Agenda item

A notice of motion, under Appendix 7 – paragraph 12 other than those listed in Appendix 7 – paragraph 10 of the Constitution must reach the Chief Executive at least ten clear days before the relevant Meeting of the Council.

The Mental Health Challenge

 

The following motion was received, proposed by Councillor Gardner and seconded by Councillor Wright regarding the Mental Health Challenge:

 

“This council notes:

1 in 4 people will experience a mental health problem in any given year.

The World Health Organisation predicts that depression will be the second most common health condition worldwide by 2020.

Mental ill health costs some £105 billion each year in England alone.

People with a severe mental illness die up to 20 years younger than their peers in the UK.

There is often a circular relationship between mental health and issues such as housing, employment, family problems or debt.

 

This council believes:

To sign the Local Authorities’ Mental Health Challenge rub by Centre for Mental Health, Mental Health Foundation, Mental Health Providers Forum, Mind, Rethink Mental Illness, Royal College of Psychiatrists and YoungMinds.

We commit to appoint an elected member as “mental health champion” across the council.

We will seek to identify a member of staff within the council to act as “lead officer” for mental health.

 

The council will also:

 

Support positive mental health in our community, including in local schools, colleges, Keele University, neighbourhoods and workplaces.

Work to reduce inequalities in mental health in our community.

Work with local partners to offer effective support for people with mental health needs.

Tackle discrimination on the grounds of mental health in our community.

Proactively listen to people of all ages and backgrounds about what they need for better mental health.

Sign up to the Time to Change Pledge”.

 

Resolved:     That the motion be carried.

 

 

Councillor Loades left the room during consideration of the following motion:

 

Universal Credit

 

A motion was received, proposed by Councillor Gardner and seconded by Councillor Olszewski regarding Universal Credit:

 

 

 

 

“This council notes:

That Universal Credit, the single monthly payment which replaces the six current working age benefits, is to be fully implemented in Newcastle in 2018.

This council also notes that within our area the number of people affected is likely to be in the thousands.

Council notes with concern that the move to a Full Service Universal Credit in other parts of the country has caused considerable financial hardship for many of those people moving onto this new system of benefit payments.

Before a full roll-out of Universal Credit the following problems need to be addressed:

·         The six -week  wait for claimants to receive their benefits.
The idea that all workers are in jobs where they are paid a month in arrears ignores the reality for the 1.5 million workers who struggle on zero hours, insecure jobs or forced self-employment. Claimants need to be paid from day one.

·         Payments going to one named member of a household.
Many claimants struggle to budget and payments should be paid to the separate claimants within a household and on a fortnightly rather than a monthly basis. With the present policy there is real danger that if the whole benefit goes to one named individual there is no guarantee that the money will be distributed fairly within the household.

·         Claimants need to have their rent paid directly to landlords to avoid the unacceptably high levels of arrears and homelessness that have occurred in the areas where UC already exists.
Pushing claimants into debt adds to the stress and insecurity for the claimants.

·         An end to benefit sanctions as there is no evidence that sanctioning helps people into work.
In fact taking away claimant’s ability to feed themselves and their families prevents them from focusing on finding employment as they are too busy trying to survive. The evidence of the harm that sanctions cause is growing – they are an unnecessary cruelty in our benefits system.

·         Allow all new claimants to apply for Universal Credit in job centres supported by trained job centre staff.
Forcing new claimants to apply on-line causes real problems for many people who don’t have either access or the IT skills to cope with the complex online application. The use of a paid helpline also needs to be abandoned as claimants cannot afford the expensive rates charged. The planned job centre closures also need to be reversed as claimants need face to face support to help them back into work and to deal with the complexity of Universal Credit.

·         Abandon the in-work conditionality for part-time or low paid workers – the idea that there are extra hours or higher paid work for large numbers of those affected workers is simply not the case.
This clause of UC places the emphasis on individuals who often want greater number of hours of work – and not on the employers who benefit from short hours and insecurity.

·         The overall level that UC is funded needs to be urgently increased. The rate at which some claimants will lose benefit is set at 63p in the pound which when compared with the top rate of income tax of 45% on incomes over £150,000 a year, demonstrates just how unfair UC is for the lowest income households.

This council notes with concern, therefore, that the implementation of a Full Service Universal Credit in the borough is likely to prove seriously detrimental to the health and wellbeing of thousands of its local residents.

 

The council therefore resolves:

To request all its political group leaders to jointly write to the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions asking that the system of Universal Credit is redesigned in such a way that it removes the inherent risks that this council has expressed its concerns over.”

Subsequently an amendment to the motion was proposed by Councillor Holland and seconded by Councillor Simon Tagg:

 

“Amendment to Motion to Council: Universal Credit

 

This council notes:

That Universal Credit, the single monthly payment which replaces six current working-age benefits, is to be fully implemented in Newcastle in 2018.

