VERBATIM REPORT OF PROCEEDINGS OF LEEDS CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF WEDNESDAY, 3rd NOVEMBER, 2004

THE LORD MAYOR (Councillor C. Townsley): Good afternoon.

MEMBERS OF COUNCIL: Good afternoon, Lord Mayor.

THE LORD MAYOR: Members of Council, it is my sad duty to officially inform Members of the untimely and tragic death of former Lord Mayor Alderman David Hudson. Sorry, before I go any further, can you please make sure that all mobile phones are switched off. Thank you.

David, as most of us know here, was a jovial, larger- than- life, dedicated Councillor. Until his retirement last year, David spent almost 30 years as an elected member for Wetherby and over 50 years as a Wetherby Parish and Town Councillor. Indeed, he became Mayor from 1986-1989. David was richly rewarded for his efforts in Leeds first by becoming Deputy Lord Mayor in 1981/2, and then Lord Mayor of this wonderful City in 2001/2.

Our sympathies at this time go out to his widow, Gillian and his three daughters.

For those who probably don't know, the funeral is taking place on Friday at 12 o'clock at St. James's Church in Wetherby.

I do understand now that Councillor Carter would like to say a few words.

COUNCILLOR A. CARTER: My Lord Mayor, Members of Council, it was with great sadness that we all learnt only last week of the tragic death of David Ellis Hudson. It doesn't seem two minutes ago since we last met in this Council Chamber and Councillor Hudson was sitting on the benches at the back listening. In fact, I think he had attended every Council Meeting since the change of administration. From now on, every time I take my seat in this Council Chamber it will feel to me as though David Hudson is still here.

He was, as the Lord Mayor has said, a larger-than-life character, but he was a great deal more than that. He was a loyal and steadfast friend. I will tell you a little story. David and I have been firm friends for over 30 years, but when I was elected Leader of this Group - some of my colleagues have heard this story before - after the election, as is usually the case, Members come up to you and tell you that they voted for you, and most of them don't know that you have probably been leaked the voting figures, and so by

PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com the time you have got 10 more people telling you they voted for you than actually did, you know that there is something fishy going on. David Hudson came up to me, he didn't say that. He said, "Andrew, I didn't vote for you, but you are our Leader, and I will do any job you ask me to do, and I will do it to the best of my ability", and from that day onwards David and I became firm friends, and he stuck to his word and I hope I stuck to mine.

Every job I asked David to do, he did it to the best of his ability, and he did it with the values of public service uppermost in his mind. In the darkest days of the Conservative Group on this Council, when we were reduced to eight, he came up to me and he said, "Well, I was thinking of winding down, but I suppose you had better give me some more jobs to do", so I did, and again he did them to the best of his ability.

For over 50 years, he served the people of Wetherby, the West Riding of Yorkshire, and the people of Leeds. He made speech after speech in this Council Chamber without fear or favour, but never ever with malice. After the Council Meetings, he was always still the best of friends with people on all sides who he had worked with for many, many years.

I suppose that is why I have had more calls, I have been stopped by people I don't even know, in these past few days, saying how sorry they have been to learn of the death of David Hudson. His contribution to West Yorkshire, to Leeds, to Wetherby, cannot be over- estimated, as I think we shall all see on Friday at his funeral.

For my colleagues and I, it is a particular sadness, because David, as I think you could imagine, always played a very robust part in our party debates, and he always held firm to his views. He had some old-fashioned values, which I think are sadly lacking in today's public life. They were of honour, service and saying what you mean and doing what you say, and too often these days that is not the hallmark of people in public life. He would always volunteer for the job that perhaps other people were shying away from and, as I said before, he was never afraid of public debate and fighting his corner. As I also said, at the end of the day, he still remained friends with people across all parties, and that I think shone through when he became Lord Mayor of this City, a job that he did with distinction. How pleased I am, and I am sure many other people are as well, that he was able to do that job - I suppose the one job that he still wanted in public life - before he retired from this Council.

And so our thoughts, our sympathy, must go out to Gill who, for all those years, has been at David's side, helping him, always in

PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com the background but occasionally coming into the foreground, when everybody realised what a wonderful woman Gill was, his daughters, their husbands and the grandchildren. It must have been an awful shock for them, as it was for us. David, I shall miss you, my colleagues will miss you, but the people of our county and of this City will miss you as well. Thank you for all you did for this City. (Applause)

COUNCILLOR WAKEFIELD: Lord Mayor, I think it is an honour to associate our Group's support of what Andrew has just said, because many of us regarded David not only as larger-than- life but someone who was very passionate about public service. I think it ran in his family. It certainly ran through his veins and, although he was in the Conservative Party and you often thought they were about attacking it, when you spoke to David you got this real commitment about public services and local government, which he served supremely well, as Andrew said, for over 50 years.

My ward colleague who, sadly, is ill today, Keith Parker, had him as a Shadow when he chaired the Leeds Development Agency, and they often locked horns, and you would have thought there was a miner from Kippax and a land- owner from Wetherby that sparks would fly, and they often did, but more often than not they got on very well together because, I think what Andrew said, is that David was a straight- talking, honourable person and his word was his bond, and there were many things you have to do as Chair of that kind of committee that relies on the Shadow's support, and David never once let Keith down in any tight situation, and I think it is a tribute to him as a Councillor that he saw the bigger interest, even though he was a party person through and through, and he saw the interest of the Council.

Of course, you expect strong political debate with David. I remember him shouting. He was like a bear shouting across the chamber, and he was awesome when he started and he got up because he was a big fellow as well, but the one way to calm David down was to talk about rugby, and he loved rugby, and I often saw him down at Headingley and he would still, even after he retired, talk about the Council, because it was his family, he was still interested, he still wanted to know what was going on and, deep down, I think he wanted to come back and take an opportunity in chairing one of the Executive Board portfolios, but that was the kind of person he was.

I am very proud to associate our Group's comments with Andrew and, as I say, he will be missed by all of us, and his family, and I am absolutely sure that this Friday the church will be packed to over- flowing as a sign of our respect and our memory of such a good public

PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com servant and a good person as well, great character. Thank you, Lord Mayor. (Applause)

COUNCILLOR HARRIS: Lord Mayor, if I may, I would like to address myself to two things about David Hudson. The first is - I know you will take this at face value - I believe that, unfortunate as it may be, in life there are people who have and people who don't have, and people who can and people who can't, and I believe that those who do have and those who know how to have an absolute duty to put something back, to do something for those who don't have and those who don't know how to, and for all his well-known wealth and privilege, David Hudson believed absolutely that he had a duty, because of that privilege and wealth, to put as much back as he could, and I defy anybody here to say, notwithstanding his robust political views, many of which I didn't agree with, but nevertheless I defy anybody here to say that he didn't care about every single person that he came across, and any person he came across, or any group of people who were not as privileged and not as fortunate as him, and I am absolutely certain that that was a guiding principle with him and, as we have said, that sort of --- Well, I think I said it, actually, when he became an Alderman, that sort of attitude to public service is not that easy to find any longer. Lots of us are in it for other reasons as well, but I am certain with David he was never ever in it for himself. It is not to say, like all of us, we don't appreciate accolades and applause and thanks when it is given, but in David's case, although I am sure that did make him smile and make him happy, he was never in it for himself. He believed he had a duty to be in it for Wetherby, for West Yorkshire, for the people of Leeds.

The second thing I want to say is a bit more difficult, and hindsight is a marvellous thing, but even so in 2001 we had an awful debate in this chamber about who was going to be the next Lord Mayor. I fought very hard. It wasn't because I didn't want David to be Lord Mayor. I fought very hard for the principle that I felt that it was the LibDems' turn to take the Lord Mayoralty, not the Conservatives.

Well, hindsight is a marvellous thing, and I am grateful to you all that I was resoundingly beaten on that day and that David Hudson was given the opportunity, before he retired, to be Lord Mayor. Thank you. (Applause)

COUNCILLOR D. BLACKBURN: Lord Mayor, I have got to say last week when I heard about the death of David Hudson, it was a very sad day for me. I have known David for six years now. For about two of them he sat in front of me when I was over in what I might call Reprobate's Corner over there. I found him an immensely nice man, a gentleman, who was the same to everybody and, as Andrew was saying,

PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com quite a few people, quite a few of my constituents - I mean, you can't get much further away from Wetherby from where I represent - who all had good words for him.

But the thing I will always remember about David was, I went to a dinner and David on one side and Garth Franklin on the other side and me in the middle, and I thought, "Oh, this is disaster." I have got to say that was the most intellectually inspiring dinner I have ever been to, where more sense was talked than I think ever is in this place and no tempers were lost. It was really good, and I think that sums up David all the way round. As I say, to me, I have lost a friend and, for the short period I have known David, I really liked the guy, and I am really, really sad. Thank you, Lord Mayor. (Applause)

COUNCILLOR ELLIOTT: Lord Mayor, my colleagues and I were very sad to hear of the passing of David Hudson. It may come as no surprise that I have known David Hudson for many years. I would put him in a class of a very able politician of the old school.

My recent memory of David was when I was the Mayor of Morley and he was Lord Mayor of Leeds, and my very first engagement was to visit an elderly lady, she was 100 years old, and the Lord Mayor of Leeds was also going to be present, so I went with some trepidation thinking, "Oh dear, I am very much aware that the Lord Mayor of Leeds takes precedence over me", but that wasn't the case. David was his usual, gracious self, and it was the very first outing for me to be remembered with pleasure.

We send our condolences to his family at this time. (Applause)

THE LORD MAYOR: Thank you very much. I would like Members of Council now to join with me in the time-honoured way in standing for one minute's silence. Thank you. (Council stood in silent tribute) Thank you very much.

ITEM 1 - MINUTES OF MEETING OF 8th SEPTEMBER 2004

COUNCILLOR PROCTER: I move that the Minutes be received, Lord Mayor.

COUNCILLOR GRUEN: Second, Lord Mayor.

(The motion was carried)

ITEM 2 - DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST

PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com THE DIRECTOR OF LEGAL & DEMOCRATIC SERVICES (Ms. N. Jackson): Councillor Harker has got a personal interest in the comments on the SILK, page 35, Minute 52. I think Councillor Harris has also got a personal interest in the minutes ---

MEMBERS OF COUNCIL: We can't hear you.

THE DIRECTOR OF LEGAL & DEMOCRATIC SERVICES: Councillor Harker has notified a personal interest as a member of the temporary governing body on the SILK, that is in relation to page 35, Minute 52. I think Councillor Harris has also notified an interest in relation to the Minutes of the Executive Board in relation to Lawnswood Cemetery. That is a personal interest.

COUNCILLOR A. CARTER: We can't hear anything.

COUNCILLOR WAKEFIELD: Can I record a personal interest on Minute 92, page 48.

THE LORD MAYOR: Thank you. Are there any others, please?

COUNCILLOR ANDREW: Lord Mayor, can I declare a personal interest in the same as Councillor Harker? I wish to speak.

COUNCILLOR SMITH: Lord Mayor, item 10, White Paper on Parking Permits for Midwives, can I declare a personal interest as a director of the South Leeds Primary Care Trust?

THE LORD MAYOR: Thank you. Any more? Thank you.

ITEM 3 - COMMUNICATIONS

THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE (Mr. P. Rogerson): There are no communications.

ITEM 4 - DEPUTATIONS

THE LORD MAYOR: To report there are, in fact, now I believe only four deputations, No. 3 has been withdrawn. So could I have the first deputation, please.

Can I just ask, is there a problem with the microphones?

MEMBERS OF COUNCIL: Yes. We can't hear a word.

PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com COUNCILLOR TAGGART: It was much better when Labour was in control!

THE LORD MAYOR: We need to sort out an electrician, I think.

(The first deputation was admitted to the chamber)

COUNCILLOR PROCTER: Lord Mayor, I believe we have skipped some business. I think the next piece of business is that I move that all deputations now be received.

COUNCILLOR GRUEN: I second, Lord Mayor.

(The motion was carried)

THE LORD MAYOR: Thank you. I am trying to get this meeting over quickly!

Good afternoon. In accordance with the Procedure Rules of Council, you have a period of not more than five minutes in which to address the Council. Would you please start by giving the names of the deputation and the spokesperson.

MRS. COHEN: Thank you, Lord Mayor, Members of Council, for receiving us. We are very concerned residents of North East Leeds. I am Lorna Cohen, and with me today is Paul McLean.

We extend to the people of the Garforth area our congratulations on their victory in their battle and sincerely hope that they will eventually win the war.

The administrative borders of Moortown Fire Station extend from the Sheepscar Interchange in the south to the River Wharfe beyond Harewood in the north, from Golden Acre Park in the west to Scarcroft in the east. Within these borders, 64,000-plus people live and an unknown number of people come into the area to shop and to work.

There are 27 schools, 26 residential homes, numerous housing complexes, sheltered housing complexes that is, high density, high risk housing in Chapeltown and Meanwood, together with medium risk properties in Roundhay, Chapel Allerton, Meanwood, Moor Allerton and Moortown; an increasing number of high-rise and low-rise apartment buildings that will continue to be developed well into the foreseeable future.

There are an increasing number of licensed premises, 18 farms, 17 of which are isolated, a hospice, Chapel Allerton Hospital,

PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com very many places of worship, numerous major roads and accident blackspots. The nearest fire stations to Moortown are Cookridge, Stanks and Gipton, possibly the busiest in West Yorkshire, all at least 4 miles away, Leeds 5, Wetherby 10 and Harrogate 13.

None of this vital data appears in this IRMP, but it does contain graphs and statistics which require a PhD to fully understand, but it doesn't really matter as some of the statistics in it are wrong anyway. Yet both the Chair of the Fire Authority and the Chief Fire Officer invite communities and stakeholders to read this in order to engage in what they refer to as 'meaningful consultation'. How many people are aware that this document even exists, let alone have read it? How many are aware that Moortown Fire Station is responsible for such a vast area?

We welcome the fire prevention proposals, from the distribution of smoke-alarms, changing the traditional chip pans for thermostatically-controlled deep fat fryers, to replacing electric blankets. These are proposals that should have been ongoing for many years.

But, my Lord Mayor, we live in the real world. Accidents do and will continue to happen. Leaking gas, electrical faults, horrific car accidents and deliberate arson attacks. On 6th October an enormous fire raged in Exeter which was attended by 30 fire appliances. On 14th October a fire in Belfast needed 100 fire officers to bring it under control.

Unfortunately, fires do not occur during set hours, they occur any time of the day or night. Fire safety should be an ongoing education to the general public, not a substitute for modernisation of fire cover.

In the five years from '99 to the current financial year, the fire authority precept has almost doubled from é14,899,400 to é26,389,082, whilst during the same period grants from central Government have increased from é40.5 million to é58.27 million. We in North East Leeds believe that the people of West Yorkshire deserve the best protection that is humanly possible.

Given the demands of this post 9/11 world for New Dimensions/Resilience Planning, how can the proposals put forward to change front line service provision provide the best possible means of protection? We therefore ask this Council to lobby the Fire Authority to ensure that the previous level of cover is reinstated without delay, not only at Moortown but at all fire stations in West Yorkshire. And, by the way, Lord Mayor, for those not familiar with

PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com the New Dimensional/Resilience Planning, it is the current buzzword for Emergency Planning. Thank you very much. (Applause)

COUNCILLOR PROCTER: Lord Mayor, I move that the deputation be referred to the appropriate Executive Member, committee or body of Council.

COUNCILLOR ATHA: Does that mean neither or either or all?

COUNCILLOR PROCTER: Or both.

COUNCILLOR GRUEN: Lord Mayor, I second that and, in doing so, I thank Lorna Cohen for getting off her sickbed to come here and do her public duty. Thank you, Lord Mayor. (Applause)

(The first deputation left the chamber and the second deputation was admitted)

THE LORD MAYOR: Good afternoon. In accordance with the Procedure Rules of the Council, you have a period of not more than five minutes in which to address the Council. Would you please start by giving the names of the deputation and the spokesperson.

MR. CHARD: Yes, the spokesperson is myself, Bill Chard, from the GMB. I am accompanied by Dave Noble from the GMB, John McDermott from Unison and Christine Stringer from Unison. Okay?

First of all, thank you for allowing us to address you today. As I said, my name is Bill Chard from the GMB trade union, and I speak on behalf of our delegation representing GMB, Unison and all the trade unions with members affected by the imposed switch from weekly to monthly pay.

You will be aware that the imposition of this change was one of the first acts of the new administration, sending out a message to all Leeds City Council employees that consultation and negotiation were bypassed on this occasion, and in the process threatened industrial relations right throughout the authority.

We acknowledge that negotiations regarding this issue were protracted, but protracted for good reason. This switch will have a detrimental effect, especially on the Authority's part-time workers, on its low-paid workers and, cruelly, workers with learning difficulties employed at Roseville Enterprises, this a flagship of Leeds set up to help the disadvantaged. People who now struggle to manage from week to week will have huge difficulties existing month to month.

PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com Traditionally, these people have had real problems managing their wages. They have had heavy involvement from the support workers. Obviously, the change to monthly pay will be horrendous for them, and I read from the minutes of the Roseville Enterprise JCC: "The Chair requested information as to how this is being received by people affected by the change. It was noted this was a major concern for staff. All the other supervisors agreed. There was general agreement that while everyone affected knew it was going to happen, few were aware of the full implications."

As I say, it was for good reasons, and these reasons, that the original negotiations were lengthy, and the trade unions were simply reflecting their Members' fears.

This change will force many loyal, long-serving employees to leave the authority, because they need to be paid weekly - not a matter of preference but a matter of absolute need.

The trade unions have been contacted by many low-paid workers who often only work a relatively small number of hours. They are telling us they will leave the authority simply because they need that pay on a weekly basis.

What our Members are asking for, even at this late stage, is that you halt this process and come back to the table and investigate further the opportunity for agreement.

The Leader, Councillor Harris, has been quoted widely in the newspapers regarding this matter. He said, "We are currently consulting with the 10,000 Council employees who are on weekly pay and I guarantee we will take notice of their views." Now, around 2,000 people have replied stating their objections. More would have objected but they were misled by their employer. When the original form was sent out, employees were not given the opportunity to object. There was only one tick box and that said, "I accept the change". Even more misleading was the letter accompanying it which said, "It has been agreed". Agreed by whom?

Our members were misled. They believed, "This has been agreed" meant "agreed with the trade unions", not simply agreed by the powers that be and, to rub salt in their wounds, you withdrew the é50 buy-out which, although totally inadequate in terms of compensation, would have been of some assistance to those low-paid workers. And again I quote from Councillor Harris from the Evening Post, "They turned down the é50 as inadequate, which pleases me because I am not

PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com proposing any cash gift." He went on to say, "Taxpayers' money is paid for services not gifts to workers."

Do you realise just what impact those words had not just on the people affected by this imposition but on every Leeds City Council employee? The é50 on offer previously was not a gift but a buy-out on existing terms. Previously, other workers employed by the authority have received buy-outs for changes to their terms and conditions. Presently workers at this moment in time who have recently transferred to Leeds West Homes, the ALMO, have been given é65 gross, é50 nett, by their new employer to compensate for the switch from weekly to monthly pay. If they were still employed by Leeds City Council, they would have received nothing. Presently, all the unions have been inundated with phone calls from people who now are realising that their overtime payments that they worked for this month will not be paid till the end of the next month. Many people will not work overtime as a result of this, with ongoing costs from the Council as they have to take on new employees.

Now, we do not say that every one of the 10,000 affected employees will suffer as a result of this rushed decision. We do know that thousands will, because they have told us so.

THE LORD MAYOR: Can I ask you to close, please?

MR. CHARD: Single parents part-time workers, low-paid workers, those with learning difficulties, they will suffer.

We just ask you to come back to the table to carry out industrial relations in an acceptable fashion and send a message to your employees that you are a reasonable employer. Thank you. (Applause)

COUNCILLOR PROCTER: Lord Mayor, I move that the matter be referred to the appropriate Executive Member, committee, board or body for consideration. Thank you, Lord Mayor.

COUNCILLOR GRUEN: I second, Lord Mayor.

THE LORD MAYOR: Thank you very much.

(The second deputation left the chamber and the third deputation entered)

THE LORD MAYOR: Good afternoon.

THE SPOKESPERSON: Good afternoon.

PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com THE LORD MAYOR: In accordance with the Procedure Rules of the Council, you have a period of not more than five minutes in which to address the Council. Would you please start by giving the names of the deputation and the spokesperson.

THE SPOKESPERSON: Maggie - oh I can't say your name - (?)Usofol, Anne Hainsworth, Moyra Emmett, Karen Wood and Paul Anderson, and I am speaking.

THE LORD MAYOR: Please continue.

THE SPOKESPERSON: Good afternoon, Lord Mayor, Councillors. Thank you for allowing me to speak on behalf of the residents of Chapel Allerton on the issue of the proposed phone mast.

We have felt that up to now we have been treated shabbily, not by our Councillors - they have been a huge support - but by the Officers who work for the City.

I would also like to say at this moment it is not a question of Not In My Back Yard. No, indeed, for this one will be in our front yards, on our doorsteps, shining its rays into our bedrooms and casting its shadow over the largest group of organic allotments in Leeds. We believe firmly it shouldn't be in anyone's back or front yard - a fact that most civilised European countries accept.

In fact, the ICNIRP certification awarded to this mast is 10 years old, therefore out of date, especially in the light of independent research done by Warwick University. The all-party Parliamentary Working Group recommends that we err on the side of caution in this, and that masts of any height or cosmetic appearance be situated 600 metres from homes, schools and hospitals. This mast will be directly opposite the house of Mr. Sapuram Singh, just 20 metres from his front door, and 75 metres from the home of Mr. and Mrs. Hainsworth.

The first news that any of these people had about this mast came from the grapevine. When Mrs. Hainsworth heard that the mast was going up from a friend it was early August. She notified her neighbours, collected a petition, sent it to the Planning people. She waited for two weeks, expecting a reply. When none came, she rang and was told by the delegated Officer it wasn't worth the paper it was written on. This denies our rights under the Human Rights Act, Article 6, paragraph 1.

PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com Our submission is that, had the planners waited for the 56 days allowed by Government guidelines rather than 39 days, her petition wouldn't have been too late. Also, had the site notice - and I say it in the singular because only one was ever seen - had his been placed prominently, for example on lamp posts, on the side of the site, or on the nearby bus stop, the planners would have received many more than the five letters of protest they did receive.

Since work started and residents became aware a mast was planned, the planners will have received a vast number of protest letters. For example, Mr. Singh, whose wife has leukaemia, has now objected most strongly. Surely this suggests to you that things were not done properly in the first place.

This was not the only thing not done properly. Those of us present at a meeting with O2 arranged by Fabian Hamilton actually heard Peter Shackleton, the site finder, admit that he had made a huge mistake by not notifying our Councillors. The notification of Councillors is the only guideline which the Mobile Phone Operators Association insist upon.

Another discovery has been that ex-Councillor Eileen Moxon specifically told O2 not to post an application of this sensitivity either immediately before the June election or for two months after. They waited one week. One week, ladies and gentlemen.

O2 also declare on their application that there are no schools within 400 metres of the mast. There are two. The cabinets should be green. They are not. They are said to be screened by trees. Also untrue. In December a Montessori nursery opens next door to Mr. Singh. Plans for this were with the Planning Department many months ago. An example of joined-up thinking?

Talk to anyone in the streets of Chapel Allerton and in the shops you hear the same phrases repeated: "Money talks", "People don't matter", "Someone has taken a backhander." Now, we are assured by Fabian Hamilton that this is not so. We believe him, but the general perception persists and grows as the work progresses.

It has been a shoddy mess, as is the work being done. The contractors appear to be making it up as they go along. As the job has not been researched in a professional manner, they meet difficulties, so they change the plans as they work. We then notify the Council Compliance Department. The workmen then return and make changes. They work on the busy Harrogate Road with no walkways, thus endangering life. Last weekend a blind neighbour training a new

PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com guide dog had to be helped around an earth-shifter working without barriers. If we had not been there, what would have happened?

But there is a way out of this mess. I would like to leave you with the thought that this planning permission can be revoked in accordance with Paragraphs 97-105 of the Town and Country Planning Act. If O2 threatened to sue, we can find plenty of anomalies in their behaviour to counter it. This would be better than the lawlessness that results when people are not heard. I am a law- abiding woman, but I would gladly pull this mast over if I had the strength. As I do not, I am appealing to you to act on our behalf. Thank you. (Applause)

COUNCILLOR PROCTER: Lord Mayor, I move that the matter be referred to the appropriate Executive Member, committee, panel, board or body for consideration, Lord Mayor.

COUNCILLOR GRUEN: I second, my Lord Mayor. Probably Councillor Carter it will be referred to, I guess.

THE LORD MAYOR: Thank you very much indeed.

MEMBER OF COUNCIL: Can we not vote, Lord Mayor?

(The third deputation left the chamber and the fourth deputation was admitted)

THE LORD MAYOR: Good afternoon. In accordance with the Procedure Rules of the Council, you have a period of not more than five minutes in which to address the Council. Would you please start by giving the names of the deputation and the spokesperson.

MR. DEWS: I am the spokesperson, I am David Dews, and I am speaking on behalf of the Westbrook Lane Action Group in Horsforth.

The Group wish to formally complain about the way that the City Council has dealt with a duplicate planning application from Trinity and All Saints College to build student flats on a sports field that fronts onto Westbrook Lane. The matter was considered and approved by the Plans Panel West on 21st October last.

As background to our complaint, we would like to remind Council of the large number of objections that were made by the community - nearly 300. We would also remind the Council that the level of objection is from a wide section of the community with a shared interest in the preservation of these sports fields, an

PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com interest which extends well beyond the small number of householders who are immediate neighbours.

A common theme for all these objections has been, "Why should playing fields be built on when the college appears to have other development options?" Planning Panels in the past have shared these concerns and repeatedly asked for the college to carry out consultation with the community. Planning Officers have suggested alternative sites that could be developed first. They have also pressed for an Estates Strategy to be produced to help in the consultation.

In view of the above, the report that was considered and approved by Panel on 21st October beggars belief.

Firstly, regarding our objections: Apparently, in view of the fact that the Panel were considering a duplicate application, all previous 286 objections can now be dismissed. So the report now only mentions a handful of new objections.

Secondly, on consultation: Apparently the college did invite a limited number of local residents to a meeting early in September. Our understanding is that approximately 12 people attended. These people appeared to be invited from the Southway estate which abuts the college at the complete opposite end to where these flats are going to be built. Was anybody invited from Brownberrie lane which adjoins the site? No. Anybody from Westbrook Lane? No. Was the PTA from Westbrook Lane Junior School which is going to be next door to these flats invited? No. Were any sports groups which officially use the playing fields invited? No.

In the past, the college has tried to get away with as little consultation as possible, and previous Panels have always rejected this as inadequate. This report now says that, "adequate consultation has taken place and can be approved".

Thirdly, about public awareness of this report: In the past all previous 286 objectors have been informed by the Planning Department when future meetings were going to take place. Because this report is considering a duplicate, all objectors have been excluded from this information. Even agenda papers for the meeting circulated to ward Members indicate the Estate Strategy was to be presented, but there was no reference to the specific report to approve the flats. If Ward Members are not even aware of matters to be considered, how are the general public to find out what is going on?

PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com Fourthly, there appears to be contradictions within the Estates Strategy and the justification for the proposed flats. The Strategy document is deferred at the meeting on 21st October but the specific application to build is approved. Isn't this putting the cart before the horse?

There are also contradictions between the site boundaries of this application and the boundaries shown on the UDP Revision. Part of this site encroaches onto land scheduled in the UDP not to be released until 2011. Which document is correct?

So no wonder we are complaining about how this matter has been dealt with. A technical procedure is carried out which changes the application number and then this wipes out all previous objections, but nobody is informed of what happens when an application number is changed. The college carries out selective consultation but does not invite the groups most affected, and this is now adequate. An item is put to Panel but apparently does not appear on an agenda. An Estates Strategy which is supposed to form an important part of the justification is not considered at the meeting but the specific application is approved. The City Council has a UDP document which suggests that part of this site should not be developed until 2011.

The planning process should look after all our interests, but this does not appear to be the case. From our point of view, openness and transparency have been exchanged for exclusion and obscurity.

Do not wash your hands on this matter. Permission to build on sports fields should be a matter of last resort, not first. Please refer this matter back so we can have a full consultation, as promised. (Applause)

COUNCILLOR PROCTER: My Lord Mayor, I move that the matter be referred to the appropriate Executive Member, committee, panel, board or body. Thank you, my Lord Mayor.

COUNCILLOR GRUEN: I second, Lord Mayor.

THE LORD MAYOR: Thank you very much.

Right, could I now call for a vote on all of the deputations? (The motion was carried)

ITEM 5 - REPORTS

PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com (a)

COUNCILLOR J. L. CARTER: My Lord Mayor, I move the item in the terms of the notice.

COUNCILLOR KIRLAND: I second, my Lord Mayor.

(The motion was carried)

(b)

COUNCILLOR PROCTER: Lord Mayor, I move in the terms of the notice, with the addition of Councillor Bruce as an alternative member to the West Yorkshire Joint Services Committee. Thank you, Lord Mayor.

COUNCILLOR HAMILTON: I second, Lord Mayor.

(The motion was carried)

ITEM 6 - QUESTIONS

COUNCILLOR WAKEFIELD: Lord Mayor, will the Leader of the Council please explain to Council the circumstances which led to the resignation of Councillor David Morton from his position as Executive Member for City Services?

COUNCILLOR HARRIS: Lord Mayor, I can add nothing to the statement that was issued on 12th October 2004 but, if it helps Council, I will read it formally again.

COUNCILLOR WAKEFIELD: I didn't expect too much in the way of clarifying or allaying suspicion.

MEMBER OF COUNCIL: Where is he?

COUNCILLOR WAKEFIELD: No, he is not here today, but I was going to ask you a question on China, because that is an easy one, but you have got one coming up, but I will ask you one which I think is probably easy for you, given you struggled with the first part. Will you just explain to us exactly what you mean by knowing David has a bright political future ahead of him?

COUNCILLOR LYONS: Joining the Labour Party!

MEMBER OF COUNCIL: You said "bright". (Interruptions)

PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com COUNCILLOR HARRIS: I have consistently said to members of my own Group that I regard David Morton as intellectually the strongest person in our group. (Interruptions) I have consistently said that he has a serious political career ahead of him if he wishes to pursue it, and so what I meant by that was that I hoped, notwithstanding this decision, that he would still pursue that political career in whatever way he thought fit. (Applause)

COUNCILLOR HOLLINGSWORTH: Lord Mayor, can the Executive Member for City Services tell Council what action the new administration is taking on illegal flyposting?

COUNCILLOR SMITH: Lord Mayor, as Members will be aware, flyposting is the placement of illegal advertising on buildings and street furniture without the consent of the owner. Often these are low quality posters which are pasted onto surfaces. They are often unsightly and affect the appearance of an area.

Officers within four separate departments have dealt with flyposting historically. Over recent months, these Officers have co- ordinated their activities through the Environmental Enforcement Working Group. This group has taken the Council's objective of effectively tackling flyposting, looked at the most effective mechanisms and produced a corporate policy of implementation.

I am pleased to say that the Council launched a new flyposting enforcement policy on 4th October. The policy clearly states how we view flyposting and provides information on how we will deal with this aspect of environmental crime. The main elements of the policy are: firstly, enforcement activity. Persons caught applying posters or benefiting from the advertisement will be prosecuted under whichever legislation provides for the most likelihood of success and greatest punishment. The range of legislation used includes prosecution under the Highways Acts and Town and Country Planning Acts, fixed penalty notices, criminal damage, licensing legislation. The application of Anti-Social Behaviour Orders for persons prosecuted for the offence will also be pursued.

Poster drums - a familiar sight on the streets - these provide a lawful outlet for this type of advertising and therefore provide an alternative to illegal flyposting. There are 49 drums and 14 boards in the city centre and 30 more drums outside the centre. A third party company is operating these drum sites and it also informs the local authority about other flyposting and removes this other blight. Planning permission is being sought for additional drums in areas near Burley Road, Chapeltown and Harehills.

PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com All flyposters placed on sites without proper permissions will be open to legal action. To remove any doubt that flyposting will not be tolerated on sites other than lawful sites, the contractor managing the drums has been written to formally in order to confirm the point.

Stickers with the word, "Cancelled" have been pasted over flyposters placed on non-approved sites. These stickers are bright yellow, a metre long by 10 cm wide. The word "Cancelled" is in red and the background text contains words to the effect that Leeds City Council has cancelled the illegal flyposter and notice is given that the Council may remove the flyposter 48 hours after it was applied. Council stickers will continue to be used.

Licensed premises have been contacted to advise them of the clampdown on flyposting and an article has recently been placed in their association's newsletter. Licensing Officers have been granted delegated powers to enforce anti- flyposting legislation under the Highways Act - (Interruptions) Oh, there is more to come, more to come - as well as Licensing Acts.

Legal action against the top offending clubs has begun. Seventeen formal interview processes have been completed with licensees, the first stage of the prosecution trail. A second formal warning using recorded formal interviews has gone to one club.

As well as taking strong enforcement action, the Council is also putting more resources into clearing away flyposting. Six teams of people are now employed to remove flyposting and graffiti across the City. Placards - these are flyposters in the form of cards or boards attached to street furniture - these have been removed from street furniture and 76 letters sent to companies responsible for putting these placards up. The majority of the companies have removed the placards, although some will be pursued for prosecution.

In summary (Interruptions), in summary the Council has recognised that flyposting can cause serious environmental problems in areas of our City. It will be taking enforcement action and removing materials to improve the environment for all the citizens of Leeds. Thank you, Lord Mayor. (Applause)

THE LORD MAYOR: Do you have a supplementary?

COUNCILLOR FELDMAN: Is there a supplementary question?

MEMBER OF COUNCIL: I hope not.

PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com COUNCILLOR LOBLEY: Will the Executive Member for Neighbourhoods and Housing tell me what the Council are doing to tackle the fireworks nuisance in the City?

COUNCILLOR J. L. CARTER: My Lord Mayor, on 29th September we held a multi-agency summit meeting to discuss what action could be taken and progressed to address the issues surrounding the supply, sale and use of fireworks within the Leeds district. Those attending these meeting were the Fire Service, the Police, Youth Service, Environmental Health, Community Safety, Legal & Democratic Services, the voluntary sector, Leeds Tenants Federation, Education Leeds, West Yorkshire Trading Standards and the Deputy Editor of the Evening Post.

My Lord Mayor, I will obviously give you more details because there is a White Paper later on what took place, but I would at this stage like to record my tribute to those who took part, and especially to the Police, the Fire Service, West Yorkshire Trading Standards and the YEP.

The next and last meeting, my Lord Mayor, will be an evaluation meeting to find out how successful we have been and also to give a lead-in for next year, because obviously we would like to start work on this harder next year and learn lessons from what we have done this year, but that evaluation will take place in the next two or three weeks and, when it does come, obviously Members of Council will be able to see what the evaluation is and what it said. Thank you, my Lord Mayor. (Applause)

COUNCILLOR FINNIGAN: My Lord Mayor, can the Leader of the Council confirm the present status of the South Leeds Diving and Swimming Centre, it projected full cost, and if there are presently any disputes, litigation or financial concerns between the Council and the contractors engaged on this project?

COUNCILLOR PROCTER: Lord Mayor, we are currently at the evaluation of tender stage of the Swimming & Diving Centre, Councillor Finnigan. We do not have a projected full cost, only an estimated cost. As a contractor has not yet been appointed, there is no disputes, litigation or financial concerns about the project.

COUNCILLOR FINNIGAN: Thank you, Lord Mayor. By way of a supplementary, could the Executive Board Member give us some insight into the thinking of the ruling administration on where we are actually going with this particular centre?

COUNCILLOR PROCTER: Well, Lord Mayor, where we are going is south Leeds (Applause) with the Centre. In terms of the further

PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com process, we inherited a situation that was a long way down the road, I think something like é700,000 had already been spent in consultants' fees in the lead-up to this project. With all of that in mind, the decision was taken that the Diving Centre would have to go ahead adjacent to the South Leeds Stadium, and that is the process that we have currently been going through in terms of full tender and now at evaluation stage. Thank you, Lord Mayor. COUNCILLOR D. BLACKBURN: Lord Mayor, will the Executive Member for City Services tell the Council what action the new administration is taking to promote 'Fair Trade' products in Leeds?

COUNCILLOR SMITH: Members of Council, I will be brief.

COUNCILLOR D. BLACKBURN: It's not a long one, this.

COUNCILLOR SMITH: As you are probably aware, this year Leeds was granted the status of a Fair Trade City. In order to achieve this, the City had to demonstrate that the Council supported 'Fair Trade', that a range of 'Fair Trade' products are readily available in the area's shops and served in at least four cafes and catering establishments, and finally that 'Fair Trade' products are used by at least 20 businesses and organisations.

A Fair Trade Steering Group has been established to ensure continued development of initiatives and a range of initiatives have been planned to further promote 'Fair Trade' in Leeds. These activities include 'Around One World Week' and a Fair Trade fashion show. As part of the initiatives, City Services, in consultation with the Lifelong Learning & Leisure Department, has introduced 'Fair Trade' products. Would you like me to tell you what they are? (Interruptions) You already know, okay. Well, it has introduced them into its commercial outlets. I will remind you what they are. They are at Golden Acre, Tropical World, the Art Gallery, Lotherton Hall and Templenewsam cafes. The initiative was launched on 29th September and attracted local media coverage for Fair Trade and for TIDAL, which Members will be aware is the Trade Injustice Debt Action Leeds. Thank you. (Applause)

COUNCILLOR DRIVER: Lord Mayor, what proposals does the Executive Member for Children's Services have to see that the aim of "putting children and young people first", as interpreted in the Children Act, which this month receives its Royal Assent, will be implemented for every child in every part of the Leeds Metropolitan District by the Government's target date of 2006?

