Agenda item

7.1

It was moved by Councillor Andy Bainbridge, and seconded by Councillor Jackie Drayton, that this Council:-

(a)       notes that the past seven years of austerity has hit some of the most vulnerable in our society the hardest and that in the last year alone, 646,120 children in England sought support after suffering from neglect or emotional abuse;

(b)       further notes that since 2010 the number of child protection investigations nationally have increased by 108% to 185,450 cases a year - with little to suggest that this trend is likely to change without major intervention from central government;

(c)        believes that early intervention is crucial but with reducing funds and an increasing number of children requiring emergency support, many councils have been forced to cut back on preventative services;

(d)       notes the recent warnings by three leading children’s charities (Children’s Society, Action for Children and the National Children’s Bureau) that early intervention services had been hit hardest by government cuts since 2010, and the formation of the Conservative-Liberal Democrat coalition, with targeted funding for early intervention having fallen by 55%;

(e)       further notes that by the end of the decade it is set to fall another 29% in real terms (or £808 million) with the most-deprived councils having to cut funding six times more than the least-deprived;

(f)        reaffirms this Administration’s commitment to protecting vulnerable children and that, even in the face of continuing funding cuts, the Administration believes in the importance of early preventive action for children and young adults;

(g)       acknowledges earlier commitments made by this Administration, most recently at October’s Full Council meeting, to provide additional support for early years and those affected by adverse childhood experiences (ACEs);

(h)       notes that rather than reduce children’s services, this Administration has reconfigured centres to expand from 0-5 years to provide a range of children’s services to family centres for 0-19 years (and to 25 for those with learning difficulties);

(i)         further notes that this Administration has also brought children centres closer to people with outreach services now running from a variety of services such as schools and GP surgeries  - covering all of the city;

(j)         believes that the Liberal Democrats opportunistically opposed the newly configured children’s services, and erroneously and repeatedly stated that children centres, such as Angram Bank, would be closing, when in reality no such closures were ever proposed or have subsequently taken place;

(k)        believes that this Administration will do everything it can to protect the city’s children, but that without additional funding from central government, it is becoming increasingly difficult;

(l)         notes the results of a recent survey by Action for Children which found that, of 500 Conservative Councillors