 

Universal Credit is a major reform that will have a transformational effect on the benefits system in Britain.

 

This council notes that within our area the number of people who could receive Universal Credit is likely to be in the thousands.

 

The council also notes the submission in bullet points below from Councillors Gardner and Olszewski relating to the Labour Party campaign to halt the full roll-out of Universal Credit:

 

·         The six -week wait for claimants to receive their benefits.

The idea that all workers are in jobs where they are paid a month in arrears ignores the reality for the 1.5 million workers who struggle on zero hours, insecure jobs or forced self employment. Claimants need to be paid from day one.

 

·         Payments going to one named member of a household.

Many claimants struggle to budget and payments should be paid to the separate claimants within a household and on a fortnightly rather than a monthly basis. With the present policy there is real danger that if the whole benefit goes to one named individual there is no guarantee that the money will be distributed fairly within the household.

 

·         Claimants need to have their rent paid directly to landlords to avoid the unacceptably high levels of arrears and homelessness that have occurred in the areas where UC already exists. Pushing claimants into debt adds to the stress and insecurity for the claimants.

 

·         An end to benefit sanctions as there is no evidence that sanctioning helps people into work. In fact taking away claimant’s ability to feed themselves and their families prevents them from focusing on finding employment as they are too busy trying to survive. The evidence of the harm that sanctions cause is growing – they are an unnecessary cruelty in our benefits system.

 

·         Allow all new claimants to apply for Universal Credit in job centres supported by trained job centre staff.

Forcing new claimants to apply on-line causes real problems for many people who don’t have either access or the IT skills to cope with the complex online application. The use of a paid helpline also needs to be abandoned as claimants cannot afford the expensive rates charged. The planned job centre closures also need to be reversed as claimants need face to face support to help them back into work and to deal with the complexity of Universal Credit.

 

·         Abandon the in-work conditionality for part-time or low paid workers

The idea that there are extra hours or higher paid work for large numbers of those affected workers is simply not the case. This clause of UC places the emphasis on individuals who often want greater number of hours of work – and not on the employers who benefit from short hours and insecurity.

 

 

·         The overall level that UC is funded needs to be urgently increased.

The rate at which some claimants will lose benefit is set at 63p in the pound which when compared with the top rate of income tax of 45% on incomes over £150,000 a year, demonstrates just how unfair UC is for the lowest income households.

 

Cllrs Gardner & Olszewski believe that the implementation of a Full Service Universal Credit in the borough is likely to prove seriously detrimental to the health and wellbeing of thousands of its local residents.

 

The council believes:

 

That it is vital the Government takes proper account of the concerns expressed about the roll-out of Universal Credit, and continues to revise and improve the system as it is being fully introduced in Newcastle-under-Lyme.

 

The council therefore resolves:

 

To request all its political group leaders to write to the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions to ask the government to continue to listen to views expressed from all quarters and to take account of the experience from pilot areas, to ensure that Universal Credit is a success.

 

A copy of this motion should also sent to the Secretary of State”.

 

 

Members debated the motion and amendment and named votes were requested for the motion and the amendment to the motion.

 

Vote on the amendment to the motion.

 

ALLPORT	NO	HEESOM	YES	SHENTON	NO
ASTLE	ABSENT	HOLLAND	YES	SIMPSON	ABSENT
BAILEY	NO	HUCKFIELD	YES	SNELL	NO
BEECH	NO	JOHNSON	YES	SPENCE	NO
BLOOR	YES	JONES	NO	STUBBS	NO
		KEARON	NO	SWEENEY	YES
BURGESS	NO	LOADES	NOT IN DEBATE	JOHN TAGG	YES
COOPER	YES	MANCEY	YES	SIMON TAGG	YES
MISS COOPER	YES	MATTHEWS	YES	TURNER	NO
DILLON	NO	NAYLON	NO	WALKLATE	ABSENT
DYMOND	NO	NORTHCOTT	YES	WARING	YES
EAGLES	NO	OLSZEWSKI	NO	G WHITE	NO
FEAR	YES	OWEN	NO	S WHITE	NO
FRANKISH	YES	PANTER	YES	I WILKES	NO
GARDNER	NO	PARKER	YES	G WILLIAMS	NO
MRS HAILSTONES	YES	PICKUP	NOT PRESENT	J WILLIAMS	NO
MR HAILSTONES	YES	PROCTOR	ABSENT	WINFIELD	NO
HAMBLETON	NO	REDDISH	NO	WING	NOT PRESENT
		ROBINSON	NO	WOOLLEY	YES
HARPER	YES	ROUT	NO	WRIGHT	NO

 

In Favour -     22

Against -        29

Abstain –       0

 

 

 

Vote on the original motion:

 