COUNCILLOR JENNINGS: Thank you, Lord Mayor. I believe I also need to thank the Whips of all parties who have agreed that this

PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com question can be answered in writing. I believe I probably also have to ask Council formally for that. The answer to this question is an extremely long one. I have already (Interruption) Do you want me to? I can reply there is a written answer. A written answer has already been provided to all Members of Council and it should be in front of you. I should explain that the reason it is named as, "Response to Council Question 12" is because that was the original number of the question when it was received by the Committee Section. If you wish me to read it out, I will do so.

I have a couple of comments I would like to make first though, the first one of which, of course, as I have already referred to, is that this is a huge agenda that applies to just about every department within the Council to a lesser or greater extent, a huge number of partner organisations within the City, and also a huge number of organisations in the voluntary and charity section of enterprise in the City.

I would also like to say that it is not my intention, or this administration's intention, to politicise this issue. We believe it is far, far too important for the future of Leeds City Council, the children and young people of Leeds, and Leeds itself, to turn it into a political football.

I believe all groups should already have received a briefing from Officers about the Children's Act and its implications, and I would also like to offer to Council this afternoon a seminar for all Members of Council so that we can meet together to discuss this, Members of all parties, and therefore again hopefully depoliticise it.

I and Officers have already spoken to the Chair of the appropriate Scrutiny Board, and I am very pleased to say he will be visiting with us next month Sheffield Council, which has been a trail- blazer on Children's Trusts, and I intend to make sure that all parties have an input into discussion over this vital piece of policy over the next months and years.

I hope the written response will suffice. If it does not, I am perfectly prepared to carry on and read it out to you. (Applause)

COUNCILLOR DRIVER: Lord Mayor, can I say, first of all, before I ask my supplementary, that in 27 years on this Council I have never known a political question be answered in this kind of way.

MEMBER OF COUNCIL: Read it.

COUNCILLOR JENNINGS: Okay, fine then ---

PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com COUNCILLOR DRIVER: It is too late. It is too late. My supplementary is intended to ask Councillor Jennings to take the matter further and actually give us a political answer.

With regard to the role given to someone called the Lead Member for Children's Services under the Act, can Councillor Jennings, in his own words, explain how he is going to ensure that that job could be carried out effectively and responsibly in Leeds by a single elected Member? You will realise that the size, scale, pressure and complexity of the new Lead Member's role, as it is described in the Act, for monitoring, apparently single-handedly, the standards of integrated children's services to be provided by a number of inter- agency teams and dealing with the conflicts and complaints with regard to the full range of services to children, young people and their families, how that is going to be done.

This is a serious question about the role of elected Members. It requires a serious political answer, not an Officer paper. Thank you, Lord Mayor.

COUNCILLOR JENNINGS: Well, that was a very long question, and I am not quite sure of its purpose. I thought I had already in part answered that, though. I don't think there is a political answer, or a party political answer, to this issue.

It is an issue that affects us all. It affects us all because we are corporate parents to our children in care. It affects us all because I imagine virtually all of us are governors of schools. It affects us all - not maybe all but many of us - because many Councillors actually are parents of the young people of Leeds.

It is a huge remit, and also I would like to remind Councillor Driver it is not a remit established by this Council but a remit established by his Government. I agree it has to be interpreted, and that is what we will do. I also, in my previous answer, said that I hoped we would not turn this into a political football. I am not going to respond in a political way. I am going to respond in a responsible way. This is probably the biggest agenda facing this Council in the next decade, and let's just all try and work together and make sure we get it right. It is a huge responsibility, and I accept that responsibility, but I also hope that every Member of this Council will accept the responsibility that they face on this issue and give me and give my Lead Member and the Officers handling it the support I think they need and deserve. (Applause)

PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com COUNCILLOR HUSSAIN: Will the Executive Member for City Services update Council on measures which were taken to reduce environmental crime during Freshers Week in Leeds this year?

COUNCILLOR SMITH: Freshers Week, I remind you, began on 20th September. There were ten separate initiatives carried out this year which significantly reduced the impact of Freshers Week on the local environment, especially in the reduction of litter.

The activities included staff attending a two-day Freshers Fair and the University's Community Day. Anti- litter and recycling posters were placed on boards in halls of residence and the Leeds Student Newspaper was contacted to include an editorial report about litter. The Student Union hosted out-door road shows which broadcast to the student audience about zero tolerance and the use of é50 fixed penalty notices. Large flyer recycling bins were placed on Woodhouse Lane and other hot-spot areas, and these also carried anti-littering messages.

Council staff patrolled the roads from University to Headingley centre for up to three weeks, beginning in Freshers Week, and lasted until the evening. Enforcement Officers operated during Freshers Week and were on stand-by to receive calls from other Council staff. 87 abatement notices were issued for littering from flyering and four fixed penalty notices issued for flyers found on street furniture.

A dialogue is now under way with clubs and promoters about how flyering can be conducted without causing litter with a view to identifying a code of conduct which is self- regulated by the industry.

Council stickers have been placed over illegal flyposting during Freshers Week and beyond. Information for residents regarding refuse services are due to be posted to properties in the Headingley street scene area and parts of the Woodhouse Ward. This is particularly aimed at new residents in those areas. And finally, additional sweeping of Woodhouse Lane from Hyde Park Corner to the Dry Dock has been carried out.

In summary, ten separate initiatives to tackle environmental crime. This has had a marked effect on the area, and we have had e- mails thanking the Council for the improvements seen in the City during Freshers Week this year. Thank you. (Applause)

COUNCILLOR SHELBROOK: Lord Mayor, will the Executive Member for Leisure tell me how many people have attended free events

PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com organised by the City of Leeds since the new administration took control?

COUNCILLOR ATHA: And could he also add how many were planned by our organisation? (Interruptions) Trying to be helpful, my Lord Mayor.

COUNCILLOR PROCTER: Lord Mayor, I have to tell you of an unpleasant experience I had this morning, I am afraid. It was Councillor Atha on TV this morning.

COUNCILLOR A. CARTER: And he is a very unpleasant experience.

COUNCILLOR PROCTER: Indeed, yes. Thank you for that question, Councillor Shelbrook. I am pleased to be able to announce that a record number of people have attended free events provided by the City since the new administration took control with approximately ---

MEMBER OF COUNCIL: Do you mean that is more than before?

COUNCILLOR PROCTER: Absolutely, with an estimated 315,000 people have attended events to date - to date - with an estimated 150,000 people likely to attend further free events this week alone. (Applause)

COUNCILLOR C. NASH: Lord Mayor, can the Executive Member for City Services update Council on what action is being taken to improve recycling facilities in Leeds?

COUNCILLOR SMITH: The City Council has made significant progress towards driving improvements in recycling, and has again improved the position over the last year. For many years we have operated a green wheeled bin curbside recycling scheme - that is hard to get out in one - in a number of areas, and this was extended to a further 136,000 properties in 2003/4. At the end of this year Leeds will extend the curbside recycling scheme further by introducing a curbside bag recycling scheme to households which are not suitable for wheeled bins. At this point, 95% of households in Leeds will have access to recycling facilities.

Leeds has now redeveloped eight of its eleven household waste sites into household waste sorting sites which encourage householders to recycle material. The first zero waste site - this is a site which accepts only recycled materials - has been opened this year, and it is hoped that more of this type of facility will be available in the future. Householders can now recycle wood, garden waste,

PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com textiles, waste oil, batteries, mobile phones, glass, tyres, ink cartridges and many other items at all the sites.

A number of new schemes have been developed during 2004 which include the introduction of (inaudible) which recycles street (inaudible) and, after treatment, uses the material as fine aggregate in the construction industry; recycling of leaf fall, which is composted; collection of recycling materials from high-rise blocks; the introduction of litter bins which will have one compartment for recyclable street litter and one for non-recyclable street litter; developing a partnership which enables householders to purchase home garden composters at a reduced price, and the employment of Education and Awareness Officers who will work towards encouraging more recycling.

All these developments have enabled Leeds to achieve a recycling rate of 19% by August 2004. I think that is commendable. I heard Ken Livingstone on the radio a few days ago boasting about how London had reached 12%. Leeds is working towards a recycling rate of 22.7% by April 2005 and has to achieve a 30% recycling rate by 2010. We will continue to drive up the recycling rate in the future by developing an innovative recycling contract which will enable the product range to be developed and recycled materials to be processed locally and provide products which can be purchased by householders. Thank you. (Applause)

COUNCILLOR GRUEN: Lord Mayor, will the Executive Member for Corporate Services please tell Council how much money has been spent on refurbishing, building works, redecoration and new furniture for the following offices: the Labour Group office, the Conservative Group office, the Liberal Democrat Group office, Green Group Office and the Leader's Support office?

COUNCILLOR HARRIS: Lord Mayor, I am unable to provide figures with regard to the cost of building works, refurbishment and decoration because those figures are not yet available. As soon as they are, I will advise all Members of Council what those figures are, broken down by individual group office.

I can, however, tell Council what has been spent on furniture and signage, broken down by group office, which is as follows: the Labour Group office, é504; the Conservative Group Office, é2,648; the Liberal Democrat office, é223; the Green Group office, é197, and the Leader's Support Office, nil. (Applause)

COUNCILLOR GRUEN: By way of supplementary, do those figures not illustrate that the hype which the Leader of Council and

PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com Councillor Carter had following the 10th June election by saying people vacating offices is a bare-faced lie, when most of the money was spent on Councillor Carter's personal new office?

COUNCILLOR HARRIS: No. (Laughter)

COUNCILLOR RHODES-CLAYTON: Would the Leader of Council care to comment on the pace of economic development in China following his recent visit to Hanzhou?

COUNCILLOR HARRIS: Yes, Lord Mayor, I am grateful for the opportunity to be able to report back on the recent Leeds Initiative delegation that I led to China.

I ought to say it is a well-known fact that I have visited China many times in the last few years and I have always been consistent in trying to explain the pace and type of change that is taking place there. I am pleased to be able to say it was important on this delegation we had more than the usual suspects coming along, particularly Jean Dent and Ed Anderson, who had never previously been to China. It was important that they were there and they could see things in the context of business and economic development.

There are many things I could mention to Council about the quality and pace of technological and infrastructure development and change in China, but in particular I wanted to tell you about the (?Maglev) which has been built in Shanghai. A Maglev, as the name suggests, is a magnetic levitation monorail train. I won't go into the technicalities because they are beyond my poor little brain, but suffice to say that this is cutting edge public transport technology. A 35 metre track that has been built connecting into the Shanghai existing public transport system, running through what is called the New (?Pudong) administrative area to the new Pudong Airport that has been built say 35 kilometres outside the city centre.

We were fortunate to be able to go on the Maglev, which I understand theoretically has no speed limit. Theoretically it can go up to any speed. I understand it is only air pressure or wind pressure that can limit its speed.

The 35 kilometre trip was covered in 5 minutes. It was only able to get up to a speed of 460 kilometres an hour before it had to start slowing down again. The cost of the return journey was, I believe, something like é7 each.

The point I am making is this: they have planned and built it in three years, and we may say, "Well, that is a Communist command

PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com economy and they can do what they want." I think we are missing the point if we allow ourselves to go down that road. I think the point is this, that having decided what their investment priorities are, and having decided to go ahead with a key piece of public transport infrastructure, they have done it from start to finish in three years.

I ask us all to contrast that with the debacle we are facing over Supertram and, if we want a salutary lesson and a warning about where this country can end up, well, this is it, because if we are not careful, if we continue to prevaricate and not stick with decisions that we make, then we will go down the pan and the Chinese will just leave us for dead. (Applause)

THE LORD MAYOR: Thank you. We are now out of time, so the remainder of the questions will be answered in writing in the usual way.

ITEM 7 - RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE COUNCIL BUSINESS COMMITTEE

COUNCILLOR HARRIS: Agenda item 7 is to approve the recommendations of the Council Business Committee as detailed in the report of the Director of Legal and Democratic Services. I move that, Lord Mayor. COUNCILLOR A. CARTER: Second, my Lord Mayor.

(The motion was carried)

ITEM 8 - MINUTES

COUNCILLOR HARRIS: I move this in the terms set out on the order paper, Lord Mayor.

COUNCILLOR PROCTER: I second, Lord Mayor.

COUNCILLOR ILLINGWORTH: Lord Mayor, I need to declare an interest, the same as Councillor Shelbrook's interest in this item.

THE LORD MAYOR: Thank you.

(a) Executive Board: (i) Central & Corporate

COUNCILLOR WAKEFIELD: Lord Mayor, I wonder if Councillor Harris could bring some slides and photos for the next question he answers, please. It would make it far more interesting.

PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com Can I preface what I am going to say with a comment and a clear statement about our Group's view of senior officers in this authority who we believe have the competence and the ability, and indeed our confidence, to manage this authority in the way that they have always done, and that means in the recruitment, retention, management and indeed the discipline of workers, so this is no reflection on their ability. In fact, I think they have always had, and will have, our 100% support in the way they manage the 33,000 people, employees of this authority.

What I do think, though, is that we should have some very serious concerns about the implication of this White Paper, because it sends two messages out. One, I think it sends a message, a very uncertain message, to our employees about the changing nature of the Personnel Committee, and, second, I think it ends the historical role of Elected Members serving on Personnel, who have served very well this authority and may well have saved us thousands of pounds in ITs. I think it is a significant step and we ought to pause for reflection, to say to people, to say to each other, there is no role for Elected Members in the life and the work of this Council.

Now, last year all party leaders and all parties supported a White Paper to Council expressing concern about the drift, as it was perceived, of delegation to Officers and the reduction of role in the Elected Members, and that was right to do so because I think then - I am looking at Andrew - there was a working party set up to begin to look at ways we could stop the drift and look at the ways we could stop the marginalisation of Elected Members in decision-making.

This year, now, we have an Executive Board paper which ends that on what I believe are fundamentally flawed arguments. The argument for ending the Elected Members is based on the argument that, because we only appoint Directors of Departments, because we don't appoint everybody, there is no role for what is termed in the paper, "operational matters".

Now, first of all, we have never appointed everybody in 33,000 employees, so that is a flawed argument, and second, let me put it to colleagues here, because I am trying to get some pause for reflection in this. The way that we appoint, the way that we recruit, the way that we train, the way that we discipline, this place, which is publicly stated in a number of documents, is a matter of importance in terms of reflecting the corporate values of this Council.

We have said it often before, it has been said recently, the way that we treat and value our employees is a matter that we should

PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com all be concerned with as Elected Members, and I do not take the view that matters of dismissal are something that are just operational, or matters dealing with complex issues, which I will come onto.

Now, I cannot see, and I will be interested to hear the answer, where there has been a problem with Elected Members serving, and I say this to all Members of all parties, serving sometimes two and a half, three days a week, dealing with very complex issues, and because our Members come from a diverse background of communities, I think they actually add to decision-making about complex issues of misconduct, of people who are being dismissed because they are sick or pregnancy or maternity or disability. I think it is right that Elected Members have a role in deciding whether it has been the right decision, and the fact that we have upheld, in the last two years, 50% of decisions can be viewed as saving this authority thousands in industrial tribunals, and I do pay tribute to all Members playing that job, because it is not easy, it is hard work, it is two and a half days, and I think it is a part of our democratic life that we get involved in those decision-makings, that we reflect.

What I would urge colleagues is to just reflect if this is the right direction that people want to go. Is it a place that we want to stop Members taking part in key decisions about employees' future? I personally, and I think my Group, believe this is a retrograde step, and we ought to reflect on it. The alternative, which is set out in the paper, by the way, without any trade union so far being represented on that Panel, I think is fundamentally wrong as well, but what I am here to argue to colleagues today is think about this decision. It is actually marginalising the Elected Members in a key decision and I think it is turning the clock actually back and I actually think we should support Members being back involved on Personnel Panel meetings. Thank you, Lord Mayor. I move the reference back. (Applause)

COUNCILLOR GRUEN: Lord Mayor, I second the reference back and I associate myself with everything that Councillor Wakefield has said in a very measured and I think responsible way.

We actually wanted to refer this resolution to the Scrutiny Board, and it wouldn't have come here today because we think the decision ought to be properly scrutinised, and I think the way out, actually, is perhaps for the Executive Board to accept that this issue ought to go to Scrutiny Board. The trouble, of course, was that the rules, although Councillor Harris promised at the first meeting of the Council Business Committee would be changed, hadn't been changed, so therefore we were stopped by Officers from referring this matter of calling in the decision, which is regrettable.

PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com What is regrettable also is that, as Councillor Wakefield says, a very distinctive tone is now being set by the new administration. We had the debate last time about low pay, and a very robust almost sort of neo-Conservative stance was being taken. I think President Bush would have been proud of you, and today we have heard the deputation on that.

Yesterday, I tell you, at the Whips meeting, one of the Alliance Whips was actually against staff having the opportunity to come here in terms of a deputation and speak to full Council. That is the kind of calibre of thinking now going on within the Alliance, and you will reap a whirlwind here. (Interruption) Well, Councillor Procter, I don't know where you were but I know you have very selective listening qualities.

COUNCILLOR PROCTER: I was chairing the meeting; I don't know where you were.

COUNCILLOR GRUEN: I certainly understood very clearly, and if you want me to name the Whip concerned, I will do so, and she will - she will - understand who she is.

COUNCILLOR PROCTER: She will. (Interruptions)

COUNCILLOR ATHA: Is that Clare? Who are you talking about? Clare? Clare Nash?

COUNCILLOR GRUEN: Indeed, you have guessed it at once. The Greens, the friends of the staff, these people who are close to the ground and who value staff, as Councillor Harris says, "We will consult with staff". Of course, they don't consult with staff. They don't consult with the trade unions and, indeed, Councillor Harris, at the last Council Meeting you made a promise to me - I just hope you are listening because I have got the verbatim report here. When we discussed that issue, you were going to give me some information about the questionnaires which you referred to. Did you forget about that? Did you instruct Officers not to give me the information? Or why haven't I got the information? I am sure you will talk when you ---

COUNCILLOR HARRIS: My Lord Mayor, may I? Just let me deal with that.

THE LORD MAYOR: Is this a point of order?

COUNCILLOR HARRIS: Well, it is helpful.

PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com COUNCILLOR GRUEN: Stop the clock.

COUNCILLOR HARRIS: The answer is, yes, I forgot, and I apologise to you unreservedly. The information will be provided tomorrow morning. Absolutely my error. (Applause)

COUNCILLOR GRUEN: Thank you very much.

THE LORD MAYOR: I have added time on, Councillor Gruen.

COUNCILLOR GRUEN: Thank you very much indeed. An example to set the bruiser who is going to take over fairly shortly. He will never apologise to anybody, so ---

COUNCILLOR J. L. CARTER: He might hit you, so sit down. (Laughter)

COUNCILLOR GRUEN: Reference back on this issue is a important issue, and I know I am winding you up very nicely here, and I very much hope you accept the reference back and, if you don't accept it, we will still scrutinize it.

COUNCILLOR C. NASH: No, I wasn't wanting to comment on the minutes; I was asking if I could make a personal explanation, but I can't because (inaudible).

COUNCILLOR A. CARTER: My Lord Mayor, I welcome Councillor Wakefield's measured comments. He is, of course, wrong because we are not talking about policy issues, the delegation of a whole raft of functions which I have spoken on in this Council over and over again, which I believe have been over-delegated to Officers, and I hope that we will do something about that. What we are talking about here is the carrying out of clear management responsibilities that in any organisation, and any company, outside of this place would be done by senior management, and that is what this administration intend to make sure happens, that management manages, politicians set policy and make sure policy is driven through to a successful conclusion.

My Lord Mayor, this is the second time that Councillor Gruen has spoken on personnel issues, and I contrast him with his Leader. All we get from Councillor Gruen is innuendo, extremely suspect comments about what other people may or may not have said, presumably in private conversations, and I have to say that I question whether -- -

PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com COUNCILLOR ATHA: That is an innuendo. That is accusing him of ---

COUNCILLOR A. CARTER: My Lord Mayor, I question whether, my Lord Mayor, a senior civil servant should indeed be entering into debates of this nature. You know, this is the second time and, as far as I am aware, Councillor Gruen is indeed a senior civil servant, and I do have to question whether it is right and proper that he should be seeking to rabble-rouse in the way that he is and did, in fact, at the last Council Meeting ---

COUNCILLOR ATHA: Well, you are the rabble he is trying to rouse.

COUNCILLOR A. CARTER: -- and I think maybe, my Lord Mayor, it is time we made some enquiries about that. But I tell you what I will repeat very clearly, and I am sure that all colleagues in the administration agree, it is the job of politicians to set policy and drive that policy through. It is the job of Officers to manage, and that includes personnel management.

Why is it, my Lord Mayor, why is it that this Council is almost unique, not entirely unique but almost unique, among local authorities in having had a Personnel Panel at which Members get involved at what is a relatively low level? Why is it that everybody else then is wrong and the previous administration was right? It is a question that they cannot - cannot - answer.

My Lord Mayor, what is being proposed is right, it is proper, it is sensible, it is fair, it is modern management. (Applause)

COUNCILLOR HARRIS: Lord Mayor, let me deal with Councillor Gruen first. Well, I have said all I am going to say to him, because the rest of it isn't worth commenting on, and I will deal with what Keith Wakefield had to say, which at least was a reasoned argument and suggested that there were signs of life in his head, as opposed to Councillor Gruen.

Now, Keith put forward a series of points which are worthy of debate. The first was that this sent out a message of uncertainty to our employees. On the contrary, this sends out a message of absolute clarity and certainty to our employees. It is the point that Andrew Carter has made, which is managers, highly-paid managers, should be left to discharge the function of management and we should be left to discharge the function of politicians, and that is the first thing. So the argument that our employees are being given an uncertain message is completely without foundation.

PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com Secondly, that we are dismantling the historic role performed by Councillors. I don't remember because I think it was before I was born, but I will bet my bottom dollar Councillors of the predecessor of this authority served on some sort of public bath-house authority. Well, should we somehow reinstigate that because of tradition and historical emotiveness, and we should allow Councillors to carry on discharging a function because it is historic and traditional? Well, that really is a backward, prehistoric approach to management and the way in which this Council should fulfill its functions. We should never, ever, ever, in my opinion, take or follow a course of action that interferes with good officer management simply because we wish to maintain a tradition for us, the good old Elected Members, and that is another clear and certain message, under this administration that sort of behaviour has gone. We are not going down that road. You might have liked it. We don't. Managers are paid to manage. We will allow the to manage.

Councillor Wakefield began by saying that by having the Appeals Panel that was not, in some way, a - he didn't say a slur but a lack of confidence in senior managers. Well, I am bound to ask the question, if it is not a lack of confidence in senior managers, why don't we let them discharge the function? If we won't let them discharge the function, the implication must be that it is a lack of confidence in their managerial ability, and that sends a disastrous message of uncertainty to our employees, and we won't go down that road either.

But finally I want to address myself to legislation and, although it is not absolute, it is quite clear that the legislation imposed upon us, the spirit of the legislation, makes it absolutely clear that there is no role or function for Elected Members in the issue of personnel. The 2001 Regulations introduced by a Labour Government, which are included in our Standing Orders, we are required by law, say the function of appointment and dismissal of, and taking disciplinary action against, a member of staff of the authority must be discharged on behalf of the authority by the head of the authority's paid service, in the case of Leeds the Chief Executive, or by an officer nominated by him. That is what the law says and, in the spirit of the law, what possible grounds can there be for Elected Members sitting on a panel which in effect can employ somebody if they decide to overturn a ruling of dismissal to bring that person back into the employ of the Council? It is contradictory, it is anachronistic, it is backward, and it is the thought process of a set of dinosaurs, and we are not having it. (Applause)

COUNCILLOR GRUEN: I move a recorded vote.

PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com THE LORD MAYOR: Do you have a seconder? You have asked for a recorded vote. Thank you, Councillor Taggart. Could I remind Members to please sit in their allotted seat. Councillor Nash, are you sat in your correct seat? Is that your normal seat? Is it?

COUNCILLOR C. NASH: I think not, actually.

THE LORD MAYOR: So this is now the vote for the reference back.

THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE (Mr. P. Rogerson): Thank you, Lord Mayor. For information, Members should be aware that up to the moment that completion of the vote is announced, which I will do, any Member may change their vote. It is the final press of the button that is recorded. Just for clarification.

COUNCILLOR TAGGART: You are not in California now.

THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE: Right, would all Members please refer to their desk units. Those Members in favour of the amendment in the name of (Interruptions) I get the impression these instructions are somewhat redundant. Would all Members please press the button marked "P" in order to activate the unit. Those Members now in favour of the amendment in the name of Councillor Wakefield should please press the "+" button. Those Members against the motion should please press the "-" button, and any Member wishing to abstain and have that abstention recorded should please press the "0" button. Voting is now completed.

COUNCILLOR A. CARTER: It is like Ohio all over again!

THE LORD MAYOR: There are 94 Members present. Those in favour of the reference back, 44; abstentions were nil; those against the reference back 50, therefore it is lost. Thank you. If we can now continue, please with Councillor Taggart.

COUNCILLOR TAGGART: Lord Mayor, I rise to speak on page 48, Minute 91(b). Can you hear me? Yes, good, excellent. I am also going to make reference to Minute 26 on page 197. It is part of the same discussion.

In fact, the minute on page 197 isn't strictly speaking correct - I know we have already approved it. My recollection of the meeting is that we had at the very beginning a discussion about the Parliamentary Boundary Proposals for West Yorkshire which had only been published that morning and, of course, at that time no political party had had an opportunity to have a thorough look at them. I did ask at the very end of the formal business we have an informal

PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com discussion between the party representatives present to see if we could head in any way towards some kind of consensus, not least on the number of Parliamentary seats that Leeds would have, because, of course, the bad news for Leeds is that we currently have eight MPs and the recommendation is that we go down to seven, despite the fact, if you read the report, the arithmetical entitlement for Leeds on its own is 7.70 and, on our idea, that means you round up to eight, because that's what we were taught at school, wasn't it, Tom?

Andrew Carter in particular objected to that approach because he hadn't had an opportunity to look at the proposals, and that is no criticism at all of Andrew. What the meeting didn't agree was we would have a Special Council Meeting, although there was some discussion about whether there would be one. What we did agree, and this was Andrew's suggestion, was that there would be a meeting of Party Whips or party representatives within a week or so to have a discussion about this, to see if we could get anywhere with it. Sadly, for whatever reason, that meeting has never taken place, and consequently at Executive Board when it met it merely, under 91(b) on page 48, went along with the recommendation to reduce the number of MPs in West Yorkshire.

Now, when we dealt with the Ward Boundary Review, despite the fact there are one or two sore heads in this chamber who think it was in some way fixed or improperly arranged by the Labour Party, which is absolute rubbish, of course, there was actually at that time a good level of working between the different political parties. I mean, there was a good level of work between the different political parties, Councillor Jennings, Councillor Fox, etc. We made some changes. I mean, Andrew Carter and I, even at the last moment, had a meeting about the particular ward boundary in Rodley to try and persuade the Boundary Committee of England of the error of it ways, and we were successful, even though that was at the eleventh hour.

We changed the Wortley Ward name at the suggestion of the Greens and, because we wanted to get consensus, that's where the Farnley & Wortley Ward name came from, so we have got a good record of attempting to work together. Even the Liberal Democrat proposals were 70% in agreement with what the Labour Group was proposing, and we agreed with the Tories about the boundary in Rawdon, for example. We had this huge row about Belmont Grove, do you remember, Graeme? And I agreed with Graeme on this. In the end, we lost on that one, but we are used to working cross party on this issue.

Now, Leeds is a huge, growing, important, successful city. When I was Lord Mayor last year I went to London to pick up the UK Favourite City Award. It was a great, great honour for the City to

PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com get that. We are clearly the capital of the North. If you read the Yorkshire Post recently there are some local authorities in Yorkshire who just don't like Leeds being the success that it is. 7.70 should be rounded up to 8. Leeds is being punished, really, because of the lack of electors in Wakefield.

Now, if we have a 22 seat scheme - the Labour Group's view is the same as that of the Executive Board, by the way - if it is 22, those will be the boundaries. We don't really like them but we will go along with them because they are the best boundaries you could get in the circumstances, but there is a case for 23. The report gives an entitlement to West Yorkshire of 22.4959 parliamentary seats. Very interesting. If you read the other reports around the country, they don't go to four decimal points. They go into four decimal points because they realise what a fine balance it is.

What the Boundary Commission have then done is look at the actual registered electorate for the year 2004. I don't blame them for doing that, but that now shows a reduction, although in our view that is because of under-representation, not a drop in electorates, and certainly not in Leeds in real terms. Our contention is that if the Boundary Commission had looked at other data that is available, for example the 2006 projected electorates which were not invented by politicians at all, they come from the Office of National Statistics in London and were allocated to each local authority, if you make that comparison the West Yorkshire electorate will go up by 1.5% by the year 2006. These new boundaries, of course, will come into effect in the General Election of 2009, 10 or 11, years away from the 2000 start date that the legislation requires, so that is the case.

What to do if you end up with 23 MPs, you get 8 in Leeds. You can do something about this outrageous Leeds Central proposal which would be almost 82,000 electors by the year 2006. Just think of the huge growth of electorate in the city centre. You can do something about the very unpopular Morley and Outwood seat, very unpopular in Wakefield. You only have to see the Wakefield Express and it leader columns, letter columns, very unpopular. Did you realise that constituency will go all the way to Pinderfields Hospital? Can you imagine how people in Wakefield, who are worried about being swallowed up --- We should be able to say to them, "We don't want to be with you either." Leeds has enough electorate to have eight MPs.

So that is basically the Labour Party submission. I am happy to share it with any Member of any party here today. No problem at all with that, but I think ---

PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com THE LORD MAYOR: The red light is on, Councillor Taggart.

COUNCILLOR TAGGART: The time is up, but I think we have made our point. It was a missed opportunity, and it is a pity we couldn't work in partnership the way we did previously. Thank you very much. (Applause)

COUNCILLOR J. HARPER: My Lord Mayor, page 37, Minute 60 on the Joint Services Centre. First of all, my Lord Mayor, may I apologise for raising this matter at Council today, but I must report to Council that an unfortunate incident happened this morning in Armley which upset my constituents in ---

COUNCILLOR HARRIS: Lord Mayor, which minute? I apologise. Which minute?

THE LORD MAYOR: It is page 37, Minute 60.

COUNCILLOR J. HARPER: -- which upset my constituents in Armley. It should have been a happy occasion, my Lord Mayor, a celebration. It was the first birthday of Armley One-Stop Centre, and we had a lovely birthday cake prepared. Unfortunately, a number of things went wrong. Firstly, Councillor Greg Mulholland arrived late

MEMBER OF COUNCIL: Unfortunate.

COUNCILLOR J. HARPER: It is unfortunate, and kept the people of Armley and Officers waiting, and I feel that was an insult to my constituents.

When I approached him and suggested that it would be more appropriate if an 88 year old resident, a lady born and bred in Armley, should be invited to cut the cake, he was really quite curt, he refused to allow her to cut it on her own. In fact, he walked away from me. He walked away from me and he insisted on cutting the cake with her. That is not really a marriage of equals, my Lord Mayor, because clearly that lady from Armley was a far better person than he is.

Actually, though, it did make it very clear to us that Councillor Mulholland was not there to celebrate with the people of Armley, he was there for his own egotistical and political purposes.

THE LORD MAYOR: Excuse me, Councillor Harper. You are supposed to be speaking to Minute 60. I am not too sure, I can't work this out, how does this refer to Minute 60?

PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com COUNCILLOR J. HARPER: I am going to ask the Leader of Council at the end --- I very rarely speak, my Lord Mayor. I do feel rather concerned. I do feel concerned about this incident and it was the only chance I had to raise it. As you know, I very rarely do speak, I would ask for your tolerance, please, my Lord Mayor.

THE LORD MAYOR: Will you kindly stick to the minute, please, Councillor Harper. Thank you.

COUNCILLOR J. HARPER: I am sorry, my Lord Mayor, I can't hear for all that is going on.

I would like really to say that, to add insult to injury, the local Ward Councillors were not invited to this event.

THE LORD MAYOR: I am sorry, Councillor Harper. This is not speaking to item 60. I am sorry, I can't allow this.

COUNCILLOR J. HARPER: I believe that ---

THE LORD MAYOR: Please sit down. Thank you.

COUNCILLOR J. HARPER: I believe that the Leader of Council should ask Councillor Mulholland to apologise to the people of Armley.

THE LORD MAYOR: No, I am sorry, Councillor Mulholland, you cannot give a personal explanation. You have not spoken on the item yet. Sorry. You can speak to the item, but you can't give a personal explanation. (Interruptions)

COUNCILLOR GRUEN: Lord Mayor, I am going to speak to the minute. It is Minute 61, Council Constitution, page 37, and it refers back to the events leading up to the AGM on June 28th. There was a lot about integrity and trust and proportionality of allocations between the various parties, and what I am going to say now goes to the heart of this issue of integrity because I have in front of me a schedule of conferences approved or disapproved by Councillor Harris and Councillor Carter, and it is very interesting that since June Councillor Morton has gone on six conferences by himself, clearly illustrating his intellectual ability away from the Civic Hall.

We have had all sorts of alternative models for children's trusts for Councillor Jennings. Well, clearly he can speak elsewhere. (Interruption) Written it down first, yes. We have had UK Mayors of Peacemaking by Councillor Nash. We have had Councillor Brett's smoke-free Liverpool. These are very important portfolio responsibilities, I can tell immediately, and yet when there

PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com are two Labour nominees for conferences, one perfectly legitimate from a new Councillor, Councillor Mulherrin, I am told that they were refused by the doppel-gangers here, and we no longer have a new Councillor encouraged to go on a conference. Eventually, when I pleaded, as I do on behalf of my colleagues, with the Chief Whip he said he would sign it and sign it in such good haste that by the time she could apply the conference was full. Well, thank you very much for that benevolence. And then you have Councillor Armitage also refused to go on a quite legitimate conference. So no single refusal for any of the Alliance conferences, and you can see how important these have been: Councillor D. Blackburn, climate change. Very important to his portfolio, I am sure, you know, and I can go on and make various other comments, but the comment stands. You are charged with applying fairly, fairly and equitably, what conferences Members can and cannot go on, and you cannot, simply for political spite, turn down conference requests from colleagues from the largest group on Council.

COUNCILLOR A. CARTER: My Lord Mayor, on the same minute, as Councillor Gruen has seen fit to raise the issue of conferences, it is a great pity that the Chief Whip of the Labour Group does not confer with his own Leader or his own senior Members. I have received no less than four cases of special pleading from Members opposite, asking to go to conferences, all of which I agreed, after initially refusing.

It is the view of this administration that we should be reducing attendance at conferences across the piece, that is across the piece, that is for all Members of Council, but going to those conferences where there is a clear need that we should attend (Interruptions) Hang, on. Hang on, you have had your say, Councillor Gruen. As in the past, the controlling group of Council, and they had 24 years experience of this, my Lord Mayor, you know, and if Councillor Gruen really wants to go into it, let's get really into it, because over and over again they were off to conferences.

Right, in recent years, under Councillor Walker and then Councillor Wakefield, and you will find now us, that there will be a level of control about precisely who goes where, but I take a very dim view of the disconnection that clearly exists within the Opposition that they can't get their act together sufficiently for the Chief Whip to know, and I am not going to embarrass your colleagues, but they all know who I am referring to, and three of them are sitting on the front bench, came to me saying, "You have turned this down. Please will you reconsider. I would really like to go", and on all the occasions they did, I then went back on my original decision, which was to say, "No".

PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com Councillor Gruen, if you want this level of debate, then you can have it, but I'll tell you what, you won't win it. (Applause)

COUNCILLOR GOLTON: Lord Mayor, on the same subject, Councillor Gruen bringing this up, it jogged my memory, Lord Mayor.

COUNCILLOR ATHA: Which minute? (Interruptions)

MEMBERS OF COUNCIL: The same one, Bernard.

COUNCILLOR ATHA: Could you tell us which minute, Lord Mayor?

THE LORD MAYOR: Well, I think it might be 37, 61. That's what it has been for the last two or three ---

COUNCILLOR GOLTON: About this year's LGA conference, Lord Mayor, because I actually applied to go as a Member of the Opposition, and I got in touch with Member Services and they were very helpful, and then I got some notification I had actually got some -- they had actually booked me some accommodation, which I didn't realise they actually did, and obviously thank you very much to them and it was very comfortable, thank you very much. But there was an apology that, "We have only managed to get you in the Wessex, Councillor Golton", and I thought, "Suits me", because usually it is é35 a night somewhere a little bit further out of town, so it is quite posh as far as I am concerned, and I didn't realise what they actually meant, Lord Mayor, until I actually got to LGA Conference and met up with the new representatives for Leeds administration, who were turning up to the LGA Conference and meeting me in a particularly embarrassed state because they were staying in the accommodation that had been booked for the previous administration, which turned out to be the most expensive in the city, Lord Mayor.

So I don't think this side has any apologies to make on the issue of conferences, because we aim to make sure that if you do go to conference it is a value for money decision for the City, rather than a nice weekend away for the attendee. (Applause)

THE LORD MAYOR: Councillor Pryke wanted to speak on page 37, Minute 60.

