  No, it’s not just us.  The Tories have been pretty forensic about their policy. Big cities like Nottingham they’ve targeted for cuts; places in the North and the Midlands, like Nottingham, they’ve targeted for cuts; places where the population is poorer, like Nottingham, they’ve targeted for cuts; reas with more elderly people who are unable to fund their own care, like Nottingham, they’ve targeted for cuts; schools in more deprived urban towns and cities, just like Nottingham, they’ve targeted for cuts;areas where there are more children in need of social care intervention and support, like Nottingham, they’ve targeted for cuts; and yes, those areas where life expectancy is shorter and health inequalities rage, they’ve targeted for cuts.  So if you’re in Hull, Wigan, Derby, Barnsley, Mansfield, Manchester or anywhere else that fits the criteria under the Conservative Party austerity policy, you’ll have seen the difference in your community.  You’ll have seen local services cut to the bone, you’ll have seen more rough sleeping, more families waiting for housing, more people on zero-hour contracts doing insecure work, bigger class sizes, more people relying on local food banks, you’ll even have seen prisoners being released from prison onto the streets with no housing, and you’ll have waited longer to see your doctor, and I could go on.

 

So to go back to your very straightforward question Councillor Joannou, that you asked me on behalf of your residents in Bulwell, why has the Government cut £529 per Nottingham household, while at the same time giving an additional £19 per household to people in Surrey?  Well the simple answer is Conservative Party policy. A policy that we’ve come to describe here in Nottingham as ‘the reverse Robin Hood’ – taking from the poor to give to the rich.  The message from our residents has been consistently clear; they want their £529 back: for housing, for schools, for youth provision, for public transport, for tackling crime, they want their £529 back.  In the run up to the General Election, we’re putting Boris Johnson, his wealthy backers, and his Russian donors on notice – your rotten policies, that have done so much damage to so many people have no support here. It’s time to end this era of Tory mis-rule. It’s time for a new Government that will put the interests of the many ahead of the vested interests of the wealthiest few.  For real change, vote Labour.