ALLPORT	YES	HEESOM	NO	SHENTON	YES
ASTLE	ABSENT	HOLLAND	NO	SIMPSON	ABSENT
BAILEY	YES	HUCKFIELD	ABSTAIN	SNELL	YES
BEECH	YES	JOHNSON	NO	SPENCE	YES
BLOOR	NO	JONES	YES	STUBBS	YES
		KEARON	YES	SWEENEY	NO
BURGESS	YES	LOADES	NOT IN DEBATE	JOHN TAGG	NO
COOPER	NO	MANCEY	NO	SIMON TAGG	NO
MISS COOPER	NO	MATTHEWS	NO	TURNER	YES
DILLON	YES	NAYLON	YES	WALKLATE	ABSENT
DYMOND	YES	NORTHCOTT	NO	WARING	NO
EAGLES	YES	OLSZEWSKI	YES	G WHITE	YES
FEAR	NO	OWEN	YES	S WHITE	YES
FRANKISH	NO	PANTER	NO	I WILKES	YES
GARDNER	YES	PARKER	NO	G WILLIAMS	YES
MRS HAILSTONES	NO	PICKUP	NOT PRESENT	J WILLIAMS	YES
MR HAILSTONES	NO	PROCTOR	ABSENT	WINFIELD	YES
HAMBLETON	YES	REDDISH	YES	WING	NOT PRESENT
		ROBINSON	YES	WOOLLEY	NO
HARPER	NO	ROUT	YES	WRIGHT	YES

 

In Favour -     29

Against -        21

Abstain -        1

 

Resolved:    That the original motion be carried.

 

 

Pressures on the Provision of Acute and Sub-acute Beds in North Staffordshire.

 

The following motion was received. Proposed by Councillor Gardner and seconded by Councillor Jones regarding a decision made by the North Staffordshire Clinical Commissioning Group:

 

“This Council notes:

That North Staffordshire Clinical Commissioning Group (NSCCG) took the decision in October 2016 to remove the funding of community step-down and rehabilitation beds, resulting in the closure of 64 community beds at Bradwell Hospital. 

 

That in October and November 2016 Stoke-on-Trent City Council and Staffordshire County Council resolved to ‘refer-back’, under the Health & Social Care Act (2012), the decision to close these community beds to the Secretary of State for Health for consideration.

 

That a motion passed at the 23^rd November 2016 meeting of council resolved to support the ‘refer-back’ of the decision to close the community beds at Bradwell hospital, and that until a decision had been made, the beds should remain open.

 

That since November 2016 a further 84 Community beds have been closed in Cheadle and Leek Moorlands hospital.  Whilst the UHNM trust is working to increase the number of beds at the Royal Stoke University Hospital, against significant funding pressures, investing £2 million to open an additional 45 acute care beds.

That during a recent debate on healthcare in North Staffordshire in the House of Commons, the Health Minister confirmed that the ‘refer-back’ has been passed onto the independent referral panel for investigation.

That the UHNM trust has made a formal request to the NSCCG to re-open community beds in the build up to, and over the winter period, in anticipation of increased pressures on the provision of acute beds.

That the NSCCG has administered circa. £10 million pounds in fines to the UHNM trust for failure to meet specified unrealistic targets, and that the NSCCG retains the ability to forgive these fines given the financial pressures the UHNM trust faces.

 

This Council believes:

 

That community hospitals provide an essential health care provision to ensure that residents can recuperate outside of an acute setting in a location close to their home and families.

 

That Bradwell Hospital wards should be re-opened permanently, funded by NSCCG.

 

That provision of sub-acute beds, where patients who are medically fit for discharge from an acute setting, but not yet medically fit to return to their own homes, is essential to a sustainable patient discharge system.

 

That the NSCCG has failed to demonstrate appropriate, transparent, and accountable leadership regarding the consultation process over the closure of community beds at Bradwell hospital and across the Staffordshire and Stoke-on-Trent authorities.

 

That the NSCCG has failed to appropriately respond to the request by the UHNM trust to reopen community beds, on the basis of increased pressures, and in doing so put the safety of residents at risk.

 

This Council resolves:

 

That the Leader of the Council write to the Borough’s four Members of Parliament and ask that they use their platform within the House of Commons to apply pressure on the Secretary of State for Health to intervene over the closure of community beds whilst under a Health & Social Care Act (2012) ‘refer-back’ mechanism and ensure the long-term opening of Bradwell Hospital wards.

 

That the Leader of the Council write to the Director of NHS England and the Secretary of State for Health, raising this councils concerns regarding the leadership of the NSCCG.  

 

That the Leader of the Council write to the Chief Accountability officer of the NSCCG, the Chief Executive of the UHNM trust, and the Director of NHS England, raising this councils belief that the circa. £10 million in fines levied against the trust should be forgiven.”

Resolved:     That the above motion be carried.