COUNCILLOR PRYKE: Thank you, Lord Mayor. It is a combination of page 37, Minute 60 and also, you should have a note of this, page 36, number 57. It is with reference to the two centres that will be going up on the site of the Compton Arms.

PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com As a local Ward Member, I very much welcome the injection of the é15.7 million PFI credits in the three centres, particularly the Compton Arms site, which has been an absolute eyesore for far too long, together with the Children's Centre next door, which is Minute 57.

On Compton Road, the previous administration took a very long time to do very, very little on that. I was interested to read of former Cabinet Minister Stephen Byers' speech last night when he said the Government must end the contracting out culture in public services. (Interruptions)

THE LORD MAYOR: Councillor Pryke, we seem to be misleading everybody here.

COUNCILLOR PRYKE: I am on Minute 60.

THE LORD MAYOR: What minute are you speaking to, please?

COUNCILLOR PRYKE: Number 60.

THE LORD MAYOR: On page 37?

COUNCILLOR PRYKE: Yes, the one you invited me to speak on.

THE LORD MAYOR: If you, please, just stick to that minute.

COUNCILLOR PRYKE: Yes, certainly. On the PFI credits, contracting out culture ---

COUNCILLOR MINKIN: Can I talk to another minute?

COUNCILLOR ATHA: Lord Mayor, on a point of order --- (Interruptions) The order of business, on a point of order, requires (Interruptions) The order of business established by the Council, Lord Mayor ---

THE LORD MAYOR: Please continue, Councillor Pryke.

COUNCILLOR PRYKE: The former Cabinet Minister claims that the current approach on PFI and contracting out had seen Ministers washing their hands of responsibility for the roles of the state, that includes the Council, and the market in the provision of public services. Now, I am fairly sure that this administration won't shy away from that debate. To stop avoiding its responsibilities, Mr. Byers told the Labour Party to grow up and be honest, so I was also pleased as a Harehills resident to receive a copy of the Labour Party

PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com Rose in which Councillor Harington admits, on the Labour Party's behalf, that you made mistakes and he wants you to analyse your record. Well, the voters managed that before June 10th.

Now, as a helpful suggestion, perhaps it is time for Labour to say, "Sorry" to the people of Leeds. Now, we know your beloved Leader can't bring himself to say that little word. We also know that it is impossible ---

MEMBER OF COUNCIL: What has he got to say "sorry" for?

COUNCILLOR PRYKE: Everything. We also know it is impossible for you to be sorry for something you meant to do all along. Now, that is your quandary, that you have been judged by the people of Leeds already. You should say, "Sorry". (Applause)

COUNCILLOR MULHOLLAND: I am going to comment on the same minute that Councillor Harper spoke on. I am going to say I am afraid I think that we have reached a new low in this Council Chamber. I was appalled at what happened this morning, and I was, and still am, going to write to the Leader of the Labour Group to say what happened this morning was entirely unacceptable.

First of all, I was less than five minutes late for the meeting, because I had been at a meeting in my own ward. Secondly, I was warmly greeted by staff and members of the public there and was going to go to the birthday party celebrations when Councillor Harper approached me and said to me, "What are you doing here? You have got no right to be here." (Interruptions)

Now, let me make it clear, in case Councillor Harper has forgotten, we are the administration. I am one of the two Lead Members for Corporate Services, including Customer Services. I was there representing the Council, which has nothing to do with party politics in the same way as being a ward representative. There is also a protocol involving Ward Members and how they are informed of such matters, which is nothing to do with me.

As it happens, although I could tell this was, frankly, just bad blood on behalf of Councillor Harper, I was actually delighted to accept the suggestion that the cutting of the cake should take place with this elderly resident who is 88 on Saturday. I was delighted. That was an excellent suggestion and one I was quite happy to do, so we did do that.

I also did not mind, did not object whatsoever, to Councillor Harper being in the photograph as well. (Interruptions) Now,

PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com something else I did, and was quite happy to do because I was there representing the Council, I praised in my little speech all the people who have campaigned to get the One-Stop Centre, including the Ward Councillors, and I have no problem doing that because, if we all work hard as Ward Councillors, basically it means the people of Leeds have more faith in every single one of their local representatives, and again every credit to everyone who was involved in that.

Frankly, the Officers were downright embarrassed about this extraordinary performance from Councillor Harper, and they apologised to me. I and my colleagues have had no problem in the past standing alongside Labour Executive Board Members as ward colleagues when you launched initiatives, and equally that should be the case. Sometimes, representing the Council, it is not party political.

But I will leave you with this. I had a tour of the One- Stop Centre, and actually here is an opportunity to say how wonderful it is, and I praised the staff involved. It is a credit to the people of Leeds, and we need more One-Stop Centres in Leeds. So I had a tour. I went round. I chatted to local residents and to staff, and I got their views and I said I would take that message back to the Council and to the Executive Board, and I have now had this opportunity to do so.

After the photograph, however - immediately after - when I stayed for a cup of tea and a piece of that cake, Councillor Harper immediately left. As soon as the flashes had stopped clicking, so I will let you make your own mind up, but that was a disgrace, an absolute disgrace, and I hope you think about your behaviour in the future. (Applause)

COUNCILLOR J. HARPER: My Lord Mayor, on a personal explanation, I think it is unfair that I was not allowed to speak. (Interruptions)

THE LORD MAYOR: Members of Council, Councillor Harper is quite in order.

COUNCILLOR J. HARPER: I was not allowed to make my statement. Lies are being told about me here. I certainly did not say what Councillor Greg Mulholland has said I said. It was him who walked away from me and who was very rude. Clearly, he was late, it was an insult to the people of Armley, added to which I had to leave. If he had been on time, I may have had more time to escort him and treat him civilly. As it was, he treated me extremely uncivilly.

PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com COUNCILLOR MULHOLLAND: Because you were rude and silly, and you are being rude and silly now.

COUNCILLOR J. HARPER: He treated the people of Armley uncivilly by being late and by not allowing this lady to do what I asked her to do. She was a lovely lady, and I just feel that it was an insult to us, it was an insult to myself, and I reject what he has said here today. Thank you, my Lord Mayor.

COUNCILLOR HARRIS: That was particularly - the whole thing was - unsavoury, frankly, and we often, sadly, in this place have a go at each other, but I have to say I can't remember an occasion when anybody in this place has ever, without notice, raised an issue under the minutes which not only had nothing to do with the minute - usually we attempt to raise things under the minutes to make some sort of obtuse political point - but I can never remember a situation where, without notice, a minute has been used for no other purpose than vitriolic personal character assassination, and it is particularly unfortunate, as far as I know, if these situations arise, the whips are spoken to, the party leaders are spoken to. If you had such an issue, you can come to me and raise it with me and it is my responsibility or it is Martin Hamilton's responsibility. Even if you feel so strongly, you can ask our Standards Committee, but to raise it in that way here was (Interruptions) All I would say to you is this, in 20 years of opposition at least I learned how to behave as an Opposition Member. (Interruptions) At least when we unfortunately get personal, usually somewhere in the issue is a debate about a decision of Council, a matter in hand, a policy of the Council, not what we just heard and, you know, this is just a little bit of helping hand or you. If that is how you are going to behave in opposition, definitely that's where you will stay.

Now, Councillor Gruen on conferences. One thing you don't know is how many of our Members have said they want to go on things and we haven't even got as far as the application form. We have said, "No." You just do not know how many of those instances there are, and Andrew explained, and it is quite right, and it doesn't just apply to conferences, it applies to overseas trips, it applies to the cost of those trips, the length of those trips, all those things, who goes on those trips. We are doing our absolute level best to reduce all of that, and as concerns what was the protocol on Members going to conferences and that approved list, I will be corrected if I am wrong but it is my understanding officers are reviewing the entire thing for us and it will come forward as a report in due course. But, yes, it is quite right, we are trying to get the marker down that the way things were are not going to be the way things are now, and we are going to be rigorous about it.

PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com Finally, Councillor Taggart. Well, I am grateful that he shared with us the views of the Labour Group. When it was raised at Exec. Board I did make the point that individuals as well as groups are entitled to make separate submissions, but we felt in this instance on the Parliamentary Boundary Review there was no case for a Council-wide submission.

I would just close, however, with this thought, and I have to say that personally I would prefer Leeds to return eight MPs but, if it is seven, let's hope they do a better job than the current eight gnomes we have had. (Applause)

THE LORD MAYOR: Thank you. We seem to be progressing rather slowly this afternoon, so we are only on Executive Board (ii) Development.

(ii) Development

COUNCILLOR FINNIGAN: Lord Mayor, I am wishing to comment on page 38, Minute 64, which is the South Leeds Stadium link road.

We are inevitably going to inject a touch of scepticism into things at this particular point. People will be well aware that from Morley we are fairly sceptical about Supertram. People will know that we are fairly sceptical about Millennium Square. At this particular point, we are fairly sceptical about the Diving & Swimming Centre, and the concerns that we actually have relate to the fact that at this particular point we don't know, from the answer that we have had earlier on this afternoon, the cost of this actual swimming centre, and while there are a lot of communities, Morley being one of them, waiting patiently to see about a refurbishment of their own swimming pools, we have great concerns that we are putting é1 million down for this particular link road to try and enhance the opportunities for this flagship project.

We don't know how much it is going to cost us. We are in a situation where we are not sure whether we are going to have to take that money from elsewhere, and we just think that perhaps this is an opportunity to reflect a little deeply about whether we are doing the right thing at this particular point, whether we ought to be focusing more on flagship or we ought to be focusing more on doing more in the outer areas with the money that we could save from sinking that flagship.

COUNCILLOR McKENNA: My Lord Mayor, I rise to speak on Minute 41, the Executive Board Meeting of 6th September and, as you will

PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com notice, Lord Mayor, Councillor Blackburn and Jennings declared the appropriate interest, prejudicial interest, as Members of the Planning Board, and left that meeting.

The minute also states that Councillor Morton and John Procter absented themselves from that meeting because of a similar interest.

Now, I think what Councillor Blackburn and Jennings and Councillor John Procter and Councillor Morton did was appropriate. They had an interest as Members of Planning and they should leave that meeting. I think the Planning procedure, Lord Mayor, has to be seen to be above any interference or any --- It has to be right, hasn't it? We can't give the impression that when you go into a Planning meeting it is a done deal, and it is all over with and people have made up their mind, and it was quite appropriate that they did leave that meeting. I say that straight away.

But looking at the recommendation a bit further down, Lord Mayor, I notice that one of the recommendations was that there would be a subsequent meeting of the Executive Board for Officers to respond to comments made from Councillors at that meeting, i.e. Members of the Executive Board had the opportunity to comment, make suggestions, and the Officers come back and respond to it.

It does worry me a little bit, Lord Mayor, that four of the Members of the Executive Board have opted out of the duty they have as Executive Board Members to improve or perhaps add value to an Officer report because they had other considerations, which I don't personally think they should have taken up. My own feeling, Lord Mayor, is that it is inappropriate to be a member of the Executive Board and also a member of the Planning Panels.

Looking at some of the attendance, and it is not a criticism, I notice that the attendance from some of these Members is not great because they have many, many responsibilities and I understand why it might draw them away from the Planning committees. I notice that it has improved slightly as Councillor Morton is now no longer an Exec. Board Member, but I guess he will still remain on a Planning Panel. I wish him well, and according to Mark he has moved on to greater and finer political roles. I await to see what those are.

But, having said that, Lord Mayor, there is another issue that draws concern from me. These issues are also discussed at Cabinet and, as you know, Cabinet do not produce any minutes, and it is in fact chaired by Councillor David Blackburn, and I think it would be very unusual, Lord Mayor, that something as important as Trinity

PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com Quarter, Casino for Elland Road, Renaissance Leeds, and other major developments, might also be discussed in it, and the public and Members of the Council have therefore no way whatsoever of knowing if the appropriate declarations have been made by the Chair and other Members of the Executive Board sitting as Members of the Cabinet, and indeed if they left the room when it happened, and that causes me concern, and I think the people in this City of ours need to have total confidence that the Planning procedure is above reproach, and I think the fact that this duplicity exists leaves that lingering doubt, and I certainly look forward to Andrew's reply on this. Thank you, Lord Mayor.

Can I continue on my next point? Sorry, I forgot I had two. Lord Mayor, you will recall that there was a deputation of Twilight Twirlers who strut their stuff and practise in the Wyther Community Centre. For those who don't know, they have been the British Champions on two occasions, the European Champions once, and --- Sorry?

COUNCILLOR HARRAND: Demonstrate.

COUNCILLOR McKENNA: I wish I could. I don't have the talent, Peter. I wish I could. I am the one with two left feet. Okay, if I can continue, Lord Mayor?

THE LORD MAYOR: You are very close.

COUNCILLOR McKENNA: I will be very close. Well, promises were made, Lord Mayor, and I do genuinely want an answer to this, so I will be quick and I know my colleagues will be talking. Promises were made that attempts would be made to find them an alternative venue. Looking around at nearby venues, I have to say that the leisure centre is nearly fully booked up. They practise four nights a week, Lord Mayor. They need to practise four nights a week if they become British champions and reach the standard.

THE LORD MAYOR: I am sorry, Councillor McKenna, you are going to have to leave this up to your colleagues, I think.

COUNCILLOR McKENNA: Okay. If I had got two separate questions, Lord Mayor, I would have had a little bit more time, wouldn't I? So I think I should have a little bit more time.

THE LORD MAYOR: No, I'm sorry. So you will have to leave this to your colleagues. Thank you, Councillor McKenna.

PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com COUNCILLOR McKENNA: I just say it is a very much deprived area. There is only 80 families that live in it and 30 of the girls come from that. They are the social glue that holds this community together. Thank you, Lord Mayor.

THE LORD MAYOR: Councillor Gruen, can you keep your Members, please, under control?

COUNCILLOR LOWE: Yes, I will continue in Jim's footsteps, still speaking on page 46, Minute 83 vis-a-vis the closure - proposed closure - of Wyther Community Centre. Clearly, there has been some discussions about the matter with ward colleagues and, while we are not particularly happy about the way that things have happened, we do understand the needs of the City Council as a whole, and we understand the needs of the Council to get best value from its resources, and we are not particularly questioning the decision to close Wyther Community Centre.

What we are questioning is what consultation is going on with the users of the Centre, the Twilight Twirlers who, Jim has already told you, are a fantastic band of young women who win everything that is going. As soon as there is a competition, we know they are going to win it, and indeed they do win it. They have been a real credit to their community. They come from a very deprived area of the Wyther. Many young people, and particularly girls, are now involved in anti-social behaviour in parts of Armley, in deprived parts of Armley, and I am happy to say that those girls are not involved in anti-social behaviour, or any criminal activity whatsoever, because they have got the lifeline of the Twilight Twirlers.

Clearly, there is a debate about whether or not the Twilight Twirlers can take over management of the Centre, and I am disturbed that the minute doesn't actually make any reference to that discussion. The Twilight Twirlers left that meeting with the clear understanding that the decision was going to be deferred whilst they got together a business plan so that they could undertake management of the Centre themselves. Whether that is feasible or not is a different issue; they were actually led to believe that that was going to be incorporated into the minutes. That is not reflected, and so I have concerns that they have been misled, they have gone off to do quite a lot of work and it is all going to be a waste of time.

So I ask that Council properly takes account of the needs of this very special group of girls doing some wonderful work. They are saving us a fortune in terms of youth work that doesn't need to happen in that area with those young girls. They are not adding to the teenage pregnancy rate, you know, the criminal activity rate, all the

PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com rest of it. They are doing a sterling job. Let's support them by giving them 110% of our support in terms of resources, consultation and help that we can. (Applause)

COUNCILLOR J. HARPER: My Lord Mayor, very briefly, because obviously I want to support everything that has been said by my ward colleagues, I would like really to know when a decision is going to be taken and given to these 30 young people, who are doing such a splendid job in a very deprived inner city ward.

I was there when we had a discussion with them, and these girl were in tears. It was heart-rending to be there. I know my ward colleagues, we found it very, very emotional. These girls want an answer, they want it soon. They are doing a wonderful job. They are winning everything that they take part in, and we are so proud of them, but we do need a decision, my Lord Mayor. We need it soon, and we need it so that these young people can get on with their lives, and get on winning all these trophies and doing some grand work. Thank you, my Lord Mayor.

THE LORD MAYOR: Can we just stick to one meeting, please?

COUNCILLOR D. BLACKBURN: My Lord Mayor, I refer to page 41, Minute 73. I refer to Councillor McKenna's comments regarding the declaration of interest. The reason the Members of Cabinet came out of there and gave a prejudicial interest was not to do with that they are present Members of the Planning Committee but has to do with that both these applications came before Planning last year, when we all were Members of the Planning Committee, and clearly the amount of court action and judicial process that has gone on between the two applicants for the area, it was felt that it would be better that we did not take part in that, in case something we had said previously last year at Planning might be seen as being prejudicial.

With reference to Cabinet meetings, I can assure you, as Chair of Cabinet, when these issues were raised I checked with our legal people to make sure everything was done correctly as it should be. Thank you, Lord Mayor.

COUNCILLOR A. CARTER: My Lord Mayor, I will deal first of all with Councillor Finnigan, if I may. Councillor Finnigan, I share your views entirely. If the South Leeds Stadium project is a flagship, it is the Titanic.

My Lord Mayor, you are absolutely right in saying that what the Council has been doing for some considerable time is throwing money at something, a problem, it created itself in the first place,

PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com and pile more and more resources into that area of South Leeds until they can stand up and say, "Look how wonderful this is." Now, the fact that they are busy wanting to close things to make that happen and take resources from other areas, this lot never own up to.

I regret to say this is one of a whole string of issues that we are having to grapple with, and that they have damn well made sure are so far committed before they were thrown from office that if we try and stop them it will cost us a lot more, so if we could pull the plug we would pull the plug, but we can't pull the plug, it will have to go ahead. But I promise you one thing: there is going to be an inquiry that will make the Landmark Leeds inquiry pale into insignificance when the true story of the sheer incompetence of the way the political decision-making process has been handled over the past number of years by this gang, and the amount of money it has cost this City, or rather the residents of Morley, Pudsey, Rothwell, Roundhay, you name it, and what could that money have bought? (Interruption) Moortown, I am very sorry. So, you know, don't think this lot are going to be allowed off the hook, because they are not. Right. Wyther. Wyther. I am going to address my comments initially to Councillor Lowe, because I thought her comments were extremely helpful and I take them on board. I have to say that I wonder how closely the Ward Councillors are working with the Twilight Twirlers, or they would have known that actually they came in for a cup of tea and a biscuit with me last week and a chat about how we can move this forward.

It was made entirely clear to them that they will not - underline not - be thrown out of the Wyther Community Centre. Bernard, actually, although I guess you can do a better twirl than me, I actually know a lot more about the Twilight Twirlers than you do, and possibly the Ward Councillors, because every year they come along to Farsley Christmas Lights, take part in the parade. I am well aware of the championships they have won. I am equally well aware of the excellent work they do in a very difficult area of the City.

What I have put to them is as discussed at the Executive Board, that it really is not possible, in the long term, for us to continue with a centre with one user that has a é70,000 backlog of capital maintenance and a running cost of é37,000 a year. Now, we have to balance the fact that the City quite obviously, and Councillor Lowe has accepted that, the need to rationalise these facilities, but what I have assured them is, we will do everything possible to make sure either that we can help them put together some sort of organisation where they will run it, and I have explained to them that that may be not possible but we will try, and our Officers will work

PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com with them. The other alternative we have given them is that we will look for alternative, suitable accommodation nearby, and that is also difficult because, if you can imagine, they need a certain height to the building because of the batons that they twirl. They can't go into any old room and throw these things about.

They went away greatly reassured. They realise it is going to take a little time for them to think about what they may be able to handle themselves, and what we may be able to find as a replacement, but we are working extremely hard to make sure that their future is guaranteed and they understand - extremely sensible young girls. I have to say they weren't in tears when they came to see me, Councillor Harper. I just wonder, you know. We realise the seriousness without you over-egging the pudding, which is why I am addressing my comments particularly to Councillor Lowe.

But just let me put this entirely --- Well, I am glad you find it funny, Councillor Hanley, but the legacy on Community Centres alone from your administration are annual running costs of é3.5 million a year and a backlog of maintenance of é10 million. It is unsustainable, and I will tell you what they said to me, your constituents, Councillor Harper, when they came in, "The Council have ignored the Wyther Centre for years. They were asked 12 months ago to repair the fire door. They couldn't even do that."

Now, my Lord Mayor, we have a lot of very difficult problems to address in this authority. You would do well to remember how they came about, and I promise you this, we will ensure the people out there know, but we will also, much more importantly, ensure that groups like the Twilight Twirlers are given a future by this administration.

My final point is on Councillor McKenna's interesting comments relating to the Trinity Quarter. I think it is again another example of the fact that this dysfunctional group over here clearly don't talk to each other. If Councillor McKenna had spoken to Councillor Minkin, I doubt whether you would have sought to make the comments you made on that minute and about that particularly very difficult issue.

Everybody on the Executive Board, your Members included, have had to be, quite rightly, extremely careful that we took every possible piece of advice from our legal Officers, from our professional Officers in the Department, to make sure that it was done by the book, because of the very litigious nature of some of the people we were dealing with. It is unfortunate, to say the least, that you should pick that issue to make those comments on, because

PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com your comments are unfounded and, again, if you talk to your colleagues, someone would have told you that, and the issue itself is of huge importance to this City and a very tricky one.

My Lord Mayor, some people round the place billed this as Labour's come-back meeting. If this demonstration so far today is a come-back, well, God help us all. (Applause)

(iii) City Services

COUNCILLOR MINKIN: Lord Mayor, I would like to comment on Minute 65, page 38 on Woodhouse Lane Car Park which, of course belongs to the Council, and it is in a prominent, highly visible position at the bottom of Woodhouse Lane. It brings revenue to the Council, and this work is necessary to stop it falling down into the inner ring road.

The building looks better than it ever has, especially at night, but my comment is about whether it is also being considered as a source of revenue from advertising. In July 2003 Exec. Board considered a report on the possibility -- on exploring the opportunities and the potential for additional advertising on Council property, and we noted the advice from Officers that these opportunities - I will read from the minute - "should only be developed on a limited and small number of locations carefully selected for their potential to facilitate innovative and design-led advertising within the context of the Advertising Design Guide."

And then in May this year Exec. Board agreed to endorse the outline business case for the replacement of street- lighting, but the assurance was given to me, and confirmed when the item was discussed below the line, that the idea of raising half a million pounds from advertising to help offset the PFI costs was only one option, and whether the bidders did include this option or not it would come back to Executive Board. So I seek your assurance for us all in Council today that this is still the case, i.e. that:

(1) No Council decision on allowing advertising on lamp posts will be taken only by officers,

(2) The Advertising Design Guide will go out for consultation before the next Council meeting,

(3) That the post for maximizing income from appropriate advertising within the agreed policy is progressed before the next Council Meeting, and

PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com (4) That all Members and Area Committees will be fully briefed on the implications of any proposal to put advertising on lamp posts which would be illuminated and would be like bus shelter adverts but stuck up on high on lamp posts.

I think this is very important, because I think Councillor John Procter needs to know and consider whether it is a good idea for Wetherby town, or Councillor Rachel Procter whether she would like them in Harewood village, or whether Councillor Harris thinks they are a good idea on Moortown Parade, or Councillor Carter would like to see them up on the lamp posts in Calverley village, or any of us would like to see them on Woodhouse Lane Car Park, but for myself I cannot see one lamp post in Kirkstall where any advert on a lamp post would be acceptable. These will be 100 times worse than any flyposting. Thank you.

COUNCILLOR SMITH: Yes, some interesting points there ---

THE LORD MAYOR: Councillor Smith, sorry. I think someone else is indicating they would also like to speak.

COUNCILLOR GABRIEL: Thank you, Lord Mayor. Sorry about that. I put in about question 66 on page 38. It is about the Fresher Week that Councillor Smith was talking about.

MEMBERS OF COUNCIL: Can't hear you.

COUNCILLOR GABRIEL: Can you hear me now? Can you hear me now? Thank you. THE LORD MAYOR: Sorry, Councillor Gabriel, I understand that is going to come under Neighbourhoods & Housing, sorry. I will call you when it is appropriate. Councillor Smith, would you like to answer the one ---?

COUNCILLOR SMITH: Thank you, Lord Mayor. Yes, some interesting points there, Liz, slightly away from the minutes to which you refer. I wasn't at that meeting. I wasn't at the previous meeting. My colleague will answer you in his summing up. Thank you.

(v) Learning

COUNCILLOR BALE: My Lord Mayor, I wish to comment under page 35, Minute 52, on the proposed merger of special schools to form specialist inclusive learning centres.

Pupil numbers at special schools have declined as parents have opted for their children to attend mainstream schools. This

PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com process of inclusion is to be welcomed but, as the parent of a daughter with Down's syndrome, I know only too well that special education requires special expertise, and that children with special needs can often feel bewildered in a large school environment. Inclusion must not be the only show in town, and when it does occur it must be in a partnership between special and mainstream education. That partnership requires dedicated locally-based special education resources in every part of this large City.

The formation of SILKS, which was largely complete when the new administration was formed, must not diminish the resources devoted to special education, nor result in a loss of locally-based special education such as that provided quite superbly by Green Meadows School in Guiseley. Thank you, Lord Mayor. (Applause)

COUNCILLOR ANDREW: Lord Mayor, I also want to speak on the same minute. In the past, I have spoken to highlight my concerns about the blanket policy of inclusion and, although the policy is still in its infancy, we already have clear problems facing us in this country.

Parents themselves, as a first off, are already expressing deep concerns about the level of education and the effect that inclusion is having on their children. In fact, we have seen several letters in the Yorkshire Evening Post over the last few weeks from parents highlighting that very concern, but also Ofsted have said that they have been getting a number of complaints and concerns from heads who feel that mainstream schools simply cannot cope with it at this stage, and that they find themselves conflicting between meeting the individual needs and efficient education of other children.

But we also have to think about the effect on children with emotional and behavioural difficulties in a mainstream school. Many of them cannot cope, and many of them do cause some disruption to other pupils. But, above all, we also have to consider the effect that this change has on these very, very special children. Many of them cannot cope with the huge change in their life. The smallest of change can have a profound effect on them.

On the other side of the coin, at Martin House we have been receiving growing evidence of concerns from parents and families as to the problems that they are experiencing in other authorities in the country. One example I can give you, I will call him James, he is a teenage with Duchenne muscular dystrophy. He has profound physical limitations and, as part of this policy, he has been sent to a mainstream school. However, the facilities in the mainstream school are not there to cope with him. Simple things like going to the toilet he can't do on his own, and he has to wait until someone is

PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com ready to take him. How many of us know when we want to go to the toilet -- can be told when we can go to the toilet?

The problem is that they have closed down the special school, they have sold off the site, and there is now no provision for this young teenager. He is now having to be taught at home so he is now totally excluded rather than included. So I hope that we learn from other authorities, that we don't sell off our schools, that we enhance the provision that we have, and that we provide, as Councillor Bale has said, a very effective locally-based special school with insight in conjunction with mainstream schools, so that we can make this policy work.

Above all, I want us to make sure that we have a policy that means there is a fall-back position, a safety net for these families, and send a clear message of commitment to our wonderful special schools in Leeds. (Applause)

COUNCILLOR BLAKE: My Lord Mayor, I wish to speak to Minute 35 on page 56, which refers to the Victoria Park Special School. In particular, I want to just give a bit of background for Members who were not on Council at the time, but I am sure you will all remember that this school was devastated completely by fire on the night of 28th April of this year.

Clearly, there are important ongoing issues about the future provision that was provided to a level of excellence at Victoria Park, but there is a particular issue that I want to bring up to draw to Council's attention. The fire was caused by arson, and I think we are all very thankful that no-one was in the school - it happened during the night - and there was no injury at all.

I have to say that early the next morning there was an interview with the Liberal Democrat Bramley Councillor at the time who, due to the excellent record of Labour Councillors Denise Atkinson and Ted Hanley in the Bramley area, is no longer a Councillor there and has been replaced by Councillor Taggart. She chose to speak on this issue, although it is not technically in Bramley Ward it is actually in Armley Ward. Unfortunately, I think she gave a very unfortunate, insensitive interview. When we were all trying to deal very carefully with the families of those children who were not going to be able to turn up to school today from a large part of the City, she made it very clear that, speaking on behalf of the Liberal Democrat Group, she believed that the City should install sprinkler systems not only in the new build schools, which has been Council policy, but retrospectively in schools cross the City, and she even, I

PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com think, went as far as to say that she would welcome a special Council Meeting to demand that this be done.

This was then followed up by a press statement by Mark Harris, the Leader of the Liberal Democrat Group at the time, demanding that action be taken with getting on with the massive job of installing sprinkler systems.

I put down a question to Council last time to try and get to the bottom of this and find out what progress and the costs associated with this would be. I think, if you remember, Councillor Harris did on that occasion speak for an inordinate length of time responding to Councillor Finnigan's question, and I had to cope with having a written answer to this.

The answer that I got revealed that it is very, very difficult to actually ascertain the cost of doing this job, but at the very least, at the minimum, it would cost é33 million. I have to say that this report came to Exec. Board talking about the physical replacement of Victoria Park and accommodation to do this on Farnley Park, and part of the report gave the view of the Fire Officers and the Safety Officers of Education Leeds that the new building would have comprehensive fire safety measures, including smoke-detectors and barrier protection, but the building has been assessed as not requiring sprinklers.

We have had a good relationship with the Fire Authority and the Council, and obviously Councillor Harker has supported their view in this measure. I am not questioning this view either but I would like, in the light of this development, please, to ask Councillor Harker, on behalf of the Liberal Group, what the current position actually is on the issue of introducing sprinklers into all of our schools in the City. Are you going to honour the commitment you made to the electorate of Leeds? If so, could you outline the programme and costs for this. If not, will you please issue a statement, or indeed an apology, explaining to the people of Leeds why you are reneging on your irresponsible promises on this issue. Thank you, Lord Mayor.

COUNCILLOR J. HARPER: My Lord Mayor, it would seem that we have a lot of cross-party sympathy with this problem at Victoria Park School. I was very interested in what Councillor Bale and Councillor Andrew said. Like Councillor Bale, I have a daughter who is registered blind and I have to say, and I am very proud of her, she fortunately managed to get through mainstream school, with a lot of help, and that is good, but I do understand that some pupils do need to have the extra support that they get at schools like Victoria Park, a special

PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com school with special pupils, and they certainly need some special treatment. I just wonder if these children have had that, and I have to suggest that perhaps they haven't.

What consultation has taken place with the parents and, for that matter, with the Councillors?

MEMBER OF COUNCIL: None.

COUNCILLOR J. HARPER: Absolutely, and I would hope to have some assurances that, before this is just bulldozed through, that we do have a special meeting with these very special people and with their very special Councillors. Thank you, my Lord Mayor.

COUNCILLOR HARINGTON: My Lord Mayor, I would like to speak to Minute 57 on page 36. I would like to begin, though, by congratulating Councillor Pryke on improving his reading matter. As he will know, one of the properties of reading improving literature is that, with any luck, it will improve what you write yourself, so now that he has acquainted himself with the very Shakespeare of political documents, to wit the Gipton & Harehills Rose, he can now attend to the nature of the Liberal Democrat Beano to wit Hocus Focus Groups, and Hocus Focus pamphlets!

I am also interested that he mentions buildings outside his own ward, namely the Compton Arms, but maybe he feels that his colleagues in Gipton and Harehills are struggling and need assistance. However, he is perfectly right to say that in our leaflet I did say that we needed to analyse our mistakes, to learn from them, but that was in the context of saying what an amount of good work I felt that the Labour Group had done, of which it should be proud, and alongside that good work ---

THE LORD MAYOR: Councillor Harington, can you please speak to the minute. It is, "Integrated Children's Centre". Thank you.

COUNCILLOR HARINGTON: Correct, yes. Well, I was talking of learning, which maybe Councillor Pryke could be learning from our leaflet, but I am delighted to see that the Children's Centre is now in place, and I look forward to the rest of that development. But it raises the question of what other learning processes are in place in the ward as a whole so that people can really feel that regeneration has happened.

There are some amazing plans for Gipton and Harehills in terms of housing, but if anybody wants to learn what happens if you just attend to housing ---

PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com THE LORD MAYOR: I think you are drifting off the subject again, Councillor Harington. Will you please stick to it. Thank you.

COUNCILLOR HARINGTON: I just want to underline, Lord Mayor, that the word "learning" is the topic here. We have got one process for learning happening around the Children's Centre, and that is excellent, but only if we have to ask what else is going to be in place, and there are these questions being asked, but I hope they are being asked sufficiently to see what ingredients come together to make sure that learning not just in the narrow sense of initially of schools but learning for life as a whole, and I would encourage anyone connected with these questions to look at Green View Mount, because there is a perfect example of what happens if only houses are put in place. "Admire ye works mighty and despair", because here is a perfect example of what happens if you don't look at what learning is in place not just in terms of schools but in terms of access to jobs and so on.

So I hope that the necessary conversations happen at the St. James's Partnership and also in Gipton as well so that we have regeneration in the fullest possible sense, with lots of learning opportunities and not a whole cluster of Green View Mounts. Thank you. (Applause)

THE LORD MAYOR: We got there in the end.

COUNCILLOR DRIVER: Lord Mayor, I rise to speak on the same minute, which is 57 on page 36.

Yesterday morning Councillor Ruth Feldman and I were at an excellent event which was the second of a series of open forums held by the -- what do they call themselves? The Strategic Partnership for Children and Young People in Leeds. It was noticeable that our colleague Councillor Jennings was not present, although it was one of these seedbed activities in which representatives not only from Council Departments but from other public services from private and voluntary organisations like Barnardos were all gathered together, about probably 100 of us, to talk about the way in which we want to see an integrated children's service develop in Leeds.

What was interesting about it was that it is quite clear that there are many ideas at this point but not yet a clear consensus about just exactly how this procedure is going to go ahead. One of the jobs, I believe, of the Executive Member for Children's Services is, in fact, to be involved with that and to help select the priorities for such an exercise. It isn't a matter just for Officers and for

PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com Officer papers, it is for us to detect in this welter of interest and energy what are the clear things that need doing.

Why am I saying this on this particular minute, Lord Mayor? It is because I notice with some pleasure that the design brief has been frozen at this stage. Now, I don't know the reason why it has been frozen, but it is clear to me that we do need to take advantage of that stay in execution, if that indeed is what it is, to make sure that we are involved with that discussion as far as this integrated - as the word is actually used - Integrated Children's Centre is concerned.

So what I am really saying, and I hope at some stage Councillor Jennings will actually answer for his own brief rather than hiding behind Councillor Harker or anybody else, Peter, if it is you, Peter. Well, I hope at some stage we will be able to get this debate really going, because it is an important one, and it affects the long term development of the City. This happens to be just one particular exercise, but it does give us a really important opportunity to carry forward the debate in which we are all participants. Thank you, Lord Mayor.

COUNCILLOR JENNINGS: Lord Mayor, I would like to respond on this minute particularly to the comments of Councillor Harington initially but, before I do, I just want to say it is rather difficult for me at the moment to respond to points on this brief because, as we know, there have been as yet no Executive Board papers or minutes directly on the Children's Service, and at the moment (Interruptions)

MEMBER OF COUNCIL: Why not?

COUNCILLOR JENNINGS: Well, we are about to. Councillor Harrand and Councillor Harker ---

COUNCILLOR TAGGART: You are paid money to do the job right. Why are we paying you then, if you give it to somebody else? (Interruptions)

THE LORD MAYOR: Sorry, through the chair, please. Thanks very much.

COUNCILLOR JENNINGS: But Councillor Harington is quite right, there is no -- regeneration including education and children is an all-round thing. We cannot just build new houses and expect communities to develop, and with regeneration comes other needs and responsibilities. There is the education element, the social and health element, and I understand there was a meeting of the Scrutiny

PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com Board yesterday where Gipton Health Centre was discussed. All these elements come together in helping regeneration of an area.

I am going to also have to comment on the rather again unfortunate personal attack coming from Councillor Driver. Yesterday I did, in fact, attend part of the meeting. If you want to get the title of the organisation that organised it correct, which you failed to do, it is the Children and Young People's Strategic Partnership. I had two events on yesterday morning. I discussed with Officers and colleagues which of those two I should attend, and first ---

COUNCILLOR TAGGART: (Inaudible) get out of bed.

COUNCILLOR JENNINGS: Most of us do that first thing in the morning, Councillor Taggart, yes. The first was attending a meeting of Leeds North West ALMO, of which I am a Board Member. I arrived at the event you talk about, and I did see you there - you obviously didn't see me - and I was able to have a number of important conversations with some of the participants.

I don't to believe - I'm not sure about other Members of Executive Board or other senior Councillors - I don't believe it is mine or anybody else's role to be involved in every single aspect of the management of my portfolio. I seem to remember the last time (Interruptions) I seem to remember the last time a Councillor got over-involved when he was the Chair of the Education Committee, which was before my time, I'm not sure who that was, but I am sure some other Councillors who have been on this Council longer than I will be able to remind me. His what was described at the time, I believe, as political interference led to Leeds losing its LEA and now we have Education Leeds. (Interruptions)

I will take my responsibilities very seriously, but please don't expect me to make the same mistakes that some of you made in the past. (Applause)

COUNCILLOR PROCTER: My Lord Mayor, before Councillor Harker rises, can I move suspension of Council Procedure Rule 3.1 to remove the time limit to receive the remainder of the minutes? Thank you, Lord Mayor.

MEMBER OF COUNCIL: My Lord Mayor, I would like to second that.

(The motion was carried) COUNCILLOR HARKER: Lord Mayor, it is a little bit difficult to know where to start with some of the points that have been raised

PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com by the Labour Party, so I suppose I am going to go at it in reverse order.

Councillor Driver, I think when the history books on the Children's Act in Leeds are written you will find that more work has been done in the time we have been in office than what we inherited from your party. So that's that.

Councillor Harington, I agree regeneration and education need to go hand in hand, and I spend quite a lot of time now talking with my opposite number, Councillor Les Carter, and exchanging views as to where that can happen.

To come to Councillor Janet Harper this time, I can say that I have actually seen the parents of Victoria Park, who wanted to see me, in this room and also in my office, and I take very seriously the issues that they raised with me.

And now to Councillor Blake. Well, what a convoluted way to get to sprinkler systems. She got there, but Victoria Park, really a little bit in bad taste twice: (a) to use a fire that destroyed a wonderful school, and then to attack an ex-Councillor who is not present in the room by naming them, and my answer is - I checked the press release - Mark at no point, nor did my party at any point, promise as a matter of policy sprinklers in every school. What we did say was in new build, and I refer her to line 12, para. 3 of the press release of the 29th of this year. I don't think there is any more to say there.

To my colleagues opposite, on their concerns about special schools. I noted that quite a lot of what was said referred to national policy, and I do agree that there are some authorities in this country who have divested themselves of special schools and gone down the totally inclusive line. I now want to pay tribute to the Officers of this authority in the special needs area. I think that the SILKS as they come on stream and they begin to operate will add to what is already a very proud record of special need provision in this City.

I would to correct one point. The SILKS did come in because the paper in the minutes refers to them having gone to the Schools Organisation Committee, so the SILKS have been created, and I have told the Chief Legal Officer that I have a personal interest here as I am a governor of one of the new SILKS.

As long as I am sitting here and with this portfolio, special needs education will be at the top of the agenda of this

PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com administration, not just the provision for the children but we also have to think of the parents. Many of these parents have had to fight tooth and nail for everything that their children receive, so when we politicians and our Officers come along with changes to the system, too often they see this not for what it is, an improvement, but a taking away of what already exists, and it is one of the things I have talked to Officers about over and over again since I took on this portfolio that we have got to make sure we communicate well and effectively with parents, and in fact I am not criticising my officers but I have commented adversely on one document that went out to parents where I thought the English was not of the right sort to get across what we were going to say.

I can assure you that this administration is 100% in favour of the provision of special needs care in special needs schools for those parents who want it for their children, inclusion for those parents who want it. Thank you, Lord Mayor. (Applause)

(viii) Social Care & Health

COUNCILLOR HARRAND: Lord Mayor, perhaps I just ought to make it clear for Members opposite that for the foreseeable future - a few more months at least - I am responsible for the Children's Services in Leeds and Brian has got the duty of establishing the new structure, which I do not envy him at all, but at present I will answer questions on Children's Services as they are now.

There was a question, talking about questions, there was a question from Councillor Driver earlier on which, in the supplementary and also in the original, asked for a political answer. Well, you are not going to get political answers about children while it is anything to do with me. We are not going to politicise Children's Services and we won't let it happen, will we Ruth? Will we, Brian? No. Will we, Keith? Will we, Keith? Keith? Keith? Keith? (Interruptions) Better than you, Keith. Better than you. We are not going to let it happen.

I now wish to make the same speech I have made five times in this Council Chamber, Lord Mayor, but if you don't listen to me I will say it again. Being a Member of this Council means you are a corporate parent. You must visit children's homes. It is not optional, it is not something to leave to other people, it is not something you can miss because there are no children's homes in your area. You are all corporate parents.

We have 16 children's homes. If you don't know where they are, we will -- the Director of Social Services will let you have

PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com them tomorrow morning. Because they are not in your ward or not in your management area doesn't mean it is something you can wash your hands of. Generally speaking, about one-third of Councillors are good at this, one third are, mm, alright, and one-third are awful. Oh, he has gone now.

I also say, generally speaking new Councillors are better than long established Councillors, but it is a duty of us all. You have all got a responsibility for the upbringing of these children in care and if you don't go, it doesn't improve next year, I shall make the same speech again next year. Thank you, Lord Mayor. (Applause)

THE LORD MAYOR: We are going to move on now to the Neighbourhoods & Housing portfolio, Councillor Gabriel on page 38, Minute 66.

COUNCILLOR GABRIEL: Could I ask where the Executive Cabinet Minister is for this?

THE LORD MAYOR: That is a very good point.

COUNCILLOR GABRIEL: Right, I will carry on regardless. I am sure he takes his duties very seriously. It is about Area Committees. At our first Area Committee, the second question asked by the community was where were their Neighbourhood Wardens. Apparently, during Fresher Week all the Neighbourhood Wardens were taken from South Leeds without any consultation with the community, without any consultation with the Councillors or the community.

Could I ask the Cabinet person what consultation was done, who made this decision, and what was put in place to cover our communities that were abandoned by this process? Thank you, Lord Mayor. (Applause when Councillor J. L. Carter entered the chamber)

THE LORD MAYOR: Would you like to repeat that now, Councillor Gabriel?

COUNCILLOR GABRIEL: No, I don't think I should have to repeat it, actually. I think as Councillors it is essential that we should actually stay in the meeting at all times and not keep leaving the room.

COUNCILLOR A. CARTER: Lord Mayor, now that my friend and colleague has returned, and you have to remember that when you get to a certain age, when you have got to go, you have got to go! (Interruptions)

PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com Whilst somebody briefs Councillor J. L. on what just went on ---

COUNCILLOR J. L. CARTER: Oh I know.

COUNCILLOR A. CARTER: -- listen to this. I want to congratulate Councillor J. L. Carter, minute 66, page 38, same one as you, Councillor Gabriel, on the way in which he found a formula to give the Wellbeing Fund, allocate the Wellbeing Fund fairly across the City. It has been a joy for those of us on the Outer West Committee to watch Councillors Lewis and Jarosz sucking lemons as they avoided commenting, whether or not they were in favour of the increased allocation for their own ward, or they were against because some of their colleagues were moaning, but, my Lord Mayor, the most important thing of all, I think ---

COUNCILLOR GABRIEL: Lord Mayor, what has this to do with my question?

COUNCILLOR J. L. CARTER: I am dealing with that.

COUNCILLOR A. CARTER: He is dealing with it. (Interruptions)

THE LORD MAYOR: Councillor J. L. Carter will be summing up. Thank you, Councillor Hanley, I have got this in hand, believe me.

COUNCILLOR A. CARTER: So if, for example, the MP for West Leeds and the Councillors for Kirkstall were to say the new coalition has increased the money allocated to prosperous areas such as Wetherby and Alwoodley and Adel and reduced the funds to Kirkstall, Gipton and Harehills, which includes some of the most deprived areas of the City, would that statement in fact be true or would it be untrue? Would Councillor J. L. Carter like to tell this Council how much money the electors of Kirkstall could have expected from the previous administration and how much they are getting from this administration? Would he also like to assure the Council that he will strenuously bend every sinew to ensure that the residents of Kirkstall are informed of the truth rather than what they seem to be getting from Kirkstall Labour News.

Now, this is sent to me by a constituent of the said Councillors, very concerned, wants an inquiry, and certainly wants a denial made and wants, I think, an apology from the Ward Councillors so, my Lord Mayor, I am sure that Councillor Carter, J. L., will be able to answer that robustly.

PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com The more serious point is this, I do wish you would stop telling these untruths. It simply is not right that areas of the City have been given less than you were proposing. It is not correct and you must stop saying it, and then maybe Councillors like Councillors Jarosz and Lewis wouldn't have to sit silent, sucking lemons, while the rest of us say how good it is that there is more money for some of the outer areas who have been deprived for so long of resources. Over to you, Les.

THE LORD MAYOR: Sorry, you will have to wait a minute. Councillor Atha has indicated.

COUNCILLOR ATHA: I want to assist my dear friend Leslie Carter. You have been posed a question by your Leader, and we bow every time we say that word, and we ask you to answer this further question: if you take the allocation of the Wellbeing money and divide it as we would have divided it, would Kirkstall have got more than you are promising now?

Now, that is quite a different question and, as I understand it, and on the information I have been given, we are likely to be a sum of something like é10,000 less well off. Now, that is the information given by the best advice we have got and, as it comes from the figures that the Council produces, then I often in that case may have some doubts about their accuracy, but I don't think it would be in any way disposed to mislead us deliberately.

COUNCILLOR J. L. CARTER: Can I speak now, Lord Mayor?

THE LORD MAYOR: Yes.

COUNCILLOR J. L. CARTER: Right. Just quickly on the wardens, I am not going to push that too far. The situation was it is a policy which this Council has been operating for a number of years and it is one which (Interruptions) I will finish it off. It is a policy which has been operated by this Council for a number of years; wardens going to assist in the University Ward when Fresher Week and students come in there. Now, if you don't know what happens, then it is because the guy before, was it Councillor Harker? Harper. Harper, Basil Brush, that was it, Basil Brush. Well, he operated it, and it has gone on again this year.

Now, let's come to the most interesting part. Let's talk about Wellbeing money. First of all, I have got to tell my Leader that the Wellbeing money is given out to Area Committees.

COUNCILLOR ATHA: You have got that right so far.

PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com COUNCILLOR J. L. CARTER: It is not given out to wards. Now, that has purposely been done, but I will give you some figures, which I think this is what you are trying to find out. Let me just talk about the Wellbeing Fund for the Inner West area, which Kirkstall is in. (Interruptions)

COUNCILLOR ATHA: You are not doing so well now, Leslie. How can we rely on information ---

COUNCILLOR J. L. CARTER: It is alright, Bernard. Pipe down. Just stay calm. North West Inner Area Committee, right? You are happy now. Now, let me just tell you, that is going to have a total of revenue and capital of é596,925. Now, my colleague says how did that compare with the previous administration?

COUNCILLOR ATHA: You see the effect you have on people?

COUNCILLOR J. L. CARTER: I wish I had that effect on you and you would clear off. Now, let's just go back to the previous administration. No formal proposal for the allocation of Wellbeing Fund was approved by the Executive Board under the previous administration. However, under draft proposals recommended by the Area Management Member Working Group under the previous administration the amount that would have been allocated to North-West Inner Area Committee would have been é274,464. I will repeat the figures, é596,000 from this administration, é271,000 from that administration.

Now then, let's carry on. I did get the figures, and I will tell you why these figures have been calculated, because all the time we have been doing this Councillor Wakefield has been trying to prove that I am a rotten devil and leaving the inner cities out of the picture, and he has failed completely, utterly miserably in doing it, because everybody is going to get a lot more under Carter's proposals.

Now, let me just tell you Kirkstall itself, and this is where somebody said would Bernard tell a lie. Well, I have always thought him, you know, not to be a liar. I can't believe Bernard would lie, and I hope he is going to put another leaflet out soon because let me tell you, under your administration, your administration, you would have had é75,001. é75,001, that is your administration. Under our administration, ours, é159,080. Now then, Bernard, I am challenging Bernard, I am challenging Liz and I am challenging John, and John Battle because I believe John Battle's name is on this thing.

COUNCILLOR A. CARTER: I have got it safe, Les, you are alright.

PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com COUNCILLOR J. L. CARTER: You have got it safe?

COUNCILLOR A. CARTER: Yes, I have.

COUNCILLOR J. L. CARTER: I want him to put another leaflet out now telling the truth. Thank you, my Lord Mayor. (Applause)

(b) Scrutiny Board (Central & Corporate Functions)

THE LORD MAYOR: Moving swiftly on, Councillor Finnigan.

COUNCILLOR FINNIGAN: I will pass. My ward colleague will be speaking much more eloquently than I can, so I will pass over to him. Thank you, Lord Mayor.

COUNCILLOR McARDLE: Lord Mayor, this is regarding Minute 5, page 52. I have already spoken previously in this chamber about the fiscal implications for the Licensing Act, and it is just an observation. I would like to talk about the civic implications that Members ought to take on board. I get the impression that there are not enough Members coming forward to appear on the Licensing Panel, and I would like to express that concern and hope that Members actually come forward and be involved, because we have a civic and moral duty to make sure that the Licensing Act 2003 actually is implicated(sic.) and facilitated. Thank you.

COUNCILLOR J. LEWIS: My Lord Mayor, I would like to speak to Minute 15 on page 56, and I note that in referring to taxi licenses that the Central & Corporate Scrutiny Board has made reference to the reduction of bus services. Now, I know that the Chair of that Board, Councillor Nash, is one of the three most important Green Party Councillors in this City, and we all know on this side that the Green Party are some of the real driving force behind this new coalition we have got, so I hope that she can persuade her two junior coalition partners to support Labour colleagues and I on the West Yorkshire Passenger Transport Authority in bringing about Quality Contracts to bus operators to make them provide a public service for public need rather than private profit, and we don't have a repeat of the disgraceful scenes we had at a recent Passenger Transport Authority meeting when the Conservative and the Liberal representatives on the West Yorkshire Passenger Transport Authority put their hands up against Quality Contracts, put their hands up against measures to improve bus services, and put their hands up against the interests of the travelling public and in favour of the operator, and I hope she will join me and her colleagues in persuading the coalition to join us in this campaign.

PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com COUNCILLOR W. HYDE: Lord Mayor, can I just make a brief comment in reply to that allegation? There are only two Conservative representatives on the Passenger Transport Authority and neither of us have voted in the way it is being proposed -- suggested.

MEMBER OF COUNCIL: You wasn't there. (Interruptions)

COUNCILLOR R. D. FELDMAN: Lord Mayor, page 63, Minute 38 also refers to page 59, item 22, which is the same subject, which is Performance Management Reports.

To anyone who gets this document, this booklet, the agenda, I am afraid would feel terribly worried by one of the sentences. If we are checking performance management, we could check it on the numbers, as it says, for BV 11(a) (b), LK1(a)(l) 2, etc., or how many BME staff are working for the authority may be of interest; why BME staff are not being recruited may be of interest. Figures for Education, Education Leeds, schools and the ALMOs may be interested, but I really and truly doubt whether or not an analysis by religion is called for. The last time that one of those was called for, we all know, many years ago it had disastrous consequences. I am not suggesting that it is the same thing here, but I find it very annoying and upsetting that one should read this.

Now, there may be perfectly good reasons for it but, nevertheless, I think we ought to be very careful before we go down the road of asking people and checking what their religion is comparable to what their performance is in this authority. Thank you, Lord Mayor.

COUNCILLOR GRUEN: Lord Mayor, I refer to Minute 43 on page 64 and I am sorry to disappoint Councillor Carter but I am going to speak yet again on a personnel issue, and I will not be intimidated by his comments about not fulfilling my role as an elected Member so: Councillor Nash will not be surprised by these comments, but we were treated to a rare spectacle at the Central & Scrutiny Board Meeting I think about two meetings ago, the 5th of October meeting.

In our pre-meeting, we noted that the Strategy was below the line, and we all wondered why it was below the line, and we all expressed surprise and said, "How can you have an HR Strategy about staff and then you can't discuss it with anybody?" and so we agreed that we would question the Officer when she arrived and ask her why this was marked below the line.

PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com The advice we were given was that it was the Officer's prerogative to mark it accordingly. Within about two minutes of questioning the Officer, she was quite content to withdraw the marking of it being below the line, so we all said, "Well, that's great now. We can now discuss it openly. She has got no more concerns. We, as a board, want to discuss it openly. What is the problem?"

The Chair turned to an Officer who she thought was a Legal Services Officer, we all thought was a Legal Services Officer, but it was a committee clerk. He probably had as much knowledge of legal process as the man or woman in the street, and he advised her that we couldn't under any circumstances discuss this matter now openly, so we were very frustrated about that, because those of us who have been on Council long enough know that it is the committee prerogative, not an individual's prerogative, to actually decide and, indeed, very recently Councillor Harris, Councillor Carter, Executive Board decided not to go on the Trinity planning application in camera but to have it in open forum. Well done to you. Why couldn't the Scrutiny Board do the same thing?

But to compound this error, after the meeting when I wrote to an Officer and said, "Now that the matter is cleared and it is absolutely obvious that it should be an openly debated item, I want to share this document with fellow Shadow Cabinet Members because I think we should be able to comment on the HR Strategy that is emerging, because we actually do care about the people who work for this authority, and we do want to see what the HR Strategy is." Now, I didn't get a response from the Officer. I didn't get a response from the Officer. I got a response from the chair, whom I hadn't written to. I hadn't asked her view of it, I asked the Officer whether I could now discuss this document with fellow senior Labour Councillors.

The Chair said to me, "Under no circumstances can you do that, and if you do, I will report you to Standards Board."

MEMBER OF COUNCIL: Political gagging that is, Peter.

COUNCILLOR GRUEN: "I will report you to Standards Board."

Now, Councillor Pryke earlier on, in his interesting speech, referred to this word of, "apology". Thank you for warming up Councillor Nash, in a manner of speaking, because I asked her yesterday at the meeting whether she now felt able to apologise for her poor chairship of the board, being unable to take advice properly and to listen to Councillors, being unable to take legal advice when she was obviously confronted with facts she didn't know about, and whether she would apologise for trying to impugn my integrity and say

PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com I would be reported to the Scrutiny Board for something I had every right to share with colleagues and to discuss.

The matter gets even more interesting, because on the agenda we were supposed to have the HR Strategy as an open item. I knew something was wrong when a senior solicitor arrived at the meeting. You know, I always get worried when that happens for something, either to bale the Chair out or something will happen. So it wasn't on the agenda. Why wasn't it on the agenda? Because this HR Strategy that is so secret nobody can see it is now being rewritten somewhere else and we still haven't seen it. It adds to this conspiracy of anti- staff feeling that is coming across from this administration, and rather than Councillor Nash being able to scrutinize and help her board scrutinize the Executive, she is in cahoots with the Executive trying to stop her board from functioning properly.

COUNCILLOR ATHA: Could I ask Councillor Nash specifically if she would answer the points made by Councillor Gruen. Did you in fact say what he said? On what authority did you say it? And is there grounds - I might put this later to the lawyers - is there a ground for in fact reporting you for standards because, quite frankly, I have been in this Council a long time, we enjoy our bit of knock- about comedy and insulting each other, but there has been a certain approach to things, and that is things in the end should be open and if, in fact, you have done something wrong and it is revealed, then you accept it, and that has been done. The Leader of the Liberals here has done it now twice, once today when he forgot something and the time before when he thought he had been (inaudible). If, in fact, you have behaved improperly, then it is time for you to say, "Yes, I did. I was misguided. I made a mistake", then everyone would accept, because that can happen to all of us, and the matter will be ended. If, in fact, what -- and you don't answer these specific questions and you avoid them, then in fact it is really a case for us to ask should this matter not be referred to Standards, because I would think it is always extremely dangerous for reports like this to be kept secret deliberately on the diktat of an individual.

COUNCILLOR C. NASH: Could I deal, first of all, with Councillor Feldman? The issue that came to our Scrutiny Board, which was the Performance Management Report, the Board Members were very anxious that they should have further information, particularly in relation to whether the Council was adequately meeting the needs of ethnic minorities and people perhaps from religious minorities. That was the concern, and we did request this analysis by religion. Now, that wasn't a request from me, it was actually a request from another

PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com member of the Board who is present here today and who may remember requesting that.

The answer I have had back from Officers is that that is not possible, you will be pleased to know, no doubt. That is not possible, that information would not be available, and the only information that is available is something that was conducted in 2003. The only information we have at all on the religious views of members of staff is the results of a religious cultural needs audit that was carried out back in 2003, which was entirely voluntary. No staff had to give their name or could be identified in any way, and that does allow us to have some of the information which the Board was interested to receive, but it is entirely anonymous and I am sure it would meet your concerns.

Councillor Finnigan and Councillor McArdle ---

COUNCILLOR FINNIGAN: I never said a word.

COUNCILLOR C. NASH: Oh, didn't you speak? Sorry, I was upstairs in the gallery at the time.

COUNCILLOR FINNIGAN: I accept it is dull, but there we go. COUNCILLOR C. NASH: Councillor McArdle. The licensing policy is currently out to -- has been out to consultation. We, as Scrutiny Board's only remit, is to see whether it feels that that consultation was properly conducted. If you have concerns that it wasn't, then I suggest that you actually come to a Scrutiny Board sub-group meeting to make your point. If you have points to make about the actual Licensing Act itself, then really we are not the appropriate -- the Scrutiny Board is not the appropriate place to hear that.

COUNCILLOR E. NASH: You are addressing the Lord Mayor, not us. (Interruptions)

MEMBER OF COUNCIL: What is it - silent prayer now?

THE LORD MAYOR: It is not silent while you are speaking.

COUNCILLOR C. NASH: Councillor Lewis dealt with the issue of the taxi licensing. That is an ongoing scrutiny. We had a Whips' agreement that we would not mention these in Council. Of course, the Labour Group were made aware of that and I don't intend to respond to those comments.

Councillor Gruen, I have a statement to make from the appropriate Officers. It was made clear to us at the meeting that

PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com our Officers, the Scrutiny Officers, may have given us the wrong advice but I am obliged, as I am not a legal person myself, I and the Board generally are obliged to take advice, and we did take that advice. We did agree not to hear that above the line at the time.

Legal & Democratic Services are responsible for providing the legal and procedural advice to the Scrutiny Board. The Officers assigned to attend the board meetings are fully authorised to give advice on aspects of the Board's operation and, if the issue in question is complex, there is the opportunity of referring the matter to a more senior officer. The Chair and other Members of the Board are entitled to rely on advice given and to act accordingly, which is what we did.

In the event any advice given is on further reflection or consideration found to be no long sustained, then Legal & Democratic Services accept responsibility for the reasonable action that has been taken in pursuance of that advice.

As a result of the recent problems regarding the report made to the Scrutiny Board (Central & Corporate Functions), Legal & Democratic Services will be reviewing the Access to Information Procedure Rules to ensure that they are clearer.

The item that we dealt with was marked, "Exempt" under some rules that had been agreed by full Council regarding exempt items which states that information relating to consultations or negotiations or contemplated consultations or negotiations in connection with any Labour relations matter arising between the authority or a Minister of the Crown and employees or office-holders and the authority should be marked as, "Exempt", so therefore the Officer was actually doing what they felt they had the right to do.

They then did agree that perhaps not the whole report was actually exempt and perhaps they should not have dealt with it in the way they did, but we did take the advice that we could not proceed to hearing that matter.

Since then the report, which was not the draft report, actually, it was a completely preliminary report which I had specially requested to come to the Board, even though the Officer had actually indicated it was not ready to come to the Board, I specifically requested it so that we could have an early input in the spirit of scrutiny, which is to help the Council perform properly, and I felt it would be advantageous for them to have an input at an early stage. They did --- That was agreed at that point in time, that we could

PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com have that input, and as far as I know Councillor Gruen took the opportunity to ask one question about the entire proposal.

Regarding my subsequent motivation to Councillor Gruen, that was in private, it was a private e-mail. (Interruptions) It was a private e-mail, and I still stand by that if a member of my Board was found to disclose pink paper or below the line information without the consent of the Board, then that would be something that I would refer to Standards Committee. Thank you. (Applause)

(c) Scrutiny Board (Development Services)

COUNCILLOR LEADLEY: My Lord Mayor, I wish to speak on Scrutiny Board (Development Services), 12th July, page 67, Minute 7. Actually, it is a bullet point which is over the page on page 68, though it is part of the same minute, and it is about the agreement to keep a watching brief on Supertram, and that is certainly something that needs watching.

I am a member of the Metro Board and yesterday there was a meeting of the Metro Supertram Working Group, of which I am also a member. Details of the discussions there were confidential, but quite a bit has been revealed about the City Council's and Metro's intentions so that they can be commented upon to some extent as there have been press releases and so on, and I remain convinced that the reduced scheme has all the faults of the full three-line version: none of the routes really go anywhere, the cost would be unaffordable, and the disruption of the City during construction would be insupportable. In general character, the Leeds proposals are remarkably similar to the disappointing Sheffield system, which is an out-and- back, which is three out-and-back suburban routes which are almost entirely within the pre-1974 city boundaries - very similar to the Leeds system, so any comparison with the Manchester system is mistaken.

If the new Leeds bid fails, I believe that must be the end of it, there should be no more time or money wasted and Scrutiny must ensure that the attentions and efforts of Councillors and Officers are turned towards public transport improvements which are essential, achievable and deliverable. This need has been shown this week when revision of many bus services caused absolute chaos because of the lack of new timetables, some buses still running to the old schedules and others not running at all. For the benefit of those who do not use public transport, I would remind everyone that 94% of public transport journeys in West Yorkshire are by bus and the rest by conventional railways.

PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com Reform of bus operations is a real public transport problem across West Yorkshire, and the real challenge - and it certainly will be a challenge to reform bus service operation - I think we have already had some reference to legal changes that might be needed, negotiations with the Secretary of State. If you can negotiate with the Secretary of State about the Supertram, you can negotiate with the Secretary of State about reform of bus services, and the constant diversion of attention and effort towards a few miles of tram route in Leeds prevents that challenge being mounted in a full and vigorous way. I trust that Development Scrutiny Board will bear this in mind. Thank you, my Lord Mayor.

COUNCILLOR CLEASBY: I am disappointed, Councillor Leadley, that you are so negative when a group are about to leave Leeds to go to talk with the Minister with a new bid to get funding. I am also disappointed, the years that you are fully aware that this project has been put together, that you are going right back to the beginning and talking about the start of the route and the end of the route, the direction of the route, and being totally negative like that.

So I hope, Council, you would all join with me and support those who are going down to London and meeting the Minister, and if I could use a little Franglais, wish them bon voyage and hope they have a fair wind on their back. Thank you, Lord Mayor. (Applause)

(d) Scrutiny Board (Neighbourhoods & Housing)

COUNCILLOR LEADLEY: My Lord Mayor, I wish to speak now on Scrutiny Board (Neighbourhoods & Housing), 20th July, page 77, Minute 5, where there is a reference to gypsies and travellers, and I have asked for a bit of clarification for that because it is obviously an extremely open heading, to say the least. I am reassured that it will mean the reopening of the inquiry into the provision of permanent and transit sites which began last year, and that inquiry got off to quite a good start, though later it seemed to run out of steam and it was abandoned in April this year without producing a final report. There was merely a resolution to do nothing, which was disappointing and rather unrealistic.

There is a very clear need for more traveller sites in Leeds, and that has been shown by the constant invasions of vacant plots on industrial sites and the invasions of playing fields and other open spaces. The City Council holds the keys to these problems. It is the Planning authority for the City and so it controls planning permissions, and it is the only body likely to be able to get any Government funding which might be available to provide new sites.

PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com When the time comes for the City Council to decide where it would place new traveller sites, Councillor Les Carter, as the Executive Board Member for Neighbourhoods & Housing will be responsible. If we are to make progress, we must support him in that difficult task, and I certainly don't under- estimate the difficulty of the task, and not raise objections to every single proposal that he might put forward.

Again, if we do nothing we will have a never-ending round of invasions, court cases and legal costs, and travellers will continue to live in unhealthy and unsatisfactory surroundings. Thank you, my Lord Mayor.

COUNCILLOR GRAYSHON: Good afternoon, Lord Mayor, Members of Council, members of the public in the gallery. I wish to speak on page 77, Minute 5, with regard to Police Community Support Officers and Wardens.

I would like to commend the work the Police Community Support Officers and Wardens carry out in Leeds. As some of you will know, I had an unfortunate incident being a victim of crime myself, and really that is why I stood for election to Leeds City Council, so that I could take positive steps in dealing with the issue I had to deal with, to prevent it happening to other people.

Police Community Support Officers offer high-visibility policing, policing in the streets, they are an invaluable source for gathering intelligence, and they return the Police Force to the perception of old-fashioned policing whereby they are a visible presence, people can go up and speak to them, and they are out in the streets. Unfortunately, police officers, uniformed officers, do not have time to do that, they don't have that luxury any more. They restore confidence in the communities in which they work. As I say, they are an invaluable source of intelligence. They help to reduce the fear of crime, which is more of a problem than crime itself.

I understand that Morley Town Council was the first Council in England to pay for Community Support Officers, in conjunction with West Yorkshire Police, and they are a natural extension of the police family.

I would ask you all to join me this afternoon commending the work of Police Community Support Officers, and I hope where necessary adequate funding will be found to resource them. Thank you very much. (Applause)

PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com COUNCILLOR LOBLEY: My Lord Mayor, in commenting on page 79, Minute 11, Food Strategy for Leeds, I would like to take this opportunity to start as we mean to go on, and request that Leeds Council tells all Members of this Council what they should and shouldn't be eating from the buffet later this afternoon. You may see an assortment of cream- cakes but, I am afraid that in the light of this latest report, Leeds City Council may decide it wishes to police what adults in Leeds are eating. Can you imagine how ridiculous it would be for Leeds Council to tell Councillors what they can and cannot eat in the buffet? I don't think even Councillor Richard Lewis, who waxed lyrical in our Scrutiny Board meeting about the benefits of returning to rationing, would be too pleased.

COUNCILLOR R. LEWIS: That is an exaggeration. I don't remember rationing.

COUNCILLOR LOBLEY: Oh, allow me some poetic licence. Every person in this Council Chamber knows that an apple is better for you than a BigMac, and so does every grown man and woman in Leeds. To say otherwise is to patronise people.

The Food Strategy for Leeds document was not only the worst written report I have ever read but it was also the most patronising. Implying that people don't know any better than Leeds City Council is rubbish. Remember, this is the Council which in recent years has installed fizzy drinks machines in libraries and provides plates of biscuits at all of its meetings but not any fresh fruit, so what exactly does Leeds City Council know about healthy dieting at the moment?

And to say there is no help available for people worried about their weight is also rubbish. You can go and see your GP for advice on normal dieting, if you please, or alternatively I understand you can go and see Councillor Gruen for advice on the Atkins Diet. He is not here at the minute. But let me get something straight ---

COUNCILLOR A. CARTER: Is that why you have verbal diarrhoea? COUNCILLOR LOBLEY: Let me get something straight. We have a moral obligation to educate children in our schools on nutrition, exercise and the need for healthy living, but when you are an adult you should be making your own decisions. The report implies that if someone lives in a certain area, or is from an ethnic minority group, that they don't have access to fruit and veg, which it refers to as being expensive. It also implies people are forced to purchase donner kebabs, Domino's pizzas, and suchlike convenience foods, because they can't afford this expensive fruit and veg. Well, let me tell you, a é9.99 Domino's takeaway pizza special, with which I am

PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com actually familiar, would pay for a return bus fare to Leeds Market and 56 apples.

Now, this is a simple extension of national Government meddling. It is the same as the way in which they tell us that a Whitehall civil servant living 250 miles away knows better how to spend our money than we do.

So what of making our own informed choices as adults? People should be provided with information to help them make an informed decision, but the Government still has not instigated simple and clear marking of packaged food to show sugar, salt and fat content, which it should have done by now. And before it starts telling people what to eat, Leeds City Council needs to get its own house in order, so I urge the Executive Board who receives this report in December to take these comments on board when deciding what to do with this report. Thank you. (Applause)

COUNCILLOR J. L. CARTER: My Lord Mayor, I am certain Members will forgive me for not actually talking about the last subject. I am the last person to tell anybody what to eat!

MEMBER OF COUNCIL: Less.

COUNCILLOR J. L. CARTER: Less is the actually correct expression.

Just on the PCSOs, I am delighted with what you said on the PCSOs, they are excellent. I know Morley was - whether it was the first, I don't know - but they were very early in on the Town Council putting them in, and I know friends of mine in Morley who have said how they feel it has uplifted the area. They said there looks to be a lot more police on the streets, so that is great.

Can I just come back to the question of travellers, and I would like to come back to it. It is a very serious subject. You will remember at the last Council Meeting I asked all Members to let me know if they had any sites which they would wish we could use as a temporary site in their ward - in their ward. I have to be honest, I nearly had one, not a reply but I nearly had one person say that they were going to, but the rest of you didn't. Not one of you volunteered a site. Now, I am not surprised, but I am just going to tell you about that site that just now they have left up at Ardsley, Tingley. It was a mess. I am not being awful. When people ask for sympathy for travellers, I don't know how they expect us to give travellers sympathy. I waded through mud there that stunk, and I mean smelt vile. In fact, the Wellington boots I had, I threw away

PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com after, I didn't even keep. That was five months of people being on there, no consideration for the people who lived there whatsoever.

But even on a quicker one, if you go down to the site next to the school Geoffrey, in your ward.

COUNCILLOR DRIVER: No, it is not in my ward.

COUNCILLOR J. L. CARTER: Alright, I apologise, Geoff, but it was at a South Leeds school. Well, they were next to that. They were off as fast as you can legally do, I think it was nine days in total, but then you looked at the mess they left there.

Now, I think everybody who knows travellers, and I know somebody who knows something about travellers and is involved with them, should go to the travellers and say, "How the dickens do you expect to get any support off people, any support whatsoever, when you leave sites, when you do that to a community?" Because people just hit back and say, "No", and I am not surprised that nobody has come back to me and offered a temporary site.

I said "nearly" because, to be fair, I nearly did get an offer from the Independents for one in Morley. No, no, to be fair.

COUNCILLOR A. CARTER: They thought better of it.

COUNCILLOR J. L. CARTER: Well, they did. That's the point. They were just about to tell me a site and the Leader of the Independents dived in and said, "Just hang on a second. Whoa." I don't blame him politically. I don't blame him for doing that but it is difficult, and I do think also that other areas should build sites. I honestly think Kirklees and Calderdale should be putting sites up. We have got a site in Leeds, but it is enormously difficult, and it is a problem which at some stage you are going to have to solve, and it is not one that is going to be solved overnight, but I would use everything in the law at the moment to move people on, because I do not believe anybody should put up with what they are having to put up with.

Finally, I thought it was interesting in the newspaper and I read the article, and presumably the Independents will say it wasn't true, that the Independents had a meeting with some Minister somewhere - I don't know which Minister this Minister was - and within two weeks the travellers had left. Now, if you could bring that Minister to me, I shall put that Minister in an office next to mine, if he is so clever and has such capability, because David Blunkett has tried to influence judges and he can't do it, but the Morley Independent

PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com Councillors obviously can actually do it. But, having said that, you know damn well it wasn't.

I am glad that the Councillors from Tingley have now got that particular part of the problem solved. The next one now is to bring that playing field back into use, and it is going to take some time to do it because, quite honestly, they are going to scrape the whole of it off, the whole of the top off, and I can't see any youngsters or anybody who is prepared to play football on that until probably next year, well into next year.

COUNCILLOR DUNN: Thank you for that. It is in Cottingley. (Inaudible) Thank you.

COUNCILLOR J. L. CARTER: Did I say ---? I'm sorry. You know which site I am talking about, but it is going to take some time to clear it off and to make that into a playing field again.

I have nothing else to say, Lord Mayor. Thank you. (Applause)

COUNCILLOR PRYKE: Taking the matters in order, Lord Mayor. Councillor Leadley, thank you very much for your comments. You will be aware that the Scrutiny Board is considering travellers next at the December meeting, and the MBI Group have all been invited to come along. Your Leader is already a member of the Scrutiny Board, but everybody else is going to be very welcome at that meeting.

I thought I was particularly privileged to be probably the only person in Leeds to hear your contribution to Radio 4 on your local fair, so fame at last, nationally.

Councillor Grayshon, yes, PCSOs are very valuable people. We are looking at PCSOs and Wardens at our next meeting, our November meeting, and you will be very welcome to attend that one and talk to us as well as hearing from the Officers about things.

Councillor Lobley, the document you are referring to, of course, is out for consultation throughout the Council and the City now and, as ordained by the Government, Leeds City Council is going to have to adopt something as policy by March next year, so time is running out. I quite like your comparative shopping expeditions and I am glad you are factoring in bus fares now when you are buying apples from Leeds Market, although you seem to have abandoned Harehills Road for your purchases. Yes, it is very sad.

COUNCILLOR ATHA: Can we join in over here?

PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com COUNCILLOR PRYKE: I don't know, is the microphone on? Okay, it is a Government requirement and it will come back to the Executive Board next year, and no doubt we will talk about it again. Above all, I welcome your encouragement that we should repatriate responsibility for our own lives to this area from central Government, and a bit more of that all round the Council would be very welcome.

(g) Scrutiny board (Leisure)

COUNCILLOR ELLIOTT: My Lord Mayor, I wish to make a comment on page 103, Minute 5, part way down the page, "The Future of Local Authority Sports Centres".

I wish to draw the attention of this Council to the deplorable state of the Morley swimming facilities at our Leisure Centre. With the disintegrating roof insulation shedding into the swimming pool below, dirt, litter and a general air of shabbiness, it is both sub-standard and unacceptable.

With three senior schools and some 14 junior schools in our town, and more than 60,000 people, it seems vital to me that we provide a facility in Morley of an acceptable standard, which is certainly not the case at the present time. It is a disgrace.

The state of parts of the Morley Leisure Centre, which was built by the old Borough Council, is a blot on this City Council, and raises serious questions about its commitment to catering for the needs of those existing outside the big city, and please don't tell me that people from Morley and other outlying areas could use the South Leeds Stadium, as this would simply confirm to the inhabitants of those areas how little understanding, knowledge and caring the Council has of them, a suspicion which already exists and which I, for one, am keen to dispel. Thank you, Lord Mayor.

COUNCILLOR PROCTER: My Lord Mayor, it would be very easy to make a cheap, quick, political point about the issue you raised in relation to our sports and leisure centres. I don't want to do that. I haven't done that in relation to this issue.

I am grateful to Councillor Minkin and her Scrutiny Board for taking this on board as an urgent piece of work to look at and to deal with. It is an issue which I hope we can get a measure of all-party support on in terms of the way forward. We face a é50 million repair bill to repair and sort out all of our centres. I don't know there is going to be --- There certainly is no simple answer. I am not sure there is going to be one answer that will fit all of the centres,

PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com by any means, but I hope that we can perhaps step back from making any sort of political points and jibes and just focus on the issue of trying to get it right, and I hope that Councillor Minkin's Board will continue their good work in that direction. Thank you, Lord Mayor.

COUNCILLOR MINKIN: Thank you, Councillor Procter and Councillor Elliott. I am glad to say that Councillor McArdle has decided to join this working party and is now a member, and I am also glad to say that Councillor McArdle demonstrates at Scrutiny Board meetings a very broad understanding of the whole of Leeds and is not taking any provincial view at all about these things, and I have every confidence that, with him being a member of the Scrutiny Board working group under the chairmanship of Councillor Wilkinson, that indeed there will come back to Scrutiny Board some suggestions which we will be able to consider seriously whether we want to recommend those to Exec. Board or not. We shall see, but thank you, Councillor McArdle.

(h) Scrutiny Board (City Services)

THE LORD MAYOR: Councillor Beevers?

COUNCILLOR BEEVERS: Lord Mayor, I would like to withdraw, please.

THE LORD MAYOR: I think we are ready for a break now. The salad will be getting cold. We will take a break and we will be back here again, let's make it half past six, please.

(Short adjournment)

THE LORD MAYOR: Right, can we move on, please? It is rather warm this evening, so if you would like to loosen or take off items of clothing, please feel free. Would you make it quick, please. I will continue with Councillor Lancaster. This is on page 90, Minute 24.

Scrutiny Board (Social Care)

COUNCILLOR LANCASTER: Thank you, Lord Mayor. This minute discusses the issues around a City Centre Drop-in facility, and I made this referral to the Scrutiny Board initially when there was danger of the looked-after children losing their drop-in facilities, which has now been resolved, but this begged the question whether it was appropriate for all children in Leeds to have this facility in the city centre.

I found out that there are numerous agencies offer services on many sites across the City, many offering very valuable services.

PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com Young people don't have somewhere they can call in and access the services they need under one roof. There are nearly 70,000 young people in the 13-19 age bracket, and nearly 150,000 between ages 11 and 25 in Leeds. This is a huge proportion of the population, who are at a pivotal point in their lives, when they need the best possible support and advice to guide them through decision that could impact upon the rest of their lives.

I therefore welcome the Scrutiny Board (Social Care) recommendation to explore the feasibility of a city centre drop-in facility, and look forward to further reports to be presented to Scrutiny when the Corporate Priority Board for children reaches its conclusions. Thank you, Lord Mayor.

COUNCILLOR OGILVIE: Lord Mayor, as Councillor Lancaster said, the issue was looked at by last year's Social Care Scrutiny Board and they came up with a series of recommendations. This year's board considered a report from Officers at its last meeting to check progress on the recommendations that had been made by that last Scrutiny Board. I can assure Members of Council that Scrutiny are very interested in reviewing the progress of this, and we shall be incorporating considerations on this and other issues in the joint review that Social Care, Health and Lifelong Learning Boards are doing, looking at the whole Children's Act over the coming months.

(j) Overview and Scrutiny Committee

COUNCILLOR ILLINGWORTH: Lord Mayor, I speak today about the continuing loss of playing fields and recreational open space to property developers, and in doing so I must declare a personal interest as Secretary of Kirkstall Valley Park, which is a not-for- profit company but whose area of activity overlaps some of the land in question.

Lord Mayor, building on playing fields is a national scandal and the subject of an ongoing scrutiny inquiry by the Council. I am already concerned about how long this inquiry is taking, and I want to point out, Lord Mayor, that the ball is currently in the Officers' court, and I await their responses. Despite all the pious protestations, the haemorrhage continues.

One reason for these losses is that property developers work on a 20 year timescale, while politicians squabble among ourselves and usually look no further than the next election. Developers are adept at working through proxies and dressing up their most objectionable schemes to suggest some public benefit.

PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com Development pressures in Leeds have caused a very poor provision of recreational open space per head of population, especially in the inner city. I will give you two examples where land is being lost today: At Holt Park, playing fields will be destroyed as part of a school's PFI scheme, and near Kirkstall Abbey, where the Abbey Gardens are under threat from a most ingenious development scam.

This issue has come before the Council because of a maintenance backlog at St. Anne's Mills and Abbey Mills in Kirkstall. A proposal will go to the Executive Board in December. Officers have briefed the Kirkstall Members about a scheme to finance these repairs through residential development at Abbey Mills.

At first glance, this proposal looks innocuous but I am strongly opposed to it because it will cause immediate damage to Kirkstall Abbey Park, and I also believe it is the thin end of a long and dangerous wedge.

Lord Mayor, there is poor road access to Abbey Mills. Residential development would require a new exit to the A65 which is proposed through the southern end of Kirkstall Abbey Park. This is an attractive wooded area, and I don't want a new road through our public park. The proposed junction is on a bend with limited visibility - many Members will know it - some extensive tree felling and demolition is needed to improve the sight lines and address the obvious safety problems.

Having built this new road junction, and sold the land to a private developer, a more alarming possibility springs to mind. It would be very easy to divert the new road over the mill (?goyt) and into Allders' car park at the rear of their store. Another very easy bridge over the River Aire would open up Abbey Gardens for residential development.

My Lord Mayor, this is a huge area of agricultural land which was offered to the Council over 20 years ago by British Rail when Councillor Nash was Chair of Leisure. She wanted to buy it, to extend Kirkstall Abbey Park. Unfortunately, without the Council's knowledge, Provident Mutual snapped it up at a land auction in London. Since then they have repeatedly tried to lift the Green Belt designation in order to build on this hugely valuable site.

The land is presently used as playing fields by the Rugby Academy, but this is a temporary arrangement pending their removal to Bramhope where they seek a permanent home. The development issue is likely to resurface at this point.

PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com What I find alarming is that over the last several months a team of surveyors have systematically worked over the entire area around Bridge Road, very plainly pursuing a much larger scheme than the Allders' redevelopment which is currently before the Council. Owners and tenants have been discreetly approached to discover how much money they want for their land. Big, big plans are in the offing, Lord Mayor, and at the same time this Council is being asked to cede control over the only practicable road access to the site.

Thank you for your attention, Lord Mayor. I hope the wider issues will be considered by the Executive Board. Thank you.

COUNCILLOR A. CARTER: Lord Mayor on the same item, first of all, I entirely endorse Councillor Illingworth's comments relating to the paucity of playing fields, and the fact that actually under the Labour Government over the past 7 years a great many playing fields have been lost, and I think Councillor Illingworth would agree with me there. The result is that in areas such as West Leeds where both he and I hail from really, I suppose, that has been very marked. However, his comments with reference to Abbey Mills are simply incorrect.

Once again, and I won't dwell on this, but I have to remind Council that Abbey Mills have been left in a dreadful state for many years. Now, I don't know how often in the past Councillor Illingworth has raised the issue of Abbey Mills and St. Anne's Mills in Kirkstall with the previous leadership, but if he has they clearly didn't listen because they are now in a parlous state, one in particular.

To bring St. Anne's Mills -- sorry, Abbey Mills, up to scratch and lettable would cost up to é2 million. It is money we simply don't have. I know what you would like, because you have told me what you would like to see happen in Abbey Mills, and if we lived in a perfect work you would probably be right, but we don't, and what I would say to all Members of the Council is, and no decision has yet been taken. A report, as Councillor Illingworth quite rightly says, on both these mill complexes will come to the next Executive Board. Ward Members in Kirkstall have been consulted, and I will come back to that in a moment.

But what I would say to everybody here is, particularly the administration, how would you like me to stand here today and say to you that in all your wards I have come up with a method by which we can invest between half a million and é1 million in open space and public realm in your ward. You would throw your hats, if you had them, in the air. But actually that is precisely what this paper,

PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com when it comes, will be all about. It will be about proper management of the Council's assets, a recognition of the neglect of the past, and an opportunity to put money into your pet project, the Kirkstall Valley Park, which I am happy to say today, and I have had a meeting with Councillor Illingworth already, I entirely support. There is no way on that particular issue you will find much between Councillor Illingworth and myself, but the points he has brought forward today, most of them are unsubstantiated, one of the is plain scaremongering, and he knows that 90% of the issues he has raised can be dealt with through a Planning brief, as Councillor Minkin knows.

What I would like to see happen is this report come to the Executive Board with the support, however grudging, of the Ward Councillors, because we are where we are, as they say, and I am more than happy to discuss with all three Ward Councillors, Councillor Illingworth, all three Ward Councillors, the best way not only of delivering a sensible scheme that saves the Council money in the long run but actually enhances the two mill complexes and ensures that this development that you speak of, this extra development, can simply not take place, and there are ways of achieving that, but I have to say this to you: you know, you have to be reasonable and you have to accept that there is an opportunity here for something really excellent not just for Kirkstall but for the whole of West Leeds, but if you are going to play - I will put it very bluntly - silly fools, as you have in the past, and I have read this document you kindly sent me. I mean, you make a comment about Officers altering the designation of the land. That is absolutely not correct. Any alterations, as far as I have been informed, have come through the UDP process. The UDP process was steered through by your ward colleague so, you know, let's get some commonsense into this and deliver a scheme that we can all live with, and then get the Kirkstall Valley Park, which we would all rejoice over.

COUNCILLOR CLEASBY: Lord Mayor, well there then. I find it quite interesting, Councillor Illingworth, that you are so very keen on open space, and obviously so keen on scrutiny that you are prepared to go to the risk of being accused of abusing it by taking the privilege the way that you have.

The information that you supplied to us as Councillors, and also the information supplied to us verbally today, and I read from what you supplied to us, "This land is a sporting and visual asset for the entire City, not just for Kirkstall Ward." Well, if I change "Kirkstall" for "Horsforth", could I then compare this with Trinity and All Saints, which you did nothing about but your ward colleague definitely did, by her definite positive inactions in the UDP when she

PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com refused to change the UDP and change the designation, and so we have seen a deputation of my residents today for that very reason.

But, Councillor Illingworth, I will be very brief. It is late. I printed out everything you sent us and Councillor Carter is absolutely right as the new Executive Board Member to admonish you. Your own words, 11, on the last page - to save you printing it out I will read it to you: "The maintenance problem stems from the Council's mismanagement because we failed to invest in either building at the appropriate time". Now, those are your words, Councillor. Why didn't you tell it, as Councillor Carter suggested it, to your administration? I hope you are listening, Councillor Wakefield; it was your administration at the time, so let's not keep blaming the new administration for making decisions that don't suit you. (Interruption)

COUNCILLOR ATHA: It wasn't. That's the whole point.

COUNCILLOR CLEASBY: No, no, no. Well, the information supplied to me, Councillor Atha, is that, and I will read: "Informal discussions about residential development started - underlined - early this year. Ward Members were informed." So, please, don't pretend that you didn't know about it. You have been involved, so why didn't you do something about it? Why didn't you do something about it? (Interruption) And instead of bogusly trying to get something onto the agenda under Scrutiny in the way you have, perhaps you should apply your time as OSC asked you to, and that is to join in the mapping of our green space to see where the holes are, where the problems are, and then, as Councillor Carter says, let's do something about it. Thank you, Lord Mayor.

(l) Plans Panel (East)

COUNCILLOR SCHOFIELD: Lord Mayor, page 171, Minute 108, the site of the former Killingbeck Hospital. Those of us who have lived in East Leeds for many years are well aware of the recent history of the extensive grounds of the old hospital, and take an interest in what the future might hold for such a prominent site.

I attended the Plans (East) site meeting earlier last month and was an interested observer, hearing what the Councillors on the Plans (East) Committee had to say with the Officers as they were taken on a tour around the grounds by bus. Questions were asked, comments were made, but I was surprised at the response by Officers to the involvement by the Planning Committee Members. The Officers had to warn the Members that many of the helpful suggestions that were being made would be difficult to enforce because of two legal agreements.

PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com One had been signed in August 2003. Another legal agreement had been signed earlier in the year 2001.

I made some enquiries and there seemed to be no recollection in the department of published approval of those two legal agreements. There is no open record. There is no trace of Elected Members being responsible for determining the future of the Killingbeck Hospital site.

It is a most unusual situation. I would be grateful if anyone in Council could shed some light on this problem. There may be grounds for concern. Thank you, Lord Mayor.

COUNCILLOR SELBY: Lord Mayor, apropos the same minute, and it is the last sentence, it says, "Ward Members to be consulted. The matter was adjourned." I don't propose to comment on the actual application itself because that would result in being accused of pre- determination. What I am concerned about is the way consultation has taken place between Officers and Members, and certainly the new Members of the Killingbeck and Seacroft Ward is concerned.

We had a briefing at the end of July from Officers. Following that briefing, a number of questions were raised with Planning Officers about the application. No reply was forthcoming. It was not until after the papers had been sent out for the meeting in September that I received an e- mail responding to certain of the issues that I raised. That concerns me.

The papers came before the Panel in September. It was agreed to go for a site visit. We had the site visit. I don't intend to comment on what happened there, that would be a matter for another time but, following that site visit and following the discussion that took place, it was agreed that Ward Members would be consulted about issues raised. What concerns me is that no consultation has taken place.

I received the papers for tomorrow's meeting last Wednesday. The application is back on the agenda. On Thursday I received a letter from the Planning Department sending me a letter dated 24th October, but including in that a copy of a letter that they had received from the applicant's agents dated 25th October. It is a total nonsense to agree to having Ward Members be consulted if meetings are taking place between Officers and the planning agents and then placing the matter on the agenda before Ward Members are consulted as this minute requests.

PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com I am concerned about the matter. I raise it in this way and I hope that at some point those who are in charge of the Department will have a word with those Officers to ensure that this situation does not happen either in Killingbeck/ Seacroft or for that matter anywhere else in the City. It comes down to the Executive Member to see that he actually runs his department and sees to it that his Officers do what they agree to do.

COUNCILLOR A. CARTER: My Lord Mayor, I thank Councillor Schofield for his comments, and to some degree Councillor Selby as well.

I became aware that there was something that was not exactly like normal, shall we say, over this particular application when Members of the Planning Committee drew to my attention the existence of these legal agreements, which I have to remind Councillor Selby go back to 2001 and August of last year. It is my view, and I suppose I can say this because I am not a member of the Planning Committee, as Executive Member responsible for Development & Sustainability I should not be and will not be, but I would caution any Members of Planning who might want to talk, because the matter will be coming before the Panel again this week. But I was very concerned, because it seemed to me that the rights and privileges of the Members of the Planning Committee have been somewhat signed away by these agreements, and that Members were left with very little to do but almost rubber- stamp an application, and a very large application at that.

Furthermore, I became, as I dug into matters, and I have to say I had, as far as I am concerned, absolute clarity and openness from the department, who told me what had gone on, I suspect, and I am not putting words in anybody's mouth, an element of embarrassment exists about what has gone on, because what I discover is we have a large development site on which there is no provision for affordable housing on one of the most sustainable sites in the City. One of the best public transport routes into the city centre, and there is no provision for affordable housing, and yet we are demanding massive quantities of affordable housing all over the place elsewhere when there is virtually no public transport to speak of whatever, so how has this come about?

Well, what I promise, Members of Council, is this, that we will investigate, and we are investigating within the Department, and if necessary I shall invite my colleague Councillor Cleasby to scrutinize, and his colleagues, to scrutinize what is happening. I cannot promise you there are no more such legal agreements, because every day something else seems to land that really invites a whole series of questions.

PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com However, I have a little good news, and that is that I suggested to senior Officers of the Department that they spoke to the developer and said to the developer that the new administration was not very happy with this, and we realised, of course that the legal agreements had been signed but we asked them to consider whether or not there shouldn't be some affordable housing.

I am able to tell you that we have received a letter from the developers indicating a very small number of affordable units. What it does, however, is establish the principle that that site is suitable for some affordable housing. I can say no more, and I certainly cannot and should not direct Members of the Planning Committee as to how to vote, but I think now we have established the principle that that site can contain affordable housing.

What I want to know is how come the documents were ever signed in the first place that said there shouldn't be, because it seems to me to cut across sustainability, completely cut across sustainability, and I am told that maybe people from another place, as they say, brought influence to bear in the discussions and the negotiations that took place. Perhaps we will ask questions there. Perhaps you, Councillor Selby, should ask questions there. Certainly, I know that Officers who finally - or an Officer - who finally signed off the deal has retired so, as usual, the paper trail seems to come to a horrible end, but I am concerned, and I am concerned because we go, Keith here - and the last document was signed, by the way, under your leadership - I am concerned that Members' democratic rights on the Planning Committee have been reduced by the way this has been handled, and it is not acceptable. (Applause)

COUNCILLOR FOX: My Lord Mayor, I tread warily through this minefield. Members will be aware that it is up for discussion and determination tomorrow, and I think that the best thing I can do is to say that I have no doubt that Members of the Panel have listened with interest to the comments which have been made tonight, and they will doubtless take them into consideration when coming to a view tomorrow. Thank you, my Lord Mayor.

(r) Area Committees - South (Outer)

COUNCILLOR FINNIGAN: Lord Mayor, I would just like to comment briefly on page 308, Minute 18, which is the Primary Review, the proposals for Morley Central Primary Planning Area. What we really want to say are three points on this. The first is to congratulate Education Leeds on approaching this with sensitivity and sympathy in

PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com terms of their support for the local community. It is a difficult decision that they actually made and we were very supportive of their actual approach, and I think the community itself accepted that, although this was a difficult decision, it was an appropriate decision to make, and we are grateful for their sensitivity in this particular case.

The second issue, top of page 309, is again the admission number of Morley Newlands Primary School being raised to 60 from 45. You will remember we debated this last year with a rather confusing 45/60 issue that has finally got resolved, and again we are grateful that what seemed to us to be a commonsense approach was adopted in this particular case and those children who were going to go to Newlands and were going to have difficulties with that will not have to face the trauma and difficulty of a Schools Appeal. Thank you, Lord Mayor.

North West (Inner)

COUNCILLOR HUSSAIN: My Lord Mayor, Members of the Council, I would like to speak on page 231, item 37(e) in relation to the Royal Park Green Space Scheme. I am delighted that the North West (Inner) Area Committee has agreed to provide the final piece of funding to allow this fantastic outdoor sporting facility to go ahead. This outdoor scheme will include an all-weather out-door sports pitch suitable for out-door sporting activities including football, cricket and basketball. In addition to this, there will also be a separate play area for children and landscape seating area suitable for picnics.

The school is due for completion by summer 2005 in time for when schools break up for summer holidays, allowing the local youth and youngsters to access this facility over this extended holiday period.

I am also pleased that this facility will also have a disabled access in order for them to access the park.

The Royal Park area of Hyde Park have been crying out for this facility for a very long time now, and this facility will bring about a positive change in terms of regeneration of the area. I also feel that this will also reduce the anti-social behaviour that is within the realms of this ward.

PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com On a final note, my colleagues and I welcome the funding that has been provided by the North West (Inner) Area Committee, and we feel that this scheme will benefit the whole of the local community of the Royal Park area of Hyde Park, and we are looking forward to seeing this completed scheme in the summer. Thank you. (Applause)

COUNCILLOR HAMILTON: Lord Mayor, first of all, could I congratulate Councillor Hussain on his maiden speech.

This is a scheme that has actually had quite a long gestation period. Is there an echo in here? I was singing the praises of the scheme. It has had a long gestation period. Is that better? (Interruptions) Okay, I will be brief.

COUNCILLOR ATHA: How long was the gestation period?

COUNCILLOR HAMILTON: Oh, several years. This is something that has been discussed for quite a long time now, and I know that money from a whole variety of sources has been put to use to fund this scheme and, in fact, this was the final piece of the jigsaw that enabled us to go ahead with it, so it is nice, actually, that the Area Committee was able to put quite a small amount of money into a scheme which actually overall is very large and, you know, involves, as Councillor Hussain says, a number of facilities. In fact, I think Councillor Doreen Illingworth was involved in this in the early days, so that shows you that it has been going for quite a few years, has this particular scheme.

Of course, this is only one of many schemes that we were able to agree at the last Area Committee meeting, and I am bound to say that, thanks to the revised formula that the administration has come up with for the Wellbeing Fund, that means that far more schemes are going to be funded in the Inner area than would have been the case under the previous administration, and that includes schemes in Kirkstall.

THE LORD MAYOR: Thank you. Before I call upon Councillor Harris, can I just apologise to Councillor Hussain. It was not brought to my attention it was your maiden, but obviously other Members of Council did recognise that, and I do thank you.

COUNCILLOR HARRIS: Lord Mayor, fortunately I have crossed out most of the comments, so I am going to deal with four, if I may. First of all, though Councillor Leadley has gone, I ought to comment on Supertram and to reiterate again that it is a pity that the Morley Independents are not part of what is still, and always has been, unanimity in this chamber to support the Supertram bid. I mean, the

PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com situation is on the 15th of this month the revised bid will be put forward. It will actually be received by Hilary Benn and then taken down to London for us, and then we will have to wait and see what happens.

I think on this side we are agreed, however, with one thing that Councillor Leadley said, which is if, following this resubmission, the answer is, "No", then it is "No", and we just cannot afford to mess around any longer hoping that somehow, heaven forbid it is rejected again, but hoping against hope at some point in the future it may be resurrected, and we will then have to turn our attentions to an alternative, so we will see. But, you know, we are looking at it and the glass is half full not half empty, and we have every reason to hope and be confident that the revised suggestions we are putting forward will be acceptable to Ministers and they will honour their long-standing promise to us that we will have this transport scheme in Leeds.

Councillor Minkin - advertising. First of all, I apologise that in fairness Steve Smith couldn't have dealt with this. There is no way he could have seen it coming under the minute you raised it under, so there is no way he could comment on it.

Can I split my comments in two? First of all, you will be aware under your time as the portfolio-holder that there was a suggestion of, I believe, looking for é200,000 worth of advertising around the City, and that was put on hold, withdrawn - I think that is correct. Well, the situation is that we have reinstigated that, and that Officers have been told to secure or to attempt to secure, that level of advertising and look for sites around the City, so that is the situation, and we do propose to try and go ahead with that.

With regard to street lighting, it would be disingenuous of me to say other than we would hope to maximize the level of advertising that we can get once the new street lighting PFI scheme goes ahead. What level that will be, I cannot say. It is with consultants. The consultants will report, I think, after Christmas, at which point a report will come back to Exec. Board and there will be the opportunity to discuss it then, but I have to say to you in fairness, not just in terms of advertising but right across the piece, the administration is looking at all sorts of ways to maximize and grow income so that we have got additional cash over and above what could be raised on the rates, or come through support from London, in order for us to deliver more and better services.

Councillor Gruen, I have to say that if anybody is attempting to destabilize and scare the employees of this authority, it is you

PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com and the Labour Group, because you are constantly putting in their heads that there is some sort of insidious, nasty conspiracy on the part of the administration to do them down, deprive them of their rights, take their jobs away, make their lives intolerable, and that is not the case at all.

Now, you again raised, and I wasn't going to deal with it today, but you again raised the question of weekly pay moving to monthly pay, and this is the information that you will get tomorrow, but let's be absolutely clear on what has happened in the consultation process, written consultation process, and what employees have said. Of 9,500 affected employees, 13% have objected, 13% have objected to moving from weekly to monthly pay. That means that 87% (Interruptions) It is not rubbish. These are the figures that will be given to you tomorrow, and it is true. It is absolutely true. 87% have accepted it without objection, so it is you that is attempting to scare 87% of those employees and make them believe that something (Interruptions) Look, Jim, just you be quiet because you are getting your turn in a minute. (Interruptions) Jim, you are the wind-up act. Just wait, okay.

Now, you are the ones who are scaring employees, but can I tell you about that great big pile of paper you had at the last Council Meeting, or before? I didn't attack it then. If I didn't make mention of it in Council, I did say to somebody afterwards it reminded me of the Chartist Petition, and when somebody examined it, it sort of had "Punch" had signed 500 of the petition signatures, "Queen Victoria" was there 23 times. (Applause) When it was analysed, a quarter of the Chartist Petition was purely fictitious. Well, let me tell you, that pile of 1,000 objections having been analysed actually amounts to 734. That is how many you had there. Added to the ones which came back to the Department directly, it amounts to 13% of the employees objecting, so it is all puff, bluff and bluster. Stop scaring the employees and start acting - you start acting - responsibly.

Now, Jim McKenna. It is staggering. Andrew and I were talking about this. (Interruptions) We are coming to that, actually. We are coming to that. You will like it. You will like it. Andrew and I were talking about the fact that clearly the front bench of the Opposition can't possibly talk to each other because, had they, Keith Wakefield would have warned Jim McKenna off from raising that issue. He would have told Jim McKenna. He would have said that on absolute detailed legal advice we handled the matter in a way that we were legally and carefully advised to do so, and Keith agreed with that. He didn't demur from that. He agreed with that.

PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com COUNCILLOR McKENNA: Remember, they will be reading the verbatim. Be careful.

COUNCILLOR HARRIS: He agreed with that, but unfortunately you raised the issue and then went on to raise the issue of what we discuss in Cabinet and that somehow that should be a public meeting. Well, the only word to describe that is bonkers. You are stark raving bonkers to suggest ---

COUNCILLOR McKENNA: I have hit the mark then, have I? Great, great.

COUNCILLOR HARRIS: -- to suggest that an administration dealing with sensitive, difficult issues at Cabinet should make that public minuted. You are absolutely bonkers. Now let me tell you ---

COUNCILLOR ATHA: Aren't you under-stating it? (Interruptions)

COUNCILLOR HARRIS: Let me tell you, as I put my glasses on and look across there and look dreamily at the names there and look forward to the day when the name Mark Carter or Andrew Harris appears there. I think what do I have in common with the others? Albert King, I didn't know him. Irwin Bellow, nice Jewish boy, Peter Sparling sold me mother my first school anorak. George Mudie, canny lad like me. Brian Walker, nice chap. Keith Wakefield, suave, smooth, just like me. Jon Trickett, well, we went to the same school but at least I got an education (applause) and, I am finishing, Lord Mayor, my last sentence, and when I became Leader at least I didn't send a memo round saying I should be known as (?Obengrupenfuhrer), and of one thing I am absolutely certain, I am not bonkers like him because I listen to legal advice. (Applause)

(The minutes as amended were approved)

ITEM 9 - WHITE PAPER MOTION - CONTROL OF FIREWORKS

COUNCILLOR WAKEFIELD: Lord Mayor, after that final farewell speech, it is going to be a hard act to follow.

COUNCILLOR LYONS: What does he want for his long service award?

COUNCILLOR WAKEFIELD: Well, I thought we should have a collection, yes. Perhaps some videos of China or some cards or something like that.

MEMBER OF COUNCIL: Louisville?

PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com COUNCILLOR WAKEFIELD: No, China is the one.

I think we can probably get through this fairly quickly, because I don't think there is going to be much of a debate. I think we have ended the football hopes, Peter, I'm sorry about that.

COUNCILLOR HARRAND: 20 years I have waited for tonight.

COUNCILLOR WAKEFIELD: 20 years for Burnley playing Leeds, but I do think that probably it ought to be said that this Friday many of us will be going to the bonfire, City-wide bonfire or community bonfire or even family bonfire, and I think most of us who do take part in those events really enjoy that community feel for it, and it is something that many of us do get some enjoyment out of.

I also though can recall, because we have had this debate on a number of occasions here, that we also recognise certainly over the last few years this is also a time of great distress for people, particularly the elderly, particularly the sick, and particularly the vulnerable, and increasingly so, what is never really stated are animals and pets which really do get traumatized around this time of the year.

I haven't forgotten either, and I think Les has probably touched upon this, or will do, but there was, and I am not sure whether it is a growing issue now or whether it is under some degree of control, an issue about criminal use of fireworks. Certainly, the use of fireworks for burglary, for intimidation, for arson, for actually drug-laundering is one that I think has been creeping up over the years. I think that is something that we ought to be very mindful about when we talk about November 5th.

But despite what people say, and this is only anecdotal, I actually think there has been some improvements this year. I actually do think that if you talk to communities, as we did last night in Methley, or you talk to other people, people do think it is not as bad this year as it has been for many, many years, and I think that is due to a number of factors. I think one, while it is not perfect, I think Government legislation has started to help create not just the legislation but a mood, particularly with banning airbombs, banning mini-rockets, banning other loud forms of noises with fireworks, I think that has helped enormously, but I also think trying to control the buying, the supply and the use of fireworks, as Les mentioned earlier, has brought about a different change in our attitudes to that, and I think it would be worth recording our thanks to all the agencies who have been involved.

PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com The YEP is not here but they have done a very good job at profiling this, but I also think the Police and the Trading Standards, the Fire Authority and the Community Safety Department, plus other agencies of the Council, have worked very effectively this year and have reduced the menace of fireworks in our community, and I know Les would think it was remiss of me not to thank him as well, but he has actually tried to lead this and I am sure that, when the next multi- agency conference comes along, I will be invited because, believe it or not, I haven't been invited for the last couple of occasions. It is just, as Les said, it slipped his mind, but now we have got it on record I am pretty sure that, as Chair of the West Yorkshire Trading Standards, I will be invited for the next agency, so I think it is worth putting on record our appreciation, and in actual fact I think there is probably still more to do, and that is why -- the nature of this White Paper.

The Government is introducing legislation in January 2005 which will control more about the selling and supplying of fireworks, but the one area I think that we can really lobby together on is the noise levels, because 120 decibels is far too loud still, and that is the legal limit. Now, it is very hard to describe how you measure noise if you are not used to it. It is based on a logarithmic formula, so when it goes up from 95 to 100, it is actually four times louder, so 95 to 120 is 400 times louder in intensity than it is at 95, and that, I don't know whether anybody has got --- It is like sometimes, you know when David Blackburn is shouting praise of Andrew, well that is about 120. The other way you can measure that is actually listening to a jet 100 metres off, so that is roughly the sound of 120, which is far, far, far too loud for I think fireworks and fireworks displays, and again people living next to those kind of noises do suffer distress, do experience anxiety, and so on.

So I think that is something that this White Paper very briefly can get, I think, unity around. I will just briefly talk about the amendments, because I think the amendment from the Morley Independents is far too crude a weapon. To ban it for two weeks misses out some very important cultural events. The Chinese New Year, as you know, is January/ February. Diwali, the Hindu festival, is October/November, plus there are also other occasions that we use fireworks with, and just to say 50 weeks and 2 weeks ban I think is too simplistic.

I actually think Les was nearly there. I am more than happy to accept Les's amendment on this, because I think if anybody goes in and legally buys 5 tonnes of fireworks, well, gunpowder, they are absolutely mad. I would suggest it is more illegal that they do that, illegally, but I think his amendments I am more than happy to

PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com accept, except the last line which is about congratulating Les and nobody else. (Interruptions)

COUNCILLOR J. L. CARTER: You rotten so-and-so.

COUNCILLOR WAKEFIELD: Now, you know, we all like praising you, Les, and deferring to you, but I do think, I actually think there is something we can actually do together. It does cause distress and we could all vote for this White Paper and lower the noise levels to 95.

With that, Lord Mayor, I will move this. Thank you. (Applause)

THE LORD MAYOR: Councillor Dowson. It is also Councillor Dowson's maiden speech.

COUNCILLOR DOWSON: My Lord Mayor, fellow Councillors, I have got a confession to make. I love fireworks. I love the colours, I love the excitement, I love the displays. I am sure many of you feel the same as I do.

COUNCILLOR LOWE: No.

COUNCILLOR DOWSON: Oh, Alison, never mind. Many of you will remember the good old days when a box of Standard fireworks was the height of firework sophistication, and you will remember dad disappearing down to the bottom of the garden with a taper, and the loudest firework out of the box was the Traffic Light or the Roman Candle or the Volcano. I can't help wondering how we got from there to where we are now, where fireworks are used to harm and to intimidate.

These days I go to organised displays. They are spectacular and I hold in awe the skills of the people who make and run those displays. Those of us who go to those displays know what we are going to see and what we are going to hear, unlike the elderly, children, sick, pets, who are in their own homes and who fear the noise of the bangs, the roars and the crashes outside. Some fireworks are so powerful they even make car alarms go off.

Now, the spirit of this White Paper is to protect the vulnerable in our society, both human and animals, and those of us who want to lower the decibel levels are not killjoys. In fact, quite the opposite; we love fireworks and we are acutely aware that the action is needed to ensure that everyone can enjoy fireworks without being disturbed by excessive noise.

PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com The Government's new regulations that came into force in August are a step in the right direction, but anti-social use of fireworks should be totally unacceptable. In my ward, fireworks are used to frighten and intimidate residents, sometimes intentionally and sometimes the noise nuisance is totally unintentional but is there nevertheless. And this is not unique to my area; across the City the noise of fireworks both before and after the curfew can be heard, and they often rejoice in fantastic names that we didn't know in our time: Airbombs, Skyblaster, Bigshot. Their booming noise can be heard echoing around the City at night.

Those of you who have pets will know that cats and dogs have particularly sensitive hearing, and loud bangs from fireworks are unbearable to them. The noise brings about hysterics and aggression, and many pets go to desperate lengths to escape the noise, and because pet-owners don't know when these noises and explosions are going to occur they can't protect their pets.

Now, the RSPCA is deeply disappointed that the new regulations don't go further. Their research indicates that 81% of the general public think that loud fireworks should only be allowed at public displays. They call for a noise level of 95 decibels for private use, the equivalent to the noise of a car door slamming. The present 120 decibels, as Keith said, is likened to a jet aircraft taking off.

Now, many guide dogs suffer. These dogs are trained specifically to care and assist their owners. Guide Dogs for the Blind report that every year dogs are traumatized and in some cases have to be retired at a huge cost both financial and personal to those owners who are dependent on them. Now, the cost to the Association of retiring a dog is up to é25,000 and has a devastating effect on the life of that bind person.

Help the Aged have said that the elderly often feel like prisoners in their own homes, and this is supported by calls I have had in my own ward. One lady said, and I quote, "The first firework of the evening went off half way through Coronation Street" - very disturbing to an old age pensioner - "The noise was so loud my heart missed a beat. It was so loud the front window rattled, and the dog hid under the table in the kitchen and it took me two hours to persuade her to come out." Recently she told me this has happened every night.

This White Paper goes some way to address one of the major concerns of this special group of people at this time of year. I

PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com would ask you to remember, remember, on this the 3rd of November, gunpowder, reason and not allow excess noise now and all year round for our residents. This motion deprives no-one of their enjoyment of fireworks displays, but protects us all, and especially the vulnerable, from excessive noise levels.

The new regulations go a long way to address public concerns. Bangers and airbombs have been banned from general use and can only be seen at organised displays. It is an offence to throw or discharge a firework in the street, and for under-18s to possess a firework in a public place. Restriction on the times fireworks may be used has helped, and Trading Standards are doing an excellent job locating retailers who are selling fireworks in contravention of the new laws, but we need to address the issue of noise reduction.

In seconding, I hope you will all see that protecting the elderly, sick, young, pets, working dogs and their owners from excessive noise is a worthy cause and one we can all rally around, and I call on you all to support this White Paper. Thank you. (Applause)

COUNCILLOR McARDLE: My Lord Mayor, I won't read the amendment out. I thought long and hard before tabling this amendment because a lot of what Councillor Wakefield says and Councillor Dowson says is absolutely spot on. I think there is a lot of meaningful text in this, and I think it is worthwhile doing, and I take the point about the exponential noise levels from 95 to 120, but even that, you know, why 95? Why not lower? I think fireworks shouldn't be noisy. I think fireworks are aesthetic, and I think people should remember that. They have an aesthetic quality, and it shouldn't be all about noise and, you know, the little comment about Standard fireworks is everything most people can remember here. We don't want bombs. You know, bombs are just not acceptable, and if you have ever --- A couple of incidents, I know. If you have pets, do you know what it's like to come home to your living room and perhaps it be decimated because somebody has let a bomb off and the dog has been so distressed that they have destroyed the sofa. That is é1,000. Okay, you can claim it off your insurance, but the devastation that that causes is absolutely (inaudible).

And this has happened to me this year. I have been walking down Queen Street in Morley and 10ft., 15ft. in front of me a rocket came across in front of me horizontally. It was almost like vandalism there to actually scare me, and by gum it did. You know, you don't have to be a pensioner to be scared by fireworks. You can be in your 20s and your 30s and your 40s, you know, and you are still scared by a rocket going off, so I take all the points.

PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com I think in terms of the enforcement it is still not happening, and I take on board the point about the new legislation. It is having an effect but it is not effective enough, and I would like to see a lot more. In fact, the Government inferred if this legislation is not enough they will come back to it, which means in my opinion that that legislation is not absolutely spot on yet, so again the legislation is ineffective.

I think we need to talk about imports. All these -- the majority of these fireworks are imported and do they meet the requirements? Well, again Trading Standards are doing a wonderful job of late, but there are still a lot on the black market that comes in. I don't go to car boot sales, but I have heard stories that these are available at various places like car boot sales and I think Trading Standards, although they are doing a wonderful job, could actually do a little better.

I think in terms of Councillor Dowson, you know, I am not a big fireworks fan but I think the way to go is public firework displays controlled by experts who know exactly what they are doing. I am not a big fan of garden fireworks, and I take Councillor Wakefield's point on board about Diwali and Chinese New Year, but because you have got a 50 week ban doesn't mean to say you can exclude Diwali and Chinese New Year.

I remember when I was a lad you went out and got your fireworks in the last week, because that is the only time they had them on sale there so, you know, we can be inclusive and still implement a 50 week ban. I think that is quite possible.

So I would ask you to support my amendment and hope that it is passed. Thank you.

COUNCILLOR FINNIGAN: My Lord Mayor, in formally seconding the amendment, just to raise a few comments, really, very briefly.

I think there is an acceptance with all three resolutions that what we have got at the moment isn't good enough, we want to go that little step further, and we are not too worried whether we support Keith's or the further amendment on this particular one, but I think there is an acceptance and a realisation that what we have got at the moment, even if it was better than what we have had before, doesn't go far enough.

Now, there are a lot of people who basically feel we should get to a stage where we are going to official demonstrations of

PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com fireworks, and that whatever little advantage they get from letting off your little box of fireworks in the back garden is overwhelmed by the fact that they are used inappropriately, and what we are trying to do is look at the supply of things because enforcement, with the best will in the world, certainly from the policing angle, doesn't work.

You are all having problems after 11 o'clock at night when people are letting off live fireworks. That has been happening for at least the last three or four weeks in Morley. I suspect it is happening the same across the City. You are in a situation where ultimately all you can do is try and control the supply, and that's what we are trying to do.

We have no problems with the suggestion of bringing down the noise levels. We have really no problems in terms of Les's amended resolution and, again, talks about limiting the supply. I think as long as there is general consensus that we need to move forward, that what we have got at the moment is not good enough, I am sure we can all be unified on this.

COUNCILLOR J. L. CARTER: Lord Mayor, there have been some very good speeches on this particular subject, because it is a subject which I don't think people are a million miles apart from each other, if we actually sit down and talk about these things seriously.

If I could just go through my own amendment, the question of the 5 tonnes was something that came out of these meetings that we are organising. I couldn't believe it, personally. I just could not believe that, you know, somebody next door --- If you are living in a semi and the bloke next door has got 5 tonnes of fireworks in his house and has them quite legally. Well, it is a nonsense, and I am certain MPs probably don't know that it is, and you have also got to go out and buy 5 tonnes of fireworks. Now, the probably is that it won't be great, but the point is it can happen, so it should be gone.

The other point which came out of these meetings as well, which is not a question of lobbying Government, it is advising Government. Two areas were identified. These are two areas identified for national lobbying: the source of illegal fireworks appears to be the disappearance of otherwise legal containers entering the country. Evidently a large number of containers which have come in legally into the country vanish, just vanish off the face of the earth, and this is a large number. This is where the illegal ones come in that we were talking about earlier, and what we should be asking for, and I am certain we all do ask for, is tighter checks at the port of entry on the transportation of fireworks, and that if we are not careful we will never stop it.

PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com Now, I think they can stop it if they know --- I am trying to think of the figures from memory now. I think it was about 150 containers came in and is it 50 go missing? I might be wrong on the numbers there, but it is a huge number just go missing, and they can go anywhere.

Now, earlier I said to you that we have been organising these meetings, and I was very proud and very supportive of the people who came to help us, actually. Let me just give you some of the programme that they decided to agree to after we set these meetings up. West Yorkshire Trading Standards, which Keith is the Chairman, and Keith quite rightly says that he wasn't invited to the meetings. Now, that was done purposely (Laughter). It wasn't an oversight on my part, and I will tell you why, because if I go right through the different people that we invited, the Police, Fire, Youth Service, Environmental Health, Community Safety, Legal & Democratic, going right through them, there would have been an army there if I had invited all the Labour people who were involved in those bodies, and that is the reason it wasn't done. I mean, if Keith had been in Wakefield -- not in Wakefield, sorry, he would have been quite happy to accept that, and I think it is because he lives in Leeds.

But, having said that, his people, and I will call them his people, they had a programme of visits to retailers to remind them of the need to seek proof of age when selling fireworks and also warn them, because the other thing is, to ensure that 18 year olds and over don't buy them and supply them to younger people. They conducted checks and tests to ensue that all fireworks complied with the current legislation in respect of noise and that airbombs are no longer sold, to ensure that they were not sold, and they conducted test purchasing operations in appropriate circumstances.

The West Yorkshire Police, they agreed to conduct joint visits with the Trading Standards at premises selling fireworks, co- ordinate targeted activity at those illegally selling or starting fireworks, to write to all those who were subject to Anti-Social Behaviour Orders, on acceptable Behaviour Contracts, and remind them of the changes in the law and the joint action that had been taken by our particular partners. They have targeted patrols in certain areas in respect of fireworks misuse and they also enforced current legislation powers where appropriate.

The West Yorkshire Fire Service, they entered into joint arrangements with the Police and the Trading Standards and they also provided various skips at certain places which shall remain nameless for the confiscated fireworks. Now, some of these were horrendous,

PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com and if anybody saw that wonderful picture of me in yesterday's Evening Post with all those fireworks, you will realise just the size of some of those fireworks. It was quite unbelievable. And then there were other people as well involved.

This is why I said earlier that I want to congratulate the people --- Keith is right, self-congratulation is nothing, but I am saying thank you really to the people, and the many people, who worked on this and tried to help us.

Now, if I look at my particular amendment, if I can just quickly go down the various aspects of it. We have talked about the 5 tonne - fine, I think there is no argument there. Re-examine and what site noise level - well, I am not going to say anything on that because I am very fortunate, I have a fairly expert Lead Member who is going to second this motion and who will be able to talk about that particular subject. And then the restriction of fireworks, when we restrict them and how we restrict them. I still can't understand, to be quite honest, the Independents' doesn't actually ban it for 50 weeks in the year, so I don't understand how people who are of other faiths, other positions, can buy them under your amendment, and they could under mine. I don't think they can under yours, and that is why I have tried to change that.

Also, and they are not here so I am not trying to give them congratulations when they are here, I tried to thank the YEP because I think the YEP have been enormously supportive on this. They really have been supportive. There have been various things they have set up. They set up one today which was a lovely meeting I had with children in Little London. There will be Councillors from Little London here. It was the first time I have visited Little London Primary School and the children in there were absolutely fantastic, and the teachers had gone through all the things they can do and all the things they can't do, and these youngsters in that school are tremendous and a great credit to their parents and to their teachers. The only thing I thought is, at the end of this, bearing in mind all the ASBOs in Little London, that there were children in there from four to ten. I hope in two years time I am not the silly so-and-so sticking ASBOs on them. We have got to find out what happens at the top, because they are brilliant, these kids. They were absolutely brilliant. I know that is nothing to do with fireworks, but they were absolutely brilliant.

So if I can just come back and finally say, Keith, I hope you will support us. I am certain you will give the new boy, you know, a pat on the back for him trying. The rest of it, I am certain there's no arguments in Council. Thank you, my Lord Mayor. (Applause)

PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com COUNCILLOR BRETT: My Lord Mayor, I am seconding the amendment in Councillor Les Carter's name and, as ever, when you are near the end of the batting order you rip up half your speech because other people have said it.

I am, like Les, amazed that 5 tonnes of fireworks is apparently legal in a private home. Obviously, we need to be lobbying for a sensible household storage limit which ought to be a few kilograms.

We are not far apart. The three different motions and however many different parties, five parties, we are close to agreement. We have, I think, before us an opportunity where, if we all support a motion that we can agree, it could form part of our lobbying of Government to do even better next year, so I am changing slightly what I had intended to say to be less confrontational about noise. As has already been said, it is a logarithmic scale. The factor, I broadly agree with Keith, is a factor of about 400 between 120 decibels and 95 decibels, but what he didn't explain is that that is not the perceived difference to the human ear, so I am not convinced that 95 decibels is right. I am happy to explore a lower sound limit, but not 95 decibels.

I am only too well aware, as other people have said, that animals are particularly at risk and when, as a relatively new member of the Police Authority, I visited the horses, one of the things they said is that at this time of year they do not have the horses going out because one firework can ruin, if it goes off near a horse, a police horse, one firework I am told can ruin that horse. Is that right, Neil?

COUNCILLOR TAGGART: You were telling us a horse was talking to you. I am worried, Richard.

COUNCILLOR BRETT: I am obviously confused. As I said to you earlier, I am Kerried out. I am very tired. I hardly got much sleep, I was so disappointed yesterday, so if I got it wrong, a police horse can be seriously damaged, I am told, by one loud firework going off close to it.

COUNCILLOR TAGGART: You are right about that.

COUNCILLOR BRETT: Good. So we do need to re-examine the noise nuisance caused by fireworks to elderly people and to animals, but I do think, and this perhaps has not been stressed, that the problem is not the fireworks but the way they are misused by miscreants, and I

PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com think there is an element of reducing the noise level of fireworks as being a bit like saying, we will make all kitchen knives blunter because a few idiots misuse them. So I would be concerned that we would actually, if we put the noise level too low, be a little bit like killjoys and spoiling particularly young people's enjoyment. I am not convinced that this chamber properly represents people under 30, and it is significant in most nightclubs the noise level is much louder than it is in here, even if I speak up.

COUNCILLOR LYONS: And none of them can hear.

COUNCILLOR BRETT: Councillor McArdle's amendment takes no account, as we have already said, of festivals like the Chinese New Year and Diwali, but the thrust of what Councillor McArdle said is essentially in line with what we are saying, because what we want to have is the sale of fireworks in an even further controlled narrow window, measured in days not weeks, and I think we agree on that.

Finally, the administration of firework sites, to co- ordinate our attack on firework misuse, it is the first time I believe that something like this has happened and I believe that we are in a position where we can gather some useful information, a database of statistical information, things like the number of firework noise calls to Environmental Health, number of firework related injuries that go to Casualty, and the number of police seizures of fireworks, and I believe that information will give us the base to build on an even better job that we would plan, I hope, all of us, to do together next year. Thank you, Lord Mayor. (Applause)

COUNCILLOR HARKER: Lord Mayor, a time of great distress, criminal use of fireworks, and so on, but what occasions this anti-social behaviour? What licences it? I agree with Councillor Dowson when she says the firework display is tremendous. I saw my first firework display when I was I think about four. But she was romantic in one sense. Airbombs were introduced in this country in 1961. I know because I must have been a hooligan. I led an attack on my headmaster's house which involved seven of these things, co- ordinated to go off together in ---

MEMBER OF COUNCIL: Police record.

COUNCILLOR HARKER: Well, it served him right. You see, he trained us as Army Cadets, so it was our revenge, but I do remember that we have a romantic view of our past. To think that this anti-social behaviour is something that only occurs now, and has only occurred in the last few years, is wrong. This anti-social behaviour was there when I was a youngster, and in many ways in Wensleydale that anti-

PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com social behaviour was slightly given licence. What occasions this anti-social behaviour? And it is Guy Fawkes Night. If we were to get rid of Guy Fawkes Night, we could still keep fireworks, they could be available 52 weeks a year. They could be available for use at organised firework displays. We wouldn't be saying, "Get rid of fireworks".

What I am asking the question is to look at this problem from a different angle tonight. What occasions the licence for anti- social behaviour? November 5th. We forget that. We conveniently forget it, so I did dig out today what we should all be doing on November 5th before we start going to our fireworks. The former prayer with thanksgiving to be used on the 5th day of November, "For the happy deliverance of the King and the three estates of the realm from the most treacherous and bloody intended massacre by gunpowder by Catholics."

COUNCILLOR ATHA: Can I declare an interest?

COUNCILLOR HARKER: By Catholics. (Interruptions) There is a 44 page homily that should be read to us, but this is what worries me. It has become Bonfire Night and not Guy Fawkes Night, but there is every reason why we should consider getting rid of what licences the anti-social behaviour and not the fireworks, and I think the time has probably come to grant Guy Fawkes and the other plotters a pardon, and I think they should have this pardon because they were framed by a Prime Minister who wanted an anti-Catholic plot to keep him in power. Other Prime Ministers go to war, I understand, but this Prime Minister actually wanted a good, old-fashioned anti-Catholic plot to keep him in power with James II, and we went on from there to have the great religious civil war and so on, so I ask you to think again.

COUNCILLOR HARRAND: It was James I not James II.

COUNCILLOR HARKER: Sorry, I apologise.

COUNCILLOR WAKEFIELD: Well, having heard Councillor Harker's confession of being a hooligan, then I heard he should resign, then he can't teach history, as most people picked up quickly, including my colleague Richard Lewis, I can't say what that added to the debate, Richard, but I am sure you found it interesting. I am just trying to work out the whole relevance of it all, but I am sure it passed 5 minutes of football.

But I won't go on because I think a number of very good points have been made. I only want to comment on Les's photo last night because he was holding the rocket to hide his -- and he did a

PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com very good job. You actually thought he was quite thin behind those rockets. But I also noticed the direction you were holding them in - that direction. Whether it was for practise later on --- But we will accept your amendment, particularly if you reflect, Les, on your argument earlier which is probably the only point I didn't agree, and send me an invitation for the next summit as a Leeds-based Councillor chairing West Yorkshire and I will more than happily chair it, but on that, Lord Mayor, I move the White Paper and accept Les's amendment but not Councillor McArdle's, because like many people have said, I think the words were better than the actual amendment, and I think you probably want to reflect on the amendment because I found your comments very supportive.

We have got legislation. It is about improving that legislation. It is about better regulation. It is about enforcement, but I think your amendment didn't reflect those complexities about banning it. Okay.

THE LORD MAYOR: Thank you very much. So if we can call for the vote for the first amendment in the name of Councillor McArdle.

COUNCILLOR FINNIGAN: Lord Mayor, we withdraw the amendment. (Applause)

THE LORD MAYOR: I am reminded that I do need permission of Council. (Agreed) Thank you. So now we have got the second amendment in the name of Councillor J. L. Carter.

(Councillor J. L. Carter's amendment was carried unanimously)

COUNCILLOR CLEASBY: Can we have fireworks to celebrate, my Lord Mayor?

THE LORD MAYOR: That then becomes the substantive.

(The substantive motion was carried)

ITEM 10 - WHITE PAPER MOTION - PARKING PERMITS FOR MIDWIVES

COUNCILLOR PROCTER: I am not sure if I need to declare an interest at this point, bearing in mind my reading today, but I do if I need to. I could lend Councillor Atha the book if he is interested.

COUNCILLOR ATHA: Is it about the facts of life? I need to know, it might affect my speech.

PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com COUNCILLOR PROCTER: The new "Contented Little Baby" book!

COUNCILLOR ATHA: No, I know all about that. Been one all my life.

Well, time starts now, I think, Lord Mayor. Yes, thank you. I hope I won't have to take all 5 minutes, because I can't believe there is one person here that doesn't consider it reasonable to ensure that a midwife, who may be called out at any time of the day or night, should be allowed to park as close as she can to the person she is visiting, feeling as safe as she can. I can't believe anyone doesn't believe that is sensible, and so I would really devote my speech to persuading those who put the amendment in to change that and let's agree to do something today, to actually do something because, just think, if we made a decision today that would give the midwives this permit, then we would have actually done something at this Council today which we have not done anything yet. We have discussed it. We have scored a lot of points. We have had a bit of fun. There has been a lot of personal abuse, but what have we done?

This would be just magical if the Leader of the Council, whoever it would be then, could announce tomorrow that it was the intention of the Executive Board to ensure that these midwives did have the parking permits, and you may ask why should they have it. Well, there are about 90 midwives in the City. A good many of them work from a fixed base so they can in fact get the permit on the day of their duty, take it out and park and come back and not have their wheels clamped or a parking ticket on the windscreen. But there are about 50 midwives who serve the City from their homes, they are on call and go out at all different times. They can't go to their headquarters, pick up a permit and go out, because sometimes it is closed because it is night-time or late evening. You imagine an evening even like tonight, it is quite dark. You think of a midwife being called out to an area where she is not particularly familiar and finds that she cannot park anywhere near the place but she has to park, and this happened in Whitehall road, way up the road, and so she had to park there. She went back and then found that when she got there the lift was broken and she had to walk up nine floors, carrying all her equipment and so on, and the delay that that caused in that case wasn't serious, but it could have been because this woman was in the later throes of labour.

And so I can't believe, particularly you women, because you know and are far more sensitive than men about these issues. I can't believe that you would think it reasonable to refer this to Scrutiny. It isn't that it hasn't been there. It has been there, I think, once

PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com or twice, and I raised this issue at the Scrutiny it must have been 12 months ago, so to refer it there again is equivalent to saying one thing, "We don't give a damn", and I am sure you do. I don't think that is your view at all. You don't give a damn, we will refer it to Scrutiny, it will go in the black hole again to be regurgitated. It is so silly.

You must know the right thing to say to these women, "Yes, you can have the permit", and remember what the permit is. It isn't going to allow them to go and park outside Harvey Nicks while they go inside and buy a nice Hermes scarf or something, because if it is seen there they will have to justify their presence. It is at places where there is resident parking only, where you can't get in, and if you doubt it just walk round some of the areas now where there is resident parking. You will find it impossible. Even the residents can't park there because there are more cars than residents' cars, so even people have to park way away from residents' parking.

It is monstrous that women should be put to this, and there is also a danger. If people see someone carrying a bag that look like medics, they often attack them. Why? Because they expect drugs to be in the bag. Generally speaking, they don't carry drugs, so that is not a problem, but they are at risk all the time, and I see no reason why these women doing this super job, and the job that each one of you if you had a wife, if you were a man, or if you were a woman having a child, you would think how on earth can we put a person like that to this extra problem? Let her get to me straight away and let her get to me unflustered and right.

So I would ask the side opposite don't do what we were accused of doing and did. If you came up with a good idea and put in a resolution you wonder, how the devil can we amend this so it becomes ours? Well, that is stupid. If we can't be sensible at times --- We can be foolish, like we have been most of the rest of the day, knocking spots off one another and saying all those things, but every now and again it is reasonable to say, let's just be reasonable human beings, the way we are in a normal committee room, where we are quite different from in Council.

So I ask you simply, vote for this resolution, withdraw your amendment and so that your Leaders, not me, your Leaders can say, "Yes, we have decided to give these women a pass which will allow them to carry out their duties with less danger and with less delay than they are facing up to now", and that will be a great relief to many of these women who have had their wheels clamped, who have had to pay parking fees, and when you are a midwife you are not being paid a fortune, and so an extra é25 or é30, whatever the fee is, is something

PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com of a problem, or if it came to the business of the unlocking of the wheels when they were locked, then that was about é75. Now, this shouldn't be for someone doing this kind of work. Thank you, Lord Mayor. (Applause)

COUNCILLOR JAROSZ: The most popular speech of the evening - I formally second and reserve the right to speak. (Applause)

COUNCILLOR SMITH: Lord Mayor --- MEMBER OF COUNCIL: Do you still want to do it?

COUNCILLOR SMITH: I still want to do it, yes. I will tell you why as well. I do actually, Bernard, think we agree on a lot of things. We do recognise and appreciate the essential service provided by midwives, but we also recognise the essential service provided by other health professionals such as doctors and nurses and health visitors, and I am sorry but your White Paper neglects to include them.

We also have a clear responsibility to keep traffic in the city flowing, and so it is important that we have a proper scheme that recognises the need of health professionals to be able to get out of the community but also keeps traffic flowing.

Yes, it has been discussed at Scrutiny Boards in the past and their recommendations have been the subject of correspondence and, in fact, continuing discussions. Now, you said to me, or you said to Council, that we might like to do this as we do it in committee. Well, in committee we speak to each other and, if you had come and spoken to us, then I could have told you a little bit more about it, but (Interruptions) I can tell you about it, yes. Because there was actually a meeting between City Services staff and NHS management representatives only yesterday, and a scheme is planned to come into place in the not too distant future.

You will be aware that there is decriminalisation of parking coming in March, and at the moment both the Council and the police are responsible for different aspects of parking, so if we brought a scheme in now we may have to change it in March, but let me assure you that there is a scheme being worked up and it will be implementation March. We don't need to send it back to Scrutiny Board. We don't need to send it to Executive Board, but we do want to include all the community of health professionals, as I said before, doctors and nurses and health visitors, and in actual fact, if I look at the Evening Post earlier this week, you have actually excluded at least one other person because you say in there, "The Council should be supporting these women in their work." Well, I can assure you there

PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com is at least one male midwife working in the Leeds Teaching Hospital Trust.

COUNCILLOR PROCTER: It wouldn't have happened when Eileen was here! (Laughter)

COUNCILLOR SMITH: It wouldn't have happened when Eileen was here. She would have been coming across, giving you a clip round the ear.

So the principle of the scheme for Leeds are permits available for doctors, nurses, midwives and health visitors, allowing certain automatic dispensations; a scheme that will cover resident parking schemes. The only mikes that seem to go funny today are the ones that I am near, I think it must be me. So they will cover resident parking schemes, yellow line restrictions and pay and display facilities. The applications will be via the employing organisation, because there are quite a lot of them.

There is going to be a fee covering the administration of the scheme, but it is not a very high fee, and clear information about details of the scheme will be provided in a leaflet for users. If you like to come and see me afterwards, Bernard, I can show you more detail but it is late and at this stage there is no need to send it to Scrutiny Board, there is no need to send it to Exec Board. I move the amendment. (Applause)

COUNCILLOR DOWNES: I would like to second the amendment by Councillor Smith and reserve the right to speak.

COUNCILLOR ATHA: I would like to speak on the amendment and then I will wind up after, if I may.

THE LORD MAYOR: I believe Councillor Campbell wants to speak.

COUNCILLOR CAMPBELL: I don't think there is a lot of disagreement, really. To be honest, I did say last time I got up to speak that it has been a revelation to me coming back to the Council in that at the last meeting we had Peter Gruen, who has turned from what I have to say - I am sorry to say this - the arch- Thatcherite into the man of the people ---

COUNCILLOR A. CARTER: No, he hasn't. He hasn't changed at all. That's his problem.

COUNCILLOR CAMPBELL: You know, the champion of the working class, and now we have got - I thought he had gone then - we have got

PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com Bernard, who has turned into, rather surprisingly, an expert on childbirth.

COUNCILLOR A. CARTER: Is there something we ought to be told?

COUNCILLOR ATHA: I was born too, you know, not passed!

COUNCILLOR CAMPBELL: I can hardly wait for the next meeting, because who knows what is going to happen there!

I mean, Bernard has a valid point, and I think Steve really has covered the aspects that we need to deal with, because it isn't just about midwives. Midwives, yes, we fully support them, fully support everything they do, but if we only support them it means we are not supporting people like district nurses, doctors on call, things like that, who also have this particular problem. Now, what I would say --- A lot of muttering on the back there.

Now, what I would say is that in April 2005 we become responsible for the parking situation in this City, and that strikes me that this is an ideal opportunity for us to make sure that we tell our operatives at that point that they want to take a leaf out of Nelson's book and turned a blind eye, in fact, to people like health professionals who are trying to go out about their business. I support the amendment.

COUNCILLOR ATHA: Can I speak on the amendment, and that gives me the right to reply later?

THE LORD MAYOR: Well, it will be part of the same speech, Councillor Atha.

COUNCILLOR ATHA: Doesn't that seem reasonable? I think the Standing Orders allow the mover of a resolution to speak on the amendment as well as speak on the resolution. I think if you read it does, but I will forego it in the interests of getting on and doing the job.

I will just say this about Councillor Campbell, a bit of fun but, quite frankly when we are discussing something serious that kind of fun doesn't really wash, because you are saying let's wait until next April. What happens if, some time in two or three days time, one of these terrible incidents happens because someone has not been given this feature? It is alright for you to, "Oh, it doesn't matter. Another three or four months, let it go." I can't

PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com understand why there aren't people across there who think this is something more urgent.

COUNCILLOR CLEASBY: Why didn't you do it 12 months ago?

COUNCILLOR ATHA: Hush, Brian, be quiet for a moment if you can control yourself. I know it is difficult when you are hyperactive.

THE LORD MAYOR: Thank you, Councillor Cleasby.

COUNCILLOR ATHA: Can I say to my colleague who replied, he can be a bit objectionable, can't he? I mean, look at him, but in terms of your answer, the reason I said midwives - because it has been the midwives who have been excluded. Doctors do have permits. A lot of the medical people. This has been through and, yes, the sticking point is the Council wants to make a fee of about é25 or é50 for each permit. That is what you are after, and I would rather say these people are performing a public service. Why should the Health Service pay us é50 or é25, whatever the permit fee is, for them to do their job? It doesn't make sense. It takes money round the corner and puts the figures up on the budgets of each. It does not make sense. So I would ask you, seriously, tomorrow you could be announcing, "Yes, the is a gap. We will give the midwives their permits, and then we will carry on and look at the rest of the Health Service to see if there are any more gaps."

COUNCILLOR J. L. CARTER: Why didn't you propose it last year, Bernard?

COUNCILLOR ATHA: I tried. I tried, and what happened is it was referred to Scrutiny and it went into the black hole. Well, you know what you want to do if you want to get something lost, you refer it to Scrutiny.

When you start looking at the swimming pool again, look in the Scrutiny minutes. What a way to bury things. You can bury anything in Scrutiny, particularly when you have got certain Chairs that I have had to deal with over the period of time. I won't mention their names but they can be very objectionable at times, but at other times they are lovely.

So I want to be serious because I was determined not to be jocular on this occasion. I just wanted to appeal to each one of you to say it does not matter that this is our amendment or their resolution. Is it right or not that these 50 women working from home

PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com at all times, 24-hours a day they are on call. Should they be --- (Interruptions) No, there is one man and the reason I didn't include him - whom I met, nice chap, very rare to have a male midwife but nice chap and quite well-respected in the profession and well accepted by those he attends. The reason I didn't mention him, because quite frankly I am a sexist and I think if I am going round a dark place it doesn't worry me particularly. You don't have the same nerves. Women are subject to attacks that men aren't, and if you don't recognise that you are pretending an untruth. I knew there was one male. I thought somebody would pick it up and make a deal of it, but it doesn't affect the issue, and you all know it doesn't.

If you all think about it individually and all say, "Yes, give them the blasted permit and don't charge, because it doesn't make sense to do so", and if you go along with this amendment you are really not playing up to your real strengths, which is that of commonsense. So I move this resolution and hope that you will have the grace and the goodwill to withdraw it, deal with the midwives and then look at any further gaps later.

THE LORD MAYOR: I now call for the vote on ---

COUNCILLOR ATHA: I move that they have leave to withdraw. (Laughter)

MEMBER OF COUNCIL: Seconded.

THE LORD MAYOR: I don't think that has been taken, Councillor Atha, so I would like to call upon the amendment in the name of Councillor Smith. All those in favour?

COUNCILLOR ATHA: I was serious, Lord Mayor, when I moved my --- I was serious when I moved that leave be given to withdraw and that then was seconded and I would have thought would then be put to the meeting and then as it could be defeated then we would go ahead.

THE LORD MAYOR: It was a nice try. I have been informed that in fact they have to offer to withdraw and that offer was not accepted. So all those in favour of the amendment in the name of Councillor Smith? All those against?

COUNCILLOR ATHA: Could we have a recorded vote now, Lord Mayor.

THE LORD MAYOR: The amendment is carried. Sorry?

COUNCILLOR ATHA: Could we have a recorded vote.

PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com THE LORD MAYOR: I think that has already gone. I am happy to do that. I am more than happy. This is on the amendment in the name of Councillor Smith. Just to get it right, this is now on the substantive, the amended substantive.

COUNCILLOR ATHA: My Lord Mayor, I want our amendment to be put. Theirs will come first, we will vote against it.

COUNCILLOR J. L. CARTER: I am amazed, Lord Mayor, that a former Lord Mayor doesn't know that you take the amendment first and that then you take the substantive resolution. I am amazed, Bernard. It must be age, Bernard, that's all it is.

THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE: Just for clarification, plainly, Councillor Atha, you can seek, because you did it promptly, a recorded vote on the amendment that was moved in the name of Councillor Smith. Is that what you are seeking?

COUNCILLOR ATHA: I think if the matter is clear ---

THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE: Yes, but the request can still be made.

COUNCILLOR ATHA: -- I won't delay by the same request. (Interruptions) I cannot hear what you are saying.

THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE: Are you withdrawing your request for a recorded vote ---

COUNCILLOR ATHA: Yes.

THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE: -- generally, at large? COUNCILLOR ATHA: Generally.

THE LORD MAYOR: Right, so we now need a vote on the substantive motion as amended.

(The substantive motion was carried unanimously)

ITEM 11 - WHITE PAPER MOTION - FREE EVENTS

COUNCILLOR TAGGART: My Lord Mayor, I love going to the theatre, I love going to the opera and the ballet, and I am a great culture buff, you could say, but sometimes when I have got a spare moment I go home at night and turn on the television and there is Chris Tarrant and the show is, "Do you want to be a Millionaire?" I don't know if you have gone through the experience. All the first questions are easy and

PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com the next lot of questions are easy, and quite often I have got to a huge sum of money and I have known the answers, and I get quite frustrated, so now is your chance, because I have a devised a little game called, "By their words shall you know them" - five quick questions and, if anyone can get all five right, they will have a prize from me.

Are you ready? Number 1. Council Budget Meeting, February 2001, the question is who said these words: "We believe the majority of Leeds people will understand and agree that we should introduce modest charges for Ballet in the Park, Opera in the Park and Classical Fantasia, still at less than 20% of what it would normally cost for such concerts. Further efficiencies within cultural services budget could reduce spending in this area by a total of é800,000." He puts his hand up. Nobody gets a prize for that because he confesses it himself, although it could be said --- (Interruptions) No, you only have to get four out of four now, Brian.

Question No. 2, who said this, Budget Council Meeting, February 2002, I quote, "Finally, if we are willing to give up perks then I think we can ask the people of Leeds to give up some of theirs." I think you can guess who this is from the tone. "If people want to go and see opera at the Grand Theatre, or ballet, or a classical concert at Harewood House, they have to pay very high ticket prices. We provide free access to ballet and Opera in the Park, Classical Fantasia, and other events in the City. I think it is perfectly reasonable to make a modest charge for these which the people of Leeds will not object to and, by doing this, we will raise an additional é1 million in revenue." Who said that? Mark Harris, absolutely dead right.

Council Budget Meeting, February 2003, who said this, and this is just part of it, because there was quite a long speech, "There has got to be a more sensible balance between giving the city life, as you lot keep saying", which I am not sure in those days meant the Tories or us or all of us, I have no idea, but that's what it said, "and simply pouring money away on what perhaps are desirable but not essential luxuries, so just like last year we firmly believe that on things like Opera in the Park, Classical Fantasia, the Ice Rink, German Market, the latest innovation, I could go on forever. I think the public would fully understand that it is not unreasonable to raise new or increase current charges for those services so that they can have a better and more vital service elsewhere." It is him again. Right.

No. 4, Budget Meeting, February 2003, who said this, "We would seek to generate extra income from events, half a million

PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com pounds, and increase the use of our swimming pools and sports centres to the Metropolitan average, which would get us an extra é200,000." Thank you for confessing, Andrew, it was you.

No. 5, who said this, Budget Council Meeting, February 2003, in his speech these words, "A cut of é200,000 in the events budget coming from increased charges." (Interruptions) Absolutely. So there you have it.

All three parties involved in this coalition that is running the Council, by their words shall ye know them because they have said when they were in Opposition precisely what they would do with these magnificent marvellous events. They had a real problem, didn't they, because the elections were on June 10th and these events were already planned to take place, so they couldn't even be cancelled and they couldn't even introduce a charge. It was all much too late, much too late to do that. Of course, we all thought New Year's Eve would still happen but, no, there isn't a charge, it has been cancelled, hasn't it. At least I hope these events carry on, even if they do raise a charge.

I think what Councillor Harris said at the time tells us a great deal, because when I went to the opera recently it cost me é200. It is a lot of money, isn't it? There was two operas, é2000. How many people living in Harehills or Gipton or Stanningley or Burley could afford it? Not only that, Members of Council, there is a cultural impediment to many people sharing the good things in life. They perceive cultural events as being for rich people from well- heeled middle-class backgrounds, and one of the reasons the Labour Council introduced these free events, particularly the opera and the ballet, was because so much public money had been put into Opera North --- By the way, Opera North came to Leeds very much because of Peter Sparling. He was one of the main reasons it came to the City, and we should thank Peter for his work on that because even in the Tory Group it wasn't that popular with all of them.

This is important for a City that sells itself as a city with a meaningful life, a meaningful culture and an important European city, but you cannot forever have a situation where people can't access the good things in life, and the marvellous thing about the concert you had at Templenewsam is not just the setting and the atmosphere, it is the combination of everything. Okay, some people come from outside of Leeds. Well, we are the regional capital, we don't mind people coming to Leeds, you know. We don't mind coming to Leeds. People look to Leeds to make their lives worthwhile. That is why they come to events in Leeds, because Leeds is a good place to be.

PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com These events for some people are the highlight of their year. Party in the Park, thousands and thousands and thousands of young people really enjoying themselves, really having a good time. Now, that is why this White Paper is here, because we keep the verbatim, we remember what people say when they were in opposition ----

COUNCILLOR J. L. CARTER: You tied to close that down.

COUNCILLOR TAGGART: -- when they were in opposition, and now we have a real fear that these things are going to come to pass, and that is why this White Paper is down on the order paper today, because there have been lots of rumours, lots of talk, lots of worry. (Interruptions)

COUNCILLOR PROCTER: Only by you. Only by you.

COUNCILLOR TAGGART: John should be careful. John should be careful. I saw him at Kirkstall Abbey Classical Fantasia. It is true he had some heckling from some members of the, I think it was Armley and Bramley Labour Party, it wasn't me, and I heard one or two calls of "Rubbish" and "Resign", but actually I thought - I never thought I would say this - this is a way for John Procter to become really popular with the people, something which I thought completely possible. He is Mr. Culture. He is fronting up these --- He loves it. You love it, John. It is the best job you have ever had and you realise, John realises, how magnificent and marvellous these events are and how much he personally enjoys them. I have seen the look of happiness on his face ---

COUNCILLOR PROCTER: Well, it is not from listening to you, that's for sure.

COUNCILLOR TAGGART: I have got the photograph to prove it, John. I have sent you it. You are smiling with me and Ted. 100th anniversary, Bramley Baths, and he was so happy he said, "Stand either side" and we have the photographic evidence and, you see, he is enjoying the job.

These are parts of the jewels in the Leeds crown, these events. Let's carry on with them. Let's develop them. Let's thank all the staff in Leisure Services who have worked so hard over the years to make them great. We owe them all a big debt. We all need to recognise the tremendous enjoyment that is gained by so many people. Let's agree today to keep these events, carry on with them, carry on with the tradition, and carry on the tradition of making free to enter. Ladies and gentlemen, thank you very much. (Applause)

PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com COUNCILLOR E. NASH: My Lord Mayor, I second the motion and reserve the right to speak. It will take some time to follow that speech, I am quite sure.

COUNCILLOR PROCTER: Lord Mayor, I have to say I really, really do feel sorry for Members opposite. I am not quite sure if this is because you are becoming such an indisciplined bunch these days or not. I am not sure if your Chief Whip or your Assistant Whip just can't get a grip of you all at all, and I did say to Councillor Gruen only yesterday, "Don't you have any form of procedure that White Paper Motions should come to the Whip or the Leader for consideration in advance?" Well, he informed me, "No." Well, I have to say you should have, and if you had, and if people actually bothered to check the record of what is actually said in here, Neil, you would also find that when in office, when in administration, we do say things, we mean them, and we actually stick to them as well, so in terms of who said what, who said this, in response to a question from Councillor Wakefield earlier this year after this administration had taken office, "We have no plans to charge the people of Leeds for the events he has outlined." That is what I said in this Council chamber after we had taken office. Neil, you may not have been here that day, you may not have been listening, but that's what I said, that's on the verbatim, that's the position.

I have to say, if some of you had actually bothered to pay some attention to what goes on in this place rather than, like Councillor Armitage and others, rather than heckling and wittering on, for goodness sake, you would actually learn something. I might say, so concerned am I this evening for the absolute garbage that some of you have been coming out with, my wife is actually sat outside - sat outside these doors - rather than listen to it because (Interruptions) having read my, "Contented Little Baby" book, I have to tell you that my as yet unborn child can hear every word - every word - that is said! Spare us all, please.

You really should ask yourself, what is this really about? What is behind this mischievous motion? Well, I have to say, I am privy to a bit of information that most of you might not be privy to. Indeed, I have seen a couple of sheets of paper, Councillor Taggart's press release saying what he said in Council that he already has forwarded to the Evening Post, and that is what this is really all about. You will see in our amendment that we refer to the scaremongering of the Labour Group, and that is exactly what this is. You say something, you repeat it, you repeat it, you repeat it, you repeat it again, no matter how untrue it is. No matter how untrue it is, if you say it often enough, you actually think that people will

PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com believe you. Well, the proof of the pudding is in the individual events.

You then think, well, surely, it can't just be to get Councillor Taggart in the press, can it, this? There must be something else behind it, and I thought long and hard about what this possibly could be about, and then it suddenly dawned on me. I know what this is about completely. What this is really about is the largesse of Labour Members. That is what this is really about. What this is really about is Labour Members doshing out tickets left, right and centre. Yes, "You are a crony of mine, have 100 tickets." "You are a community group I know, have 50 tickets." This is what this is really about.

MEMBER OF COUNCIL: That is what we are supposed to do.

COUNCILLOR PROCTER: Councillor McKenna says, "We are in contact with our communities". Let's just see if you think this is fair and if this is appropriate. How many people go to Classical Fantasia? About 8,000/9,000, about 8,000 people or thereabouts. How many of those tickets are reserved for elected Members to dish out? 2,000 of those tickets. 25% are reserved for elected Members to dish out, and they say, "Oh, we are asked to do it." Why are you asked to do it? Because you decided you wanted to do it. That is why the system has been in place thus far.

How is it fair? How is it fair that people will queue for hour after hour after hour to receive tickets for Classical Fantasia when, if you are a friend of a Labour politician, you don't have to queue at all, you can simply say, "Oh, I'll have some of those tickets." "There you go." Not appropriate. Not appropriate at all, and I have to say it is because of what we have seen recently that I would like to see that practice, which I think is slightly shabby, frankly, coming to an end.

Lord Mayor, it wouldn't be so bad if they actually utilised all the tickets that they actually received but, again as we saw with the film festival only the other day, "Yes, I want my tickets." I want the tickets" and we introduced a new system. We introduced a new system which a number of Members I might say moaned and groaned about that they had to pick them up actually on the night in advance and, if they didn't, we would actually sell the tickets so there weren't empty seats all over the place, which there have been in previous years. There have been row after row of empty seats previously. We wanted to put an end to that, and the same is true of these concerts. What is the point in dishing out tickets left, right and centre unless people actually turn up to them?

PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com MEMBER OF COUNCIL: Are you not taking them?

COUNCILLOR PROCTER: Lord Mayor, that is what I believe. Lord Mayor, isn't it strange there's loads and loads of people who want to shout from a sedentary position. If you want to speak, get on your feet. Indicate to the Lord Mayor. Stand up and say what you need to say.

Lord Mayor, I have to say I expected better of Neil. This is the second time I have said the same thing. Let's hope it is put to bed once and for all now. I don't think I could have been any clearer than I have been already.

Let's move on and let's talk about some other very important issues in this City. I am the first to recognise the efforts of the Events Team in this Council. I understand, I might add, that I am the only person to publicly, in front of all of the audience at Classical Fantasia and other events, I am the only person, so I am told by that very Events Team, that has ever bothered to thank them for their efforts (Applause) and actually name the particular Officers who have made so many of our events so successful and so popular.

Lord Mayor, let's see if some of these other speakers who have been heckling do stand up and speak and have got something useful to add to the debate. Thank you, Lord Mayor. (Applause)

COUNCILLOR MRS. A. CARTER: My Lord Mayor, in seconding this motion I would like to draw to the attention of Members some of the many high-quality events that have been provided by this Council free. In fact, I attended one myself earlier this year. (Interruptions) Can you not hear? Have you got a problem? You want to go to sleep?

COUNCILLOR LYONS: I said my leg has gone to sleep.

COUNCILLOR MRS. A. CARTER: Oh, sorry. I thought you had gone to sleep, sorry. (Interruptions)

The Lesley Garrett Concert, held at Templenewsam. The setting was perfect, the majestic and magnificent Templenewsam House, set against the backdrop of the setting sun, the rare breed (inaudible) cattle grazing in the parkland. Many people brought picnic tables and chairs for this wonderful event which, of course, was free.

MEMBER OF COUNCIL: Mark Harris said that.

PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com COUNCILLOR MRS. A. CARTER: And Father Procter was there -- I mean Councillor Procter, ensuring the event went as well as it should do and, Members, there were 45,000 people attending, and it is thanks to Leisure Services that the event was so successful. Indeed, someone from Martin House Hospice told me the other day that Party in the Park - you know, that free event that this Council put on - where there were such bands as Busted, McFly, Girls Aloud, and stars like Will Young and Natashia Beddingfield performed, was the best event they had ever been to. In fact, it was so well organised for disabled and sick children that they commented on it to a Member.

And, Members, I have here a letter from a young lad who attended the Rhinos reception at Millennium Square, and I will read it out to you, "I had a great time at the free reception for Rhinos. I went with my mum and dad and friends. It was really cool seeing the players on stage up close, and that Councillor Carter was a great guy too. (Laughter) Leeds City Council are a fantastic, fabulous and brilliant Council to provide all this free. You are much better than that Labour lot who are putting about rumours about everything being cancelled. They are rubbish." (Applause) And it is signed by some kid called Jack Carter. (Applause) I can't quite read it, but I think it says --- It might be, "Keith Wakefield" but I can't quite read it.

There are many more free events planned for this City, some of which are scheduled before Christmas and on Bonfire Night, the Leeds Lights Switch-on, where the popular Girls Aloud will be performing, so I hope that you lot are going to apologise for misleading the people of Leeds and for trying to cause concern that these events are not to be free. You will be putting about a message next that we are cancelling Christmas. Thank you, my Lord Mayor. (Applause)

COUNCILLOR GOLTON: Lord Mayor, after all that marvellous free entertainment, I am afraid, as your token whingeing Liberal, I am going to be not quite as funny. (Interruptions)

COUNCILLOR A. CARTER: We don't have to pay for hearing you talk, do we?

COUNCILLOR GOLTON: I am always open to a small fee, and I just wanted to mention the fact that I know why it was brought up by Councillor Taggart is that the issue of free events is far more identified with the Liberal Democrats than it is with any of the two other parties in our coalition, and it was a little disingenuous really to include them all, I have to say.

PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com COUNCILLOR TAGGART: I was being fair.

COUNCILLOR GOLTON: Alright, you were being fair, but to put a bit more balance on to it I have to say you were missing the point about the free events and the association of the Liberal Democrats. The only reason that they were actually brought up by the Liberal Democrats at the budget events is that budgets are about setting priorities and, if you are fair to your taxpayers, you need to make sure that if you are offering them the very best in community events that you make sure that your own finances are sound, and I was going to look across there at Peter Harrand, who has aged immeasurably since he has inherited your Social Services budget, I have to say. It is through irresponsibilities such as that that we had to look at hard choices such as free concerts as a possibility if we did need to make (Interruptions) budgetary moves.

Fortunately, now that there is a new administration in charge, the budgetary finances are far better managed and the prospect of having to charge for any of these events has diminished to a tiny amount.

COUNCILLOR J. L. CARTER: Smaller than that.

COUNCILLOR GOLTON: Smaller than that, so don't worry about it. If what you wanted was assurance that these events will remain free, you have it.

COUNCILLOR HARRIS: Yes, you beat me to it. I was about to say, yes, Scrooge is about to speak, Killjoy Harris. I mean, Super Stu over there put his finger on the free entertainment. I have enjoyed listening to Marvellous Mandy and Gentleman John, and for years I have struggled to work out who Neil Taggart reminded me of, and it was the combination of the "Contented Baby" book and Neil using the expression, "The marvellous thing", I suddenly realised, Tigger, as he stands there bouncing around like this, all enthusiastically, going, "The marvellous thing about Taggart is Taggart is a marvellous thing." (Applause)

Now, if any of you know me, I am not about to eat my words. I am not foolish enough to do it, and I can't pretend that I didn't say what was said. I did say those things. I think Stuart has reasonably tried to explain it but, you know, I will be a bit more honest and I will put a bit more meat on the bone, because it has come as a revelation to me now I am on this side of the chamber, and now I have got at my disposal the entire Officer core with everything they are prepared to do for us, I say to you genuinely, if all of that had been available to me to explain things that I didn't --- I didn't

PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com spend scant amount of time on our budget amendments. Officers will tell you, we spent a huge amount of time, but had I had available all of that to me, and had I had the knowledge then that I have now, I would have known ways of not having to make those suggestions.

But let's just deal with why I said it, and I will say it to you again now. Of course, the Neil Taggart motion is absolutely right. Of course, these events should be free. Every social service that we deliver should be free. I want everything we do to be free in the perfect world. That is how it should be. That is what we all want. That is what we are determined to try to deliver in the perfect world, and at the moment it is absolutely right, we have no plans to introduce charges. There are lots of other routes available to us, and if you want an assurance that there are no plans as far as I know and as far as we can see, you have that assurance.

And if you say to me, and it may be I am saying what others may not want me to, if you want me to say that there could never, ever be charges in a situation where we had to make terribly hard choices, then I won't say that to you, and I don't see that situation at the moment, but I have to say I am better informed and better advised and better assisted to be able to say that, but at the time at which we put the amendments, if I had to do it again in opposition, with the information available to me, I don't apologise because that is how it appeared to me at the time, and what I was saying was, confronted with a choice between social services and charges for free events, I would have opted for charges on some of the free events, and the truth is, if it has to be that way at some point in the future, then I will tell you again that I will argue with my colleagues that that's what we had to do, but we have no such plans now and for the foreseeable future we want these things to remain free. We intend for them to remain free, and we are very proud of that. (Applause)

COUNCILLOR HANLEY: Lord Mayor, just very quickly on the point that Councillor Procter made, I noted that you, and indeed the Lady Mayoress, were at the Art Gallery last night at the Newby Hall function. It was very nice to see you there and your wife looked as wonderful as ever, and I noticed Councillor Procter was there and he was well turned out, and he said a few words to us all, nice suit, shirt, tie - pity they didn't match but, you know, I know you are trying. But you made great reference to this thing that you, and you were there pointing at me, about these complimentary tickets.

Now, I personally do not need complimentary things. I am quite fortunate in my life. When Councillor Atkinson and I go about Bramley and we give the complimentary tickets out to the poorest

PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com people on the poorest estates, when we visit schools and when we visit other places, we do that because we think it is our civic duty.

You put your hand up and said that you will not be taking complimentary tickets and so did Andrew. I will be very grateful if you will confirm that that's what you will not be doing. You have given us your word. Don't take complimentary tickets.

And just finally, I know that the Council Leader is new and you have got a lot to take in. I know you have had a lot of problems, there were resignations. I understand there's all sorts of more problems to come, but you do not understand the economics of what you are talking about. Free? Nothing, nothing, is free. It is the people of this City that pay for those concerts. It is the people who pay for all of the other things and they have the right to these complimentary tickets and we as Councillors should go round these institutions and encourage them to join in. You don't need to in the hoity places of Wetherby but please understand, Councillor, or try and understand, it is not free, it is their money; those people that come, it is their money that pays the bills, including your allowances.

MEMBER OF COUNCIL: You want to charge. You want to charge.

COUNCILLOR R. D. FELDMAN: Why don't you stand up? (Interruptions)

COUNCILLOR E. NASH: Lord Mayor, I think the Labour Group ought to congratulate itself for our splendid campaign so that it has made Councillor Harris (Interruptions) and Councillor Carter withdraw their plans for charging for these events. (Interruptions) There has been no denial that it was planned, and if something is said in this Council Chamber, we take it seriously. If Councillor Harris says that they are considering charges, then obviously we believe them, and it is because of the fuss and the stink that we have made about it that they have backtracked.

I had prepared a few notes and, at the heading of them, I had one of the Leaders as killjoy Oliver Cromwell and the other as Long- John Silver, and I give it to you to work out which is which. It is an absolutely outrageous suggestion that the reason that these concerts are free is just so that we can hand them out to our friends and pals. As far as I know (Interruptions) My Lord Mayor, I would be obliged if you could keep order. My Lord Mayor, I do hope this will be added on to my time.

PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com I also saw Councillor Procter at the Art Gallery last night, and that is the first cultural event I have ever seen him at, and he told us that the ruling group had got plans for the Art Gallery. I wonder if that means charging for the Art Gallery. And, come to think of it, the only people from that side of the house that I have seen at the opera or at concerts are Councillor Feldman and Councillor Anderson and, on occasion, Councillor Schofield. Quite frankly, they are just not interested in cultural events. I beg your pardon, my Lord Mayor, I remember you too.

Councillor Andrew Carter, the Leader of the Conservative Group, has been a member of the Grand Theatre Board for well over a year for my knowledge and he has never attended one meeting. That shows you how much he cares about culture in this City.

COUNCILLOR A. CARTER: My Lord Mayor --- (Interruptions)

COUNCILLOR E. NASH: The success of Leeds and its vibrancy is due to the many cultural events which embrace all of its citizens. I remember when Opera North first came to Leeds, and it is full marks to Councillor Sparling for spearheading the campaign to have Opera North here, but there were all sorts of charges of elitism, and it was for the upper classes only. It was beyond the reach of most people. Well, these free concerts allow people who have little means, and particularly families, to go and enjoy it. I would suggest that Members of the opposite side avail themselves of this opportunity and get a bit of culture into their heads.

COUNCILLOR MINKIN: A lot of what we have heard I think is quite reassuring, except for the fact that when your amendment congratulates the new administration on maintaining a wide range of free events, it still does not refer to the fact that you did summarily cancel the New Year's Eve event. Now, there are thousands of people looking forward to coming into the City tomorrow night for the switching on of the Christmas lights. There will be thousands looking forward to the bonfires. If you can summarily cancel one of the wide range of free events without any discussion or any forewarning, then obviously we do doubt what you have to say about it.

Now, I do expect, Mark, if you mean what you said, that you would be keeping the widest range and everything that we at present have. However, the New Year's Eve one, that is in the City Centre Business Plan as part of the wide range of events to attract families into the city centre. It has the warmest support from the police because of the impact it has had on reducing crime on New Year's Eve in the city centre, and I would have a careful look at what happens on New Year's Eve this New Year's Eve and, if you could look at your next

PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com year's budget, put something back for New Year's Eve. It is an important part of the celebratory calendar for this country. For this City not to have an event is regrettable, particularly when it was cancelled just summarily with no discussion and no notice, particularly with your city centre partners.

COUNCILLOR A. CARTER: My Lord Mayor, I address the first comments to Councillor Elizabeth Nash. I know she has a soft spot for me. I have got an even softer spot for her, but never mind! You are a serially silly woman. You are a serially silly woman. I am not on the Board of the Grand Theatre. I have not been on the Board of the Grand Theatre for many a long year. However, if your Members on the Grand Theatre are missing the benefit of my help, then invite me to come along and I will be delighted to attend.

My Lord Mayor, now to the other Liz. We have not summarily cancelled New Year's Eve event. What we have said is it will be a different event. Again, you want to read and listen and do a bit less of this. That way you might learn something to your advantage.

My Lord Mayor, when they went out of administration, they appear to have actually gone into administration (Laughter) because, my Lord Mayor, if the receivers aren't in already they want to get in quick while there is still something left to get rid of. These are the people, ladies and gentlemen, who set a budget for this financial year which is the most cynical piece of fiction I have ever seen in 30 years on this Council. We are going to bring to you over these next few months a tabulation of millions of pounds that just was never there to spend on services, and you have the temerity to talk to us about your belief that we are going to stop free event. We are not going to stop free events. Understand? We are not going to stop free events.

It is quite right in the quote he gave from my speech of whenever it was.

COUNCILLOR TAGGART: Do you want me to read it again?

COUNCILLOR A. CARTER: No, no. I know exactly what it said. It was about raising half a million quid and, indeed, we may well have to raise half a million quid. That doesn't necessarily mean that we stop free events, but it comes a bit rich, ladies and gentlemen, from this lot who introduced charges at Tropical World, Lotherton Bird Gardens and Templenewsam Home Farm. Now, we all like Templenewsam, and we all know where it is. It is right bang adjacent to one of the poorest communities in this City, in your ward, Bill.

PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com COUNCILLOR W. HYDE: Yes.

COUNCILLOR A. CARTER: I remember you saying to me, having had a conversation with a lady and two kids who lived on Halton Moor, and they were standing outside Home Farm, and the mum was saying to the two kids, "I'm sorry. I can't afford to take you in." And don't say "Leisure card" because it isn't even anywhere near important enough on that person's budget for her to think about the Leisure card. Now, you did that, so really isn't it time you just shut up, sat in opposition for a while, learnt how to be an opposition and let us get on with making a better job of running the City than you have ever done. (Applause)

And my Lord Mayor, I will be very careful how I say this, in view of certain things that have happened in the not too distant past, but when my Scouse friend at the back gets up to intervene in the debate, then I know you are bringing it down to the level of a music hall farce.

Let me tell you about the free tickets, Councillor Hanley. I hope Members here will continue to take complimentary tickets, but let me tell you, they are going to be very few in number. The days of 2,000 tickets, 25% of the total attendance at the Fantasia in Kirkstall are over. The people of Leeds will not have to queue up in the rain to get tickets because you lot are doling out free tickets. You know it is wrong. It is the Leeds United syndrome all over again and, yes, Ted, the poor communities of Bramley will get the tickets but not handed out by the largesse of somebody like you. (Applause)

COUNCILLOR HANLEY: Where will they get the tickets from?

COUNCILLOR A. CARTER: The tickets will go to the communities who need them given by this Council not by a Councillor, and that's the way it should be and that's the way it will be. (Applause)

COUNCILLOR McKENNA: Lord Mayor, I think you begin to realise we are really getting into their ribs when two Leaders insult Members of the Opposition. I do wonder if it may be something that we might refer to Standards: apparently I am bonkers and Councillor Nash is serially silly. You know, when you start bullying, shouting me down and insulting me, you know you are getting there so, you know, it has been a good day, Andrew. Keep them coming, I like insults.

Regarding what I wanted to say, I did want to say that, yes, I have been to some of the free events and I have seen John there, and he has been dressed up very smart, and he has enjoyed it. I have not

PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com actually noticed, Ted, if his tie didn't match but, not being an expert on matching ties, I wouldn't put myself up as a judge of that. John has enjoyed it. He has enjoyed the great showmanship. He has enjoyed all the bluster and, indeed, John, you did, you did pay a rightful tribute to the Leisure Service staff for putting on such an event and all the hard work they were doing. But, John, you shouldn't tell porkie pies - you did at the last Council meeting - because I have --- Yes, porkie pies. I was at the last Council Meeting and I heard you say the same thing.

I have attended Kirkstall because, basically, I walk there, it is very near my house. I very much enjoy it, as does the other 9,000 people, and over the years I have heard Bernard stand up on stage and do everything you accuse us of not doing, that is thanking - -- (Interruption) John, you should not always believe an Officer. I understand you got yourself into trouble last time. Remember the accusation regarding the Grand or something, the Playhouse, you got your facts wrong on that, and presumably you got that information from Officers. You should check your facts. Bernard does it regularly, and I have to say you did it very well and I was proud of the job you did on behalf of Leeds, but Bernard as an old Thespian, an actor, and you are still not quite up to that level. Bernard does it brilliantly, and I think really now you should apologise to the man because he has done it regularly, and if you talk to any of the outdoor staff they will tell you the same thing and, please, John, before you actually accuse, check your facts. Thank you very much, Lord Mayor.

COUNCILLOR C. NASH: When Councillor Elizabeth Nash suggested that perhaps some of us don't go to a lot of events, well, I will admit that I have only ever been, that I can think of, to four events put on by the Council in the 4 years on Council that I have been here. I am not in the habit of taking complimentary tickets, but I think she has a very restricted view of culture if she then suggests that that means that Councillors are not involved in the cultural life of the City. A lot of the cultural life of the City takes place in voluntary organisations in informal settings and outside the province of this Council. (Applause)

COUNCILLOR CLEASBY: Lord Mayor, I think it is fair to say I probably started this when I challenged Councillor Wakefield, the former Leader of the Council, when he was prepared to spend é270,000 of this City's money on the free television screen in Millennium Square. He then started to run the story that we and me were against a free screen and we were going to get rid of the free screen. No, the only thing we have got rid of, Councillor Wakefield, is the

PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com é270,000. We are getting a free screen, and I seem to remember you have gone very quiet on this, Councillor Atha. You seem to have ---

COUNCILLOR ATHA: I am quite happy making a noise if you like, but I just think I was being well-behaved. I know it is terribly difficult for you to understand.

COUNCILLOR CLEASBY: Maybe you are, but I hope you will be just as generous, Councillor Atha, that when the free screen arrives and it is in place you will compliment the administration, and particularly Councillor Harris, for saving this City é270,000 and getting the screen that everybody wanted.

COUNCILLOR ATHA: If he does that, I will congratulate him, I promise. COUNCILLOR CLEASBY: That is the point. That goes right back to the scare stories and, Neil, you are just trying to run the story round again. It doesn't work, and Councillor Carter is absolutely right. Take a fortnight's holiday, learn how to be the Opposition, recoup yourself. I notice an e-mail that I received just recently, your Chief Whip is Chief Whip of a Labour Group. Well, I thought you were a party. I didn't know you were disparate parties that were now in a group. Thank you, Lord Mayor.

COUNCILLOR W. HYDE: Lord Mayor, really just to put the record straight for the benefit of Councillor Elizabeth Nash and Councillor McKenna. I notice that Councillor Claire Nash has said that she has been to four events in 4 years, I think. Well, I can tell Council that I have been to a lot more events than that in 4 months, but then that is not to be surprised if that happens because I am a Lead Member in that area. What I can tell you is that people I talk to at the Art Gallery, and I have been there three times, and I have seen one or two Members opposite. I am not going to name names because they have seen me and they know that I was there and I know that they were, but the bottom line is that the Officers in the Art Gallery have come up to me and said, "It has been a real pleasure to see you here and to see Councillor Procter here. We think it is a wonderful improvement on the position that we have experienced in the past", so if you think we are not taking the job seriously, then you are very wrong.

Just on the other issue of the concert at the Town Hall, I do think it is important that we support those concerts. I know there is a rationing system and those of us who are interested put in for what we want and we get what we are given, and I am hoping I might get a few more this year, Lord Mayor. I might even see Elizabeth Nash at some of them. Thank you.

PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com COUNCILLOR ATHA: I just want to say how disgusted I was at Councillor Procter reducing everything to the scurrilous idea that people like myself and my colleagues went for the free tickets because we were able to give them away to our friends. I think that type of comment tells you a great deal about your mind and not about ours, and I did find it quite disgusting that we sink to that level.

I wouldn't for a moment suggest that when Councillor Bill Hyde says he wants to go to the concerts he is doing it because he has got some back door benefit or little perk. It is because, quite frankly, if you don't go and see these things, you don't know what they are like, you don't know whether you are getting value for money. But to actually say we are using these tickets --- There are 99 Councillors in the Council. If we each get 100 each, then you can see where your 2000 rapidly goes, and I have got 30, and I know exactly where they have gone and I will tell everyone where it went: to the Hawksworth Community Association, to families who would not have gone into town to get them and, what is more, by giving it to 99, this was our plan when we had a committee, which was agreed I may say by everybody on Leisure Services, it wasn't a party political agreement, it was something we all agreed that we were all interested in leisure and recreation. We agreed that if it went to every Councillor no-one in the City could say we didn't have a geographical dispersion for events like Kirkstall.

So that is the background. That is why when I was Chairman, and I am sure Councillor Feldman will continue it, when I was Chairman we invited every Member of Council to bring children from the most deprived areas in their wards to see the pantomime. If anyone wants a good night out, go on those nights when they are there. It is absolutely brilliant. You get a real thrill, you really know you are doing something worthwhile by seeing the excitement and joy of kids who would never go otherwise. We didn't do that so we could go and get a free ticket to the Varieties. It is in fact a very low moral view you take of us, Councillor Procter, and that is indicative basically of your own failings, and so I know your other colleagues won't dissociate themselves with those remarks. I won't pursue them further.

The only other point I make with equal brevity is this: that we know darn well that if you had said what you said and didn't deny you had said it, we took it seriously, there was every reason for us to mount a campaign. As Liz Nash said, it is because we mounted a campaign from the very start you had to conform. Now, we know it. The public knows it. The only people who pretend it isn't true is some of you. The others say, "We have been caught out so what else

PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com could we do?" and others say, "Thank God they put the campaign on because we actually believe, with people over there, that these events are good for the City."

COUNCILLOR J. L. CARTER: My Lord Mayor, what sanctimonious nonsense, Bernard. Total sanctimonious nonsense. You know as well as I do, this so-called campaign has been lies to the people of Leeds by your group. Under no circumstances, under no circumstances - we said it right at the beginning - and I saw the papers quoted it, referring to Councillor Wakefield, nobody was going to stop Opera in the Park being free, and many other events as well. It is you that have lied to the City.

I am not bothered what you say to me. I am not bothered what you say about knock-about here, you can knock- about because you know I will knock-about with you all, but this so-called campaign has been an utter and total nonsense and, in fact, the people of Leeds --- COUNCILLOR ATHA: We won the battle.

COUNCILLOR J. L. CARTER: Bernard, you spoke and I listened to you. Now be quiet. You are getting old, be quiet.

COUNCILLOR ATHA: I am getting older by the hour when you are speaking.

COUNCILLOR J. L. CARTER: Sorry, I am being accused of ageism, Bernard, and I will withdraw that comment. You are not getting old, you are already old. You know, Bernard, as well as I do ---

COUNCILLOR ATHA: I am not listening now, you have hurt my feelings.

COUNCILLOR J. L. CARTER: -- there is no way these events are going to be closed. I will tell you what the people of Leeds are saying now, they are going to these events free and you are talking like the boy who cried, "Wolf" too often. That is what you are doing now and people are turning and saying, "What a load of rubbish. We can go to these events free. They are free. What are the Labour Party talking about?" and they are now beginning to see what nonsense. If that was a campaign, my God, I think we ought to give you some lessons because it was rubbish.

COUNCILLOR ATHA: It was just successful, that was the point.

COUNCILLOR R. D. FELDMAN: My Lord Mayor, I think the evening is going on quite fast, and I don't want to speak too long, but I would like to inform everyone that we are continuing what Bernard Atha

PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com started at the Varieties by sending out -- well, not tickets, but asking everybody to actually inquire if they want any and consequently, of course, we will now how many are taken and preferably that they go to community centres rather than individuals.

There is one other thing, though, that I am very, very disappointed in with all of you. I go to all the jazz concerts, all four of them, with Ruth, and I am still waiting to see one of you there. Of course, the difference is we pay for the tickets, I don't know whether that has any effect, but up to now there is a board who look after the Playhouse but, as I say, over several years I have yet to see one of our colleagues there. It would make a change. Perhaps I could give them an incentive, I will even treat them or buy them a drink.

MEMBER OF COUNCIL: I didn't see you at the reggae concert.

COUNCILLOR DOWNES: Lord Mayor, I just want to respond to Councillor Nash's comment about not attending cultural events. I was at the Lord Mayor's Charity do last weekend, which I enjoyed immensely, and there was some Irish Riverdancing there, and it was a wonderful evening attended by over half my colleagues on this side of the house, who I believe always attend such events to support the Lord Mayor's Charity, but I noticed none of my colleagues on that side were there. Not one was there. Perhaps it was because we had to pay for it.

COUNCILLOR TAGGART: Can I start by correcting Councillor Carter, particularly as he is going to become Leader of Council in a few weeks. There is no admission charge at Lotherton Bird Garden. You can make a voluntary donation as you walk in. The only charge there is for car parking, and even at Tropical World, where there was a huge row, as he knows, inside the Labour Group, about charging, if you have one of these, the Leeds card, it is absolutely free.

MEMBER OF COUNCIL: You have to buy the card.

COUNCILLOR TAGGART: Yes, but the card gives you so many discounts, if you live in Leeds you will get it all back within a year, and that is absolutely true.

I was very disappointed. I did my best to praise John Procter, didn't I? I built him up. I painted the picture of a decent human-being that has got a soul, and I have always believed in telling the truth in politics, you know, and saying exactly what I believe. I am not withdrawing it, but I tell you who you remind me of, John. Do you remember the Muppets, the old gits who always

PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com complained? You are one. I don't know who the other one is, but if that is the best you can do, you need less misery in what you actually say.

The most disappointing thing about all of the debate tonight for me has been that, despite the fact I read out what people said in the verbatim, the essence of their response is, "Oh, that's in the past. Oh, don't believe any of that rubbish. We are in power now. We are in power now." Well, you know, I do believe that when people go into politics and they say what they are going to do when they get into power, they should say what they are going to do, because you expect people to believe you and, on that basis, you expect people to support you. I suppose this to some extent explains why not one of you - not one of you - in the election campaign put out a single (Interruption) Barry, I will always out-shout you because I have got a bigger voice than you. Shall I let him carry on or what?

COUNCILLOR ANDERSON: I am very good at this as well. I was only being told today that I have been quiet in full Council, so I thought, "I am getting bored here so I will start saying something."

THE LORD MAYOR: Thank you, Councillor Anderson.

COUNCILLOR TAGGART: I was trying to say what they are saying is, "Forget the verbatim. Who cares about it? Who reads verbatims except people like Neil Taggart and other Members of the Opposition" but, you know, actually we have seen this pattern before. All the leaflets that went through letterboxes, "Vote for us and we will do this. Vote for us and not these nasty Tories." And not one of the leaflets said, "Oh, by the way, we will get into the same political bed if we can after June 10th." Not one of you did that. Not one of you did that. You don't care who you share your political bed with. (Interruptions)

So what you are saying is, "This copy of the verbatim is rubbish. Don't believe a word we say." Is that what they are saying? "Don't believe us." And you come here today and say, "Oh, we are not going to charge for these events." Well, why have you written the amendment the way you have? We didn't include all events in the Labour White Paper but we quoted some because they are good examples of some of the good things the Council does. Opera in the Park.

COUNCILLOR PROCTER: There isn't such a thing any more.

COUNCILLOR TAGGART: I know. It is Opera in the Park.

PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com COUNCILLOR PROCTER: No, it's not.

COUNCILLOR TAGGART: Yes, it is the same event (Interruptions), it is marketed differently, as we all know. Party in the Park, yes. Classical Fantasia. We use those three examples because there are many other free events. I mean, Mark Harris actually suggested at one Council Meeting, it seems, charging for the German Market. Absolute nonsense. Since when do you charge people to go into a German Market? But we quoted three events which are still in the calendar and not one of the events is quoted in the amendment, not one of them. It is very, very vague. If you were true to your word in terms of what you have said today, and there is not a single reason why we should believe a single word, let me put it like this, there is a gap in how we believe what you say. (Interruption) Well, we will see, won't we, as the weeks and months go by, but you should not have put the amendment in like that. You could have done something better than that, and the most honourable thing you can do, if you say that you are really people of your word, trust us, believe in us, if that's true you withdraw your amendment and vote for my motion. Thank you very much.

(Councillor Procter's amendment was carried)

(The substantive motion was carried)

COUNCILLOR HARRIS: I request a recorded vote, Lord Mayor.

COUNCILLOR A. CARTER: And I second that, Lord Mayor. (Interruptions)

THE LORD MAYOR: Thank you. Chief Executive, please.

THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE: Sorry, there have been two requests. One was for a recorded vote on the ---

COUNCILLOR HARRIS: Can I be helpful? I asked for a recorded vote on what was then the substantive motion. I did hear Neil Taggart immediately request a recorded vote on the original amendment which, as far as I am concerned, he is entitled to do because it was asked for within x number of minutes of the show of hands.

THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE: Right, the first recorded vote then will be on the amendment in the name of Councillor Procter. Would Members please ensure that they are in their allocated seats. Please then refer to the desk unit and press the button marked "P" in order to activate the unit. Those Members in favour of the amendment in the name of Councillor Procter should press the "+" button, those Members

PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com against that motion the "-" button, and any member wishing to abstain and have that abstention recorded should press the "0" button.

COUNCILLOR HARRIS: What has happened, you can all guffaw as much as you like, Councillor Jennings has voted using the wrong desk. He has voted using the wrong desk and then, recognising that he has done that, Lord Mayor, he has then voted using the right desk, so Councillor Jennings has voted twice. (Interruptions)

THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE: The voting is completed.

THE LORD MAYOR: Thank you. The number present, 87; those in favour 51 --- Oh no, sorry, 86, I beg your pardon. 51 in favour and 35 against, therefore the amendment is carried.

THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE: Now a recorded vote on the substantive motion. Again, would Members please refer to their desk unit and press the button marked "P" in order to activate the unit. Those Members in favour of what is now the substantive motion please press the "+" button, those Members against the substantive motion should press the "-" button, and any Member wishing to abstain and have that abstention recorded, the "0" button.

Right, the vote is completed.

THE LORD MAYOR: Those present, 86; those in favour 51, there are no abstentions, and those against 35. The motion is carried.

COUNCILLOR PROCTER: Lord Mayor, under Council Procedure Rule 22.1, can I move that Procedure Rule 3.2 be suspended to allow all White Paper motions to be debated.

MEMBER OF COUNCIL: Seconded, Lord Mayor.

THE LORD MAYOR: All those in favour? Thank you, that was carried.

ITEM 12 - WHITE PAPER MOTION - ST. PATRICK'S BOXING CLUB

COUNCILLOR ATHA: Well again I feel, given the failure to succeed on the midwife's course, I am certainly going to fail on this, but I think it is a great scandal, too. I think we devote ourselves to --- We talk about spending é7 million on some person's idea of what the city centre should be like. We spent very considerable sums supporting bodies which I very greatly support, like the West Yorkshire Playhouse, like Opera North, like the Dance Centre, like the Craft Centre, and so on, but sometimes we forget to deal with those

PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com small organisations in communities which do an incredibly valuable job and yet get no recognition because they have no up front people to support them, and just such a body was St. Patrick's Boxing Club.

It was in the cellar, really, of the old Irish Catholic Club at St. Patrick's. East Street Arts wanted to go into those premises to create what they have done, a most remarkable exercise and asset for Leeds. The boxing club in the basement was there rent free. We left them there. The Playhouse bought the premises for the East Street Arts. East Street Arts got grants totalling well over é1 million to turn it into what it is now. We allowed the boxing club to remain there until East Street Arts were sending the builders in in order to complete the job that has just been re-opened, and I think Councillor Procter was in fact there for one of those openings, I am told.

And so poor St. Patrick's were turned out. They went voluntarily in the end but, in the end, it would have been necessary to put them out with bailiffs, which is the last thing we would want to do. The Playhouse is still storing their equipment.

I went out on a limb for them, a limb to such an extent defending the boxing club that the Arts Council of Yorkshire sent their Chief Executive to me. Well, they didn't, he went on his own bat, and really asked me to resign as Chairman of the Playhouse because I had stood up for the boxing club and delayed the move in there.

I thought the man was terribly impertinent, told him so, nicely, of course, told my Board, and they gave the matter short shrift, but anyone who claims that I didn't support and do my best for St. Patrick's will be lying, and I have got the documentation to prove it, and the Evening Post has got the documentation to prove it. The Arts Council have got the documentation to prove it. And so all I put, and it is not reference to the amendment; this is with reference to fact, that St. Patrick's Boxing Club --- Do you mind, behind? Get to your own side, otherwise there will be trouble.

I was saying, St. Patrick's is terribly important because it is part of the history of that part of Leeds. It does an enormously useful task in attracting young men and young women into the boxing club for very serious disciplined exercise. They don't allow women to box, they are old- fashioned. They say it is inappropriate for women to box, but they do boxercise which is severe training, and all the benefits of severe training.

PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com It takes these young people off the street, gives them discipline, gives them control, gives them self-worth, and some of them, of course, go on and do quite well in the professional field. The best known is Henry (?)Wharton, I suppose, who was a middle-weight champion and fought for the world championship.

There is another boxing club doing equally valuable work who I understand have been taken in by a working men's club, but on a temporary basis. So there are these two clubs. They are desperately keen to find premises in the area, which is the most deprived in the city centre, starting from a radius of about a mile, going to Harehills, going into Meanwood, going into Burley, going into the area round York Road, its former hunting ground - anywhere that they can go in, set up and get these young folk in training, and there is no doubt whatsoever in a very short time they will be attracting well over 150/160 people.

It is something we ought to do. I feel ashamed that I am asking this group, this coalition, to do something that my group failed to do. I really do.

COUNCILLOR J. L. CARTER: Yes, significant.

COUNCILLOR ATHA: Les, there are some things, we give up the joke at a certain time, and possibly quarter past nine is late enough to say, "Let's be serious for a moment", and so let's be serious for a moment.

COUNCILLOR J. L. CARTER: I am being serious. You failed in a lot of things, didn't you, Bernard? An awful lot of things.

COUNCILLOR ATHA: You see, Lord Mayor, what I mean. There is this triviality, this stupidity which, in the end, goes beyond the point of reason. What I am saying, and I am still saying, that the boxing club is important to us all. We may live at Wetherby, we may live at Harrogate, we may live outside, but for the people of Leeds it is important that these people have these accesses, and they don't.

If you want to go and play tennis, you can join a club easily; if you are going to play rugby or football, there is access, but these aren't sports that attract every individual. There are individuals attracted by the martial arts but particularly amateur boxing, which has a first-class record of self-discipline, training, and so on, and so it must be within the wit and wisdom of the Council to find a place.

I will tell you what, Andrew, if you do it, and there will be no twittering from your colleague, my dear friend Les, if you do it,

PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com there will be no-one standing up more quickly than I and saying, "Thank God you did it. We didn't. You did, but you did the right thing."

I may say that I had got no hope previously but I did actually ask Keith when he became Leader to look at this, and steps were taken which were quite quick, and I was quite hopeful. Sadly, events overtook us, June 10th, and we are in a position we never actually anticipated being in, seeing a holy alliance of that nature, but if you can deal with this problem it is only one premise, I am sure we can get grants from the Sports Council for this purpose. I am sure we can go to the Lottery and get help for them, but we should meet this need if we are serious about social inclusion and deflecting people from criminal and other anti-social behaviour.

And so, again, this amendment, I just think we had the same fault. You come up, as I said on my previous occasion, with a good idea and then when we tried to amend it for some silly reason, as though it meant anything to outside that we had amended it and it became ours, well, this doesn't even become yours because all you are doing is noting the efforts made. You are not saying you are going to do anything about it, and I want you to do something about it, and I want to compliment you when you have done it, and I want you to be there at the opening and even put on a pair of boxing gloves, John, and have a go with some of the lads. It would be fun. I would love it, (Laughter) although if you take my advice you wouldn't, but it is within your power to do something like this, and that's why I would like you to forget your amendment, say, "Yes, it's trivial. Let's not bother and be trivial. Let's go along with saying, 'Yes, we will do something.'" It would be the second chance we have had to do something. We failed the first time. This time we could succeed. COUNCILLOR R. LEWIS: My Lord Mayor, could I second formally, reserving the right to speak. Changed my name.

COUNCILLOR PROCTER: My Lord Mayor, do you know, it is surprising, isn't it, how much power I am supposedly suddenly to have had. I can only presume that all of Bernard's colleagues who did this job before I did it didn't quite have the same sort of power. I can't understand quite why, because it is strange that so many Members of the Labour Group are now looking to me and my colleagues to actually do things that they couldn't get done under a Labour administration, and I have to scratch my head and ask why should that be.

COUNCILLOR CLEASBY: Can you help him, Tom?

COUNCILLOR ATHA: I think he is very good; I think he is an absolute convert (inaudible).

PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com COUNCILLOR PROCTER: I don't know why that should be. But I have an amount of respect for Bernard Atha, and I have said so in the columns of the Evening Post as well. In the 12 years I have been on this Council, believe it or not, I have not ever once said anything that attacked an individual member of Council, ever, and I don't want this to be treated in that way either. That said, I just wonder how many Members opposite and how many Members here actually realise what actually went on here, and what Bernard has alluded to.

The fact of the matter is that St. Patrick's Boxing Club were happily getting on with their business in the building that they had been in for quite a number of years. That building was then bought by an organisation called the West Yorkshire Playhouse. The Chairman of the West Yorkshire Playhouse is Councillor Bernard Atha. Councillor Atha and the West Yorkshire Playhouse Board didn't buy that building to allow St. Patrick's Boxing Club to remain in it. They bought the building knowing full well they would evict St. Patrick's Boxing Club from that building. That was always the intention, always the plan. St. Patrick's Boxing Club was never, as I understand it, was never going to remain in that building. Now, if Bernard tells me that that is different, well ---

COUNCILLOR ATHA: It is different, and I can prove it.

COUNCILLOR PROCTER: Well, again, that is interesting because he was acting not as a person from this place, a representative from this Council, on the West Yorkshire Playhouse Board. Councillor Atha serves as Chairman on that Board as a completely private individual, not representing this Council, and so the best Officers from this authority can do is try to glean the information from effectively people who are representing themselves, not representing this authority. So I find it quite rich, really, for Councillor Atha to in any way suggest this is a problem caused by this authority, because it isn't. However, I do ---

COUNCILLOR ATHA: I never suggested that.

COUNCILLOR PROCTER: I do recognise that Councillor Atha has turned to the authority for assistance in his hour of need to try and sort out a problem which he and his colleagues on the Playhouse Board caused in the first instance. It really is as simple as that, Lord Mayor.

I think it is a shame, Bernard, that these things happen and, again, I do just wonder how much of these goings on your colleagues actually realised in the first instance. Perhaps if you were a

PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com little more up front with them, and they did actually understand what was going on, they may have been a little swifter to help.

In terms of our amendment, our amendment is actually factually correct in terms of what the Officers have done, and I might say the Officers have probably done all that they can do in that, regrettably, the St. Patrick's Boxing Club seems to have disbanded completely and faded into the distance. The chairman of the club is no longer around, his telephone number is unobtainable. Officers have written to him, I understand, to try and bring him forward, to try and find out their current situation. St. Patrick's for quite some time shared boxing arrangements with Burmantofts Boxing Club as well, but then after a period they stopped attending the Burmantofts Club as well. So, having displaced the boxing club in the first instance, Officers then having suggested a temporary alternative at Burmantofts, sadly and regrettably, St. Patrick's as an organisation appears to have disbanded and disappeared.

I think that is regrettable. I do agree with Councillor Atha about the good works that boxing clubs in our communities actually do, and I think it is a shame that this particular club was forced out of its premises in the first instance and then didn't have an immediate home, none of which this administration was aware of at the time. We knew nothing of it. Not mentioned on the floor of this chamber your concerns then, and again we should be clear, shouldn't we, Bernard, because this isn't something that has just happened; this was something that happened how long ago?

COUNCILLOR ATHA: You tell me.

COUNCILLOR PROCTER: Quite some time ago.

COUNCILLOR ATHA: That is a bit imprecise.

COUNCILLOR PROCTER: Quite some time ago, and there was plenty - plenty - of time for your colleagues to have been able to deal with the difficulties that St. Pat's were having at that time. For whatever reason, somebody chose not to do that. I think that is regrettable.

We are where we are, Lord Mayor. If anybody is aware of the current position of St. Patrick's Boxing Club, if anybody here has connections or links with the club in any way, I would be more than happy to receive them today, or in the next few days, so I and the Officers of the authority can see what we can do to accommodate them at some premises somewhere within this City. Thank you, Lord Mayor.

PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com COUNCILLOR HYDE: I second, my Lord Mayor, reserving the right to speak.

COUNCILLOR McARDLE: Lord Mayor, I just wonder whether this could be facilitated through the Scrutiny Leisure and the Cultural Facilities Task Group. We could perhaps look at that in some capacity.

COUNCILLOR ATHA: Yes, I explained to you, I thought very clearly, my involvement in this. I am therefore rather surprised that Councillor Procter has seen fit to ignore the facts as I stated them and to state something quite differently. I will tell you for the record and it is all documented, all documented, and if anything was said which was untoward, then I am prepared to prove it and insist on an apology.

I, in fact, said to the club, speaking in my personal capacity but knowing I was Chairman of the Playhouse, long before the sale took place, that I would do my very best to keep them there, and they have used that letter as a constant reminder of that obligation to keep them there, and I said to my colleagues on the West Yorkshire Playhouse Board, and some are here who will remember, I said, "To me, the boxing club is as important as the Northern Ballet Theatre, as the West Yorkshire Playhouse, as the Dance Centre." Every bit as important. It is a form of culture that many of us will support and respect the social work they do. That is well documented and recorded.

It was that letter that caused the Arts Council to come and say to me, "You should resign your chairmanship of West Yorkshire Playhouse because, as a Trustee of that Trust, the Trust that runs the Playhouse, I had by defending the boxing club and keeping them in there, exercised powers that I didn't have as a Trustee of the Playhouse because it was not in the Playhouse's interest, and they had taken legal opinion and as a Trustee my obligation was to do the best for the Playhouse, and at that time the Playhouse had bought these premises for East Street Arts, and East Street Arts was something that the Arts Council were extremely keen on doing, as indeed I was and am. I was privileged by them to be invited to their formal opening and make a speech, an indication of the appreciation of the support I had given them.

But the boxing club was the sufferer, because they had to come out, because the East Street Arts plan depended on them having all the floors. As I said, my Board at West Yorkshire Playhouse said, "Forget what the Arts Council said", they responded on my behalf and said, "Get lost", basically, but that was an indication, because

PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com there will be very, very few occasions when someone is told by an Arts Council to one of its major, major clients in an area, "You are sacked." "Why?" Because I was defending the boxing club. So I have done that.

It has also been --- When you say "gleaned", you obviously have not been properly briefed, because I have spoken to our Director of Leisure Services, as he was then, who is back there, who came to a meeting and reassured us that he was very keen on boxing, he had been very instrumental in developing boxing in Liverpool, and I accepted that. I thought, here we have got an ally and a genuine ally, and a genuine ally I know he has been.

The Sports Council Executive Officer in Leeds at Minerva House, he also has tried to help St. Patrick's. What St. Patrick's needs is about three or four people who have got competence to order them, organise them into having a proper constitution and having a proper system of the management of a club. They have never had that, but they have been an extraordinarily successful boxing club in the terms I have given, and so there is no question about it being disbanded, John, none. I am in touch with them. They have been in touch with me. They ring me up, "What haven't you done? You haven't found us anywhere yet." If you want names, I will give you names.

COUNCILLOR PROCTER: Yes, please.

COUNCILLOR ATHA: I will give you addresses, I will give you e- mails. Happily do that, with pleasure. But what worries me is when you are saying that you are not lying, I know that, you are saying what you think is the truth. What worries me is who hasn't briefed you properly, and who hasn't told you before the background I have given you, because that is the bit that worries me, because we can fight like two cats and suddenly find when we get all the facts out, look, there is nothing to fight about it, we are on one side. And, in fact, we are on one side because I think we have just heard when you spoke you said you would agree to provide, you would do your very best and agree to provide for the boxing club.

That is really what we are asking for, and I think, when you read the verbatim, you will find you have conceded basically what we are asking for, that you in fact will go forward and provide for them as a top priority, as high a priority as you will do for any other organisation in the City, and I thank you for that, and when we read the verbatim we will have it highlighted just to remind us that here we are, a genuine person, who has a wider range of culture than going to opera or going to ballet, or even going to jazz concerts. We have

PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com got someone who actually sees boxing as so important as part of a culture that he is going to do exactly what we want. So thank you very much.

(Councillor Procter's amendment was carried)

(The substantive motion was carried)

THE LORD MAYOR: Colleagues, I would like us now to have just a short recess for 10 minutes. I am sorry, the Lord Mayor would like a short recess for 10 minutes.

(Short adjournment)

THE LORD MAYOR: We are going to try and move this on now in record time.

COUNCILLOR HARRIS: Lord Mayor, in the recess, Councillor McKenna has come to me obviously extremely upset about some of the things I said. If I give any suggestion in what I said that was in any way associated with Jim's religion or culture, that certainly was not intended, and if that was the case I apologise unreservedly. I'm sorry in what I said I have clearly personally distressed him so much, and I apologise to him publicly for that.

COUNCILLOR McKENNA: Lord Mayor, I thank Mark for his apology but, regarding my religion or colour, it was totally unnecessary. I did talk about my background and his background and how we often suffer discriminations. What I was offended with, very offended, was that I should be accused in such a way from the current Leader of Council who referred to me as being "bonkers" for raising a matter of probity. I have to tell you here and now, I will continue to do that.

I was equally upset when Andrew Carter pooh-poohed me and said I had no right to raise it, because I believe in this Council probity is something that we all have to concern ourselves with, and we must raise it where we see issues. I talked about a matter of good housekeeping on Planning where I thought there was duplicity between Executive Board Members and Members who sit on a Planning Committee who had to vacate and go out of the room. I notice that Councillor Carter did not answer that question. COUNCILLOR A. CARTER: Lord Mayor, I feel I have to comment after what has just been said. I did not dismiss what Councillor McKenna said, I merely pointed out that the item on which he had raised it was highly inappropriate and that he should have spoken to his Leader and to Councillor Minkin who, I am sure, would have given much wiser

PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com counsel. I did not insult him and so I am not going to apologise, and I still stick to what I said. The item on which he raised it, because of the sensitivity of that particular item, what he raised was wholly inappropriate on that item.

The issue itself is a serious one, and I take it seriously, but I still think it could have been raised in a better way, because nothing that is being done in terms of the Cabinet arrangements now have differed from the Cabinet arrangements when he was part of the administration, and I do personally take exception to the inference in what Councillor McKenna has said, which he cannot substantiate, and which is highly offensive to every member of the current Cabinet.

THE LORD MAYOR: Thank you. I am going to call it a draw on that one. Can we move on, please, to White Paper 13 in the name of Councillor Blackburn.

ITEM 13 - WHITE PAPER MOTION - POST OFFICE CLOSURES

COUNCILLOR D. BLACKBURN: Thank you, Lord Mayor. This Council Meeting seems to have gone on as long as last night's Presidential election, and I think we are all suffering from that.

Lord Mayor, the proposed closure of Farnley Post Office is one of eleven Post Offices due to close in Leeds North West and Pudsey Parliamentary constituencies if plans announced by the Post Office go ahead. In moving this motion regarding Farnley Post Office, I do not want to leave the impression I find the other proposed closures acceptable, because I don't, but this particular proposal is so illogical that it is almost unbelievable.

Old Farnley is a relatively small settlement consisting of what is left of the old village of Farnley, a significant number of Council properties, and a small number of privately built houses perched on top of a large hill. It is right on the urban fringe, suffering from the same isolation as many rural villages, and within the area there is a significant amount of deprivation. Both of these issues which the Post Office should supposedly take into account when they are looking at closures. The truth is that these proposals in general, and this one particularly, do not take any mitigating circumstances into account and are not planned. It is about reducing numbers, saving money, with no concern for its customers.

The Farnley Post Office is located within a small parade of local shops. If this were to close, the nearest Post Office branches are at Greenthorpe Estate and Lower Wortley. The Greenthorpe office is across the ring road, which could prove difficult to access for

PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com elderly or disabled residents, or those with young children. The Lower Wortley office is a 30/40 minute walk away from the current Post Office.

Residents have voiced their concerns about the inconvenience of losing their local Post Office and having to travel further for the services available there. In fact, I have a petition here that currently consists of 400 residents' names, which I will be taking to the Post Office at the close of the consultation next week, and I expect there to be a substantially larger number of signatures by that time.

Also, Leeds West Homes have transferred cash payments from its Neighbourhood Housing Offices to Post Offices, and this should have helped to make the Post Offices in the area more viable. Leeds West Homes has already sent a letter of objection regarding the proposed closure.

Given these circumstances, we believe the Post Office should reconsider this and other proposed closures in Leeds. On Monday of this week, my Ward colleagues and myself, along with the Area Manager for West Leeds, met with the Post Office as part of the consultations. I have got to say, if that is supposed to be consultation, then I am a Dutchman. It is clear to me the Post Office have made their mind up. They were not ready to listen to our arguments. They wouldn't listen when we challenged the validity of the facts they offered. They clearly were not prepared to look at alternatives.

I therefore hope that Members of Council will support my motion. Since drawing up this particular motion, obviously some circumstances have changed as regards the announcement regarding Crown Post Offices and, in the interests of taking that within the motion, Councillor Andrew Carter has put an amendment to this, which also broadens the terms of this resolution. We believe that it broadens it sufficiently enough to mitigate the things which are in Richard Lewis's motion, and we would hope he might withdraw that. Anyway, I will move my motion, Lord Mayor. Thank you.

COUNCILLOR C. NASH: My Lord Mayor, as Councillor Blackburn has said, Farnley is basically a village community on top of a hill, and it has just one little row of shops, which is the centre of that community, two shops and a Post Office. Removal of the Post Office could not only devastate the Post Office but also the adjoining shops.

We are very concerned that the Post Office seem to follow guidelines which make this virtually a random closure. Rather than having a structured process, they seem to be looking around for people

PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com who want to give up their business, and this means that basically the future of that community is put in the hands of the Postmaster. If that Postmaster or Postmistress wishes to give up their business, then the Post Office assists them to do that. They call this, "network reinvention". Well, to me it is not a network at all that they are leaving us with. They are leaving us with a very random series of Post Offices with no really coherent idea of where those should be. They do say they will take into account whether communities are rural, which this one is effectively semi-rural, and whether they are deprived.

Farnley has one 'super output' area which is defined as amongst the 10% most deprived in this country. They also have two other super output areas nearby which use that Post Office which are amongst the 20% most deprived, and we do feel that this is therefore an exceptional case which the Council should support. Thank you.

COUNCILLOR R. LEWIS: Lord Mayor, I know David's Post Office well. It is in an isolated situation, but I think all of us probably have recently had fairy devastating news, or quite a few of us, about the future of Post Offices in our ward, and in our case we had one Post Office where they didn't bother to tell us, simply because it is a couple of hundred yards outside the Leeds boundary is Tyersal and so we were not worth consulting in any way.

Post Offices are important. They are probably not important to all of us these days, and I think we have to be honest about that, that for most of us our lifestyles have changed. You know, what we have in our communities is something that we often bypass. It probably goes for most people in this Council Chamber, you know; we have cars, we don't need to use our local Post Offices. It is not inconvenient for us to buy our milk from the supermarket, all those things.

The people who are affected most by Post Office closures are the virtual communities, and they are the communities that are not necessarily like David's, stuck on the top of a hill with not much else, but they are the disadvantaged, they are the elderly, who struggle to get anywhere else, and I think for somewhere like Tyersal where you do have a bus service, probably not as good as you have from Old Farnley, but you have got to go a long way to get to your Post Offices so, you know, the isolation that increases for individuals and, okay, it is not the whole community, but it is a significant part of our communities, that is being affected by what is happening.

It has been a long kind of story that seems as if it has been going on forever. I remember back in the sixties when my grandmother

PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com was begged if she would take over the sub-Post Office in a small Welsh village, and she was in her early sixties at the time and she had to kind of brush off all the cobwebs of, you know, "I can't remember any arithmetic. I have to take over something." After just raising a family for 40 years, that suddenly became her life, and she did it for about 20 years, so long, long after she should have retired and, of course the Post Office closed down after she did retire, and I have seen Post Offices close in my area.

We have all seen that kind of gradual decline, but it is reaching that stage where it is no longer a kind of gradual decline, it is crucial, I think, for us all. We cannot see the Post Office do what it wants to do without, as a body, expressing our disgust and our concern about what is going on, because once we lose Post Offices they ain't coming back. They are like coal mines, you know, you have got a facility there, you have got something that belongs to the community that you lose completely when they go.

Now, Post Offices won't remain the same as they have been in the past. They have got to change, but we found that out probably as a Council too late when we have suddenly said things like, "Well, we don't want to collect money ourselves. You know, we don't want to collect rents. We don't want to do this, let's get Post Offices to do it" and then, as soon as we said that, what do we get from the Post Office? They say, "Well, we are going to close a raft of your Post Offices", so kind of cutting the ground from under our feet.

So it is late. I won't kind of go on about the injustices of it all. We all know what the score is. On our side, you know, we don't want to be kind of partisan about this. I have no problem with what Andrew's resolution says or with what Andrew's amendment says or what David's White Paper says. I know they feel differently, but I think it is probably important that we do all express our concern about what is happening and our objections not just about Farnley but about all the Post Offices that are under threat within the Leeds district or outside the Leeds district that affects people who live in the City. Thank you, Lord Mayor.

COUNCILLOR McKENNA: Lord Mayor, as Councillor Lewis said, it is getting late and we are not very far apart. While I am on my feet, though, I would like to say to Andrew that I am not -- I was not questioning the integrity of any of the four Members. I simply used the wrong word. Instead of "duplicity" I should have said "dual Membership". Read my verbatim, Andrew, you will see that very clearly. They did decare the right interest, but it was the impression in the wider world is the one I was questioning, and I leave it there, Lord Mayor.

PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com I hope you will support the motion. I am sure we are not far apart.

COUNCILLOR A. CARTER: My Lord Mayor, I will be brief. If we say too much the League for Cruel Sports will be in to stop the meeting!

It is a serious issue, however, and I entirely support the sentiments expressed by both Councillor Blackburn and by Councillor Lewis. In Pudsey, and as you would expect I would comment on that because I know most about it, over the past few years we lost our Magistrates Court, our fire station. We have seen our police station downgraded and made part of the largest Police Division in the whole of West Yorkshire. We have seen Post Offices close in Rodley, two in Stanningley, now Tyersal under threat and others, and this Council, in fairness, under the previous administration and now under this administration, has done more than this Government, or any of our Members of Parliament, to try and put some more business through the sub-Post Offices, as Councillor Blackburn has pointed out.

Quite frankly, I get a bit sick of the hot air coming out of our Members of Parliament, because it is Government policy that is stripping away business from sub-Post Offices, and there is no way, no way at all, that that can be wriggled out of. It is a fact. It is Government policy.

Two former sub-Postmasters - well, one sub-Postmistress and one sub-Postmaster - said to me, "We are going because of the compensation packages that are being offered to us. We don't want to go, but we know if we stay the business will be worth nothing so we are leaving", and it is the compensation package that the Government encourages Royal Mail to use. When they talk about saving sub-Post Offices, it is the rural sub-Post Offices that they are talking about, but don't they realise that the urban sub-Post Offices in the outer areas of Leeds in particular, not just the outer areas, in Ronnie's ward, in Alwoodley the same thing applies. No Council ward is untouched.

I remember saying in this Council Chamber last year, when we were debating I think the closure of the two that simultaneously closed in my ward, that for those of you who were not particularly interested because it happened to my ward, it was going to happen in your wards, too, and by golly, unfortunately I was right. Because when the Post Office talks about consultation, it is a bit like some of the consultation that you have entered into over the years. You know, actually it is a one option, "We are closing" consultation, and

PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com I sympathise with David and his colleagues. I know exactly how they feel.

It is now made a lot worse, however, because now, you know, the Royal Mail considers its options. Half of all High Street Post Offices, they mean Crown Post Offices, are to go. I know they are saying not all closures, closures and we will offer them to other people", but imagine what that does, Liz, to city living. You know, the Crown Post Office is now under threat in Leeds. St. John's branch. You know, the main Post Office has already gone. St. John's branch office and Markets office in New York Street, the Headingley branch, the Crossgates branch, the Morley branch and, yes, the Pudsey branch, all Crown Post Offices, now the heart of communities. You know, they go and the hopes of regenerating our small towns will be set back considerably.

Now, it is time this Government woke up to what their mate in the Royal Mail is doing, Mr. Leighton and his colleagues. You know, he is the fellow who was at Leeds United, Mr. Leighton. (Interruptions)

But just to come back to the point I mentioned, Liz. You know, we are trying. She tried. I am trying. Everyone is trying to make city centre living a reality. At the moment what we have is a lot of flats being built in the centre of Leeds. If you think that is city living, you are wrong. City living is when the infrastructure that supports communities coming back into the city centre is all there. Not much good, then, if the two Crown Post Offices are under threat, is it? No good at all and, and I said, what does it do to the other communities? It is devastating. It takes away another piece of the heart, another piece of the jigsaw, the fabric that makes a local town centre.

Friends from Morley know my views about the importance of regenerating our small towns, about keeping alive our urban areas. Unless the Government intervene and talk to the Royal Mail in the strongest terms, this consultation exercise will become a reality. They are determined to dispose of, one way or another, half of Crown Post Offices. There are 500 and some across the country, they want 250-odd to go, and we know, as I have just said, when they enter into consultation that means it is not about whether they are closing, it is about when they are closing, and we have got to stop it, and we have got to stop it and we have got to be united in this chamber, and our MPs have got to start earning their money. They have got to start earning their money because, you know, let's face it, our fellow in Pudsey, every time he campaigns to keep something open, you know what is going to happen, it is the kiss of death.

PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com Well, I think this City Council can do a great deal. We have done a great deal already. We have got to think about doing a great deal more, because the sub-Post Offices that are left, like the Farnley one, like the Tyersal one, like the ones that are left in everybody's wards, are assets without price. They are assets that we have to keep. They are assets for the community and they help us in regeneration, and the bigger issue still is the issue of the Crown Post Offices, because if they go it is a huge blow to this City and to the small towns that go to make Leeds a better place.

So I am pleased David has accepted my amendment, and I hope all Council will vote in favour of the amended resolution. I move, my Lord Mayor. (Applause)

COUNCILLOR HARRIS: Briefly, Lord Mayor, in seconding. A few weeks ago I attended I think it was the Churches Council on Financial Exclusion which was hosted by Leeds Met. University, and there were representatives from all sectors of society, community and religious organisations. Keith was there, and we talked at some length about this whole problem of financial exclusion, which is a huge impediment to what is all-party agreement that we have got to try and close the gap in this City. And here the whole question of Post Office closures, as we are debating now for the fourth time since 2002, the whole question of Post Office closures, be they Crown or Sub, is an absolute attack on the principle of our attempt to close the gap and to deal with financial exclusion, because it strikes at the very people who just don't have access to credit cards, to High Street banking, to Internet banking, or the other myriad of financial institutions and opportunities.

I said the last time I spoke on this that the Government has made a fundamental error in the way it perceives the Post Office service, and I say this as somebody who is unashamedly from the private sector. I am unashamedly a capitalist, I hope with socialist leanings, but I am a capitalist, I make no bones about it. I believe in private enterprise. I believe in profit, because profit produces taxes that pays for all of this, but I do not believe that the private sector solution is always the right one. I am not a one-size-fits- all person, and here the Government has made a fundamental error in applying the principle of private sector profit motive to the Post Office service, because it is not; it is a social service in essence, in large part. That is what it is, and the only way in which this can be reversed and addressed is if Government recognises that driving the Post Office towards profit is not the correct route; the answer will have to be to subsidize the Post Office service in order to protect the vital service that it provides to our communities as a

PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com whole, but in particular to the most vulnerable and the most under- privileged members of our community.

That is why this is so important. It is why, as Andrew has said, our MPs have got to stand up and be counted. They have got to, even those who voted in favour of the original Post Office closure programme, have now absolutely got to stand up with all of us.

I am confident there is going to be all-party agreement on this tonight. Let's talk as a single entity, as a City politically united, and we won't be the only ones. It won't just be us in Leeds. This must be the message going to Westminster from every Council in the country. I can't believe that the message is any different anywhere, because every community in every city up and down the country will be under threat. That is why this is so important.

I am sure we will be united on it. We have got to get the Government to step back on this. (Applause)

COUNCILLOR MULHOLLAND: Lord Mayor, before I start, I will just say I am still feeling slightly uncomfortable about Councillor Harker's contribution to the fireworks debate earlier. As some of you may know, I am a Catholic, but I can assure you I have got no plans to do anything in terms of plots to this chamber, but I was very tempted earlier to set the fire alarm off, and I think you might actually have thanked me for that so we could have all gone home a little earlier.

The Post Office closures, now we all know, we are all united here. This is an issue that motivates people, that unites communities. There are action groups all over the City campaigning on this and, as representatives of our communities, we have got a responsibility to take that on. So I will say now I welcome the all- party support on this one.

In fact, I had a meeting regarding the Silk Mill Drive closure a few weeks ago. I was very pleased that there was an unequivocal statement of support for the campaign from our MP Harold Best, despite the fact, of course, that it is his Government that must actually ultimately take the responsibility for these closures in the first place, and let's not try and avoid that point in coming up with some bland anodyne debate this evening.

There are actually five Post Offices in Harold Best's constituency that are due to close. I will give you an example of two of them, and this is from speaking to residents. The Silk Mill Drive Post Office closure, residents have been told it is only 0.6

PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com miles to the next Post Office. Well, let me tell you, in actual fact it may be 0.6 miles but there is a bloody big hill in the way. Now, there is no map that shows a bloody big hill, and you will pardon my swearing at this time of the evening, I am sure, and ---

THE LORD MAYOR: No, I won't. Please refrain.

COUNCILLOR MULHOLLAND: I do apologise. Terrible. I do apologise. But, in actual fact, there is no looking at the community aspect in this. Tinshill residents have to rely on five buses a day, so in actual fact for old people to catch the bus to go to this Post Office in Horsforth, which is the nearest one, 0.6 miles away, it gives them 14 minutes to cross a busy road, do their business in the Post Office, and get back on the bus, and if they don't they could have up to 3 hours wait. Now, that is ludicrous, and you don't need to be told that that is ludicrous, and it is entirely unacceptable. Similarly with the Westbourne branch in Otley. It may only be a short walk into the centre of Otley, but nevertheless it involves crossing two main roads, including a dual-carriageway and a roundabout. This has not been thought through and, as local representatives, we have to oppose it and oppose it very strongly this evening.

Now, what does Tony Blair say about this? What does he say about the Post Offices? He says, "Britain's Post Offices are a vital part of the fabric of this country, especially in rural areas and in disadvantaged parts of our towns and cities." Wonderful words, and I think every single one of us would agree with that. But what is the record? The fact is that the Government are the only people who can do anything about these Post Office closures, apart from campaign and protest, which is all we can actually do. And what have they done? Well, there was a report on Post Office closures from the Performance and Innovation Unit. There are two things that can be done: maximize financial services and maximize e-commerce. So there is the Universal Bank, which is something that could potentially keep many, many sub-Post Offices open. You will be very surprised to hear this, but the Government will not set a target for the number of people to open Universal bank accounts using the Post Office card system. The Government also ended the 'Your Guide' Initiative, which was designed to turn Post Offices into information centres, so the reality is this, that there are no concrete plans whatsoever from the Government to support any initiatives designed to generate more income for Post Office branches.

So, yes, as I said at the beginning, I welcome support from all the parties, but someone has to be accountable here, and let's face the very simple fact this Government has twiddled its thumbs and

PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com looked the other way. So I welcome the Opposition comments, and I welcome the contribution from Labour Councillors, Labour candidates, and Labour MPs, but let's be honest about the Government's culpability in this situation, because this is about community and urban communities like the ones I have talked about, like the ones that have been talked about earlier, are no less communities than those in rural areas. Now, the Post Office position and the Government's position is clear, but let's send a very clear message today from Leeds City Council and on behalf of the City, the people of Leeds: we believe in urban communities, and we will defend our local communities against anyone, for reasons of profit, indifference or political cowardice, who would threaten them, so please support Andrew Carter's amendment. (Applause)

COUNCILLOR GOLTON: Lord Mayor, I am very glad that Councillor Mulholland has taken a close interest in the Post Office closures within my ward, because we could do with all the support that we can get. I have to say I will concentrate on the last aspect that Greg concentrated upon, which is the isolation factor.

I think it is a little disingenuous, my Lord Mayor, for the Post Office to talk about the special case for rural Post Offices and then ignore those that are in the outer areas of cities. I have to think that the reason why they have done that is because of the pressure that they had previously on rural Post Offices, and once they had done their certain amount of culling they thought, "Okay, we will come out on their side".

But, Lord Mayor, the areas that we are talking about can be just as isolated as rural communities. People often, when I say I represent Weetwood, look at me as if to say, "How can a Chingford skinhead like you look after somewhere as green and leafy as Weetwood?" because they assume that everyone there is posh and they have got degrees and they all drive big cars. But the reality is that within Weetwood Ward there are very large pockets of deprivation which historically have been left out from the City's prosperity, that they have looked longingly at things that have happened in Belle Isle, or even in Gipton, in terms of the investment that has been put into those areas to try and regenerate them, whereas they effectively felt ignored, Lord Mayor.

These particular closures have met with such major anger, it has to be said, because they follow on from an onslaught from the bus companies, so that these areas are ever more isolated because they have had their bus routes stopped. They are going to be even more isolated because the centre of their communities, which are the Post offices, are -- well, the intention is to shut them. There is very

PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com little of their community left, Lord Mayor, because their community centres are those parade of shops that you have in Council estates which already have precious few people renting properties in there, and the Post Office is an essential function to keep those shopping parades alive and, as I said, Greg Mulholland has made a very forceful speech on the subject.

I don't think there is really much else to mention. Thank you.

COUNCILLOR TAGGART: Are you (inaudible) as well, Richard?

COUNCILLOR HARKER: Not at all. Lord Mayor, most of what I was going to say has already been said for me, (Interruptions) but I do want to make one or two points and then I will sit down, but I will make the points.

Over é600 million has been used by the Post Office. Of that é600 million, most of it has been used to buy people out in order to close Post Offices. The Government has actively taken away many of the services that the Post Offices used to provide. By closing more of them, then more people go to not using Post Offices as their means of banking and for their benefits and their pensions, and so it goes on, and so there is a major responsibility, as Andrew said, for the Government to put back into the Post Offices services that would make them profitable.

At the present moment, the Post Office is faced with using money not to enhance services but to try and force what is left of their business into less and less Post Offices, and the Crown Post Offices will be picked off one by one by one. Unless the Government stands by what it has said over and over again, in particular Patricia Hewitt, and there is activity on the part of Government to put services back into the Post Offices to make them profitable again, then even more will close with time. (Applause)

COUNCILLOR KIRKLAND: I think the number of speakers is directly related to the anger which people on this side and probably on your side feel about this situation. Post Office closures are cuts and, make no mistake about it, those cuts are going to hurt. A lot of people will be hurt, and most of those will be elderly and disabled.

Councillor Blackburn and Councillor Nash are dead right, it will destabilize the other shops close to the Post office. The only thing that keeps them open at the moment is the fact that a lot of people go to the Post office, and every Post Office closure right

PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com across the City will cause the same problem. We have already had three in my ward. This is the fourth.

The One-Stop Shops, Councillor Gruen, are stopping collecting cash, for instance, rents. "Go to the Post Office", they say. The problem is the Post office is closing as well.

You can imagine the end. Unless we call, "Enough is enough", the end result will be they will be ringing a call centre, and when the answer comes on it will say, "Press button 1 if you want first-class stamps, and press 2 for second-class stamps." We did have a thing for, "Press button 3" but it wasn't quite polite. There is urgent need to promote and encourage greater use of Post Offices to expand the range of services and to actually get them into e-business. Now, the Government has stood idly by while the Post Office system breaks down, and we have got an extra problem in my ward in that the Post Office which people will be directed to due to the closure proposed will shortly become a major building site when this Council builds a new library which incorporates part of that particular Post Office building, so not only will you get an extra lot of elderly and disabled people walking around but you will also get a lot of dumper trucks and JCBs and lorries delivering building materials in the same space. Now, we have already got a campaign in Otley ---

THE LORD MAYOR: Can we have some order, please. We all want to get home.

MEMBERS OF COUNCIL: We can't hear.

COUNCILLOR KIRKLAND: Yes, Lord Mayor. We have got a campaign in Otley to stop heavy lorries using the roads. Now, this is actually putting heavy lorries into direct contact with elderly and disabled people by design, and it is wrong. (Applause)

THE LORD MAYOR: Councillor Taylor.

COUNCILLOR A. CARTER: My Lord Mayor, I beg leave of Council to withdraw the motion. (Laughter)

COUNCILLOR J. L. CARTER: Second, Lord Mayor.

COUNCILLOR TAYLOR: You are quite alright, Andrew, I am used to being brief. I have spoken about this on two previous occasions in this chamber. I have reminded people about the dangers of what was going on in Parliament. I reminded people that it was people like George Mudie, in fact, who voted for the closure of the Post

PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com Offices in the first place, and I hope that when it comes to an election, and if it is next year, that each of us here will remember that and will hold our Members of Parliament accountable.

This Post Office closure has a devastating effect on people. One example, and only one, there is a lady in my ward now and it costs her é5 to collect her pension, which is scandalous. (Applause)

COUNCILLOR D. BLACKBURN: Can I sum up then? All I will say is, let's just think of the elderly, the people with children, who are living at the top of the hills, who have got no banks and are going to have no post Offices, and what I say is, vote for my motion and vote for Councillor Carter's amendment. (Applause)

(Councillor R. Lewis's amendment was lost)

(Councillor A. Carter's amendment was carried unanimously)

(The substantive motion was carried)

ITEM 14 - WHITE PAPER MOTION - FLUORIDATION OF WATER SUPPLIES

COUNCILLOR A. BLACKBURN: Lord Mayor, it has been brought to our attention that the Health Scrutiny Board will be receiving a report at its next meeting on the issue of fluoridation. We therefore feel that it would be inappropriate to proceed with this motion at this stage.

I know we all want to get home, but it still is an important issue. I would say that in our view a debate on fluoridation is urgently needed. We therefore feel that the Health Scrutiny Board should process any further enquiries with due speed enabling Council to visit this in the spring, so I therefore ask leave to withdraw the motion. Thank you. (Applause)

COUNCILLOR A. CARTER: All in favour?

THE LORD MAYOR: I don't think we can do it quite like that, can we? We can. Alright, thank you. We will accept that.

ITEM 15 - WHITE PAPER MOTION - LEEDS RHINOS

COUNCILLOR J. LEWIS: Lord Mayor, I would like to formally move this motion. Thank you. (Applause)

COUNCILLOR J. L. CARTER: I will second.

PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com COUNCILLOR MINKIN: I am going to second it. I am not just going to formally second it, because (Interruptions) you have to celebrate success as much as you have to make a pain about things that are going wrong, and also because a deep depression of gloom was lifted over the Minkin household in Morris Lane because of this result. In fact it created joy. It is a great victory. I think we should celebrate it. I don't want the verbatim of this Council not to show that we didn't take due note of what this team has achieved.

When the Superleague and the Rhinos were created, there was little or no involvement of the club in community activity but that great team which built the club also built its involvement of schools. (Interruption) Just two minutes. It is worth it to celebrate the work that they have done. It has become a role model for other clubs. There are more schools playing Rugby League now in Leeds than at any time since the Second World War, more amateur teams playing, more girls and women. The Education & Learning facility at Headingley is ten times bigger than that at Manchester United, and in the squad which beat Bradford 10 out of the 17 came from the Leeds Academy. It is a testament to Milford, Stanningley, East Leeds and to the Leeds school system. It was a young squad with enormous commitment to each other which won on Saturday, and you should have the generosity of spirit to just wait ten seconds to celebrate that. Those (inaudible) effort to strive for the best is actually great for this City. Their mission statement, "Believe Leeds", is tremendous. So believe us, Rhinos, we are, all 99 of us, proud of you, proud of what you did, and proud of the values you represent. (Applause)

COUNCILLOR J. LEWIS: All I would like to do, as this is the last Council before Christmas, is to wish everyone a happy Christmas. (Applause)

(The motion was carried unanimously)

THE LORD MAYOR: Thank you very much, and goodnight.

(Council rose at 10.30 p.m.)

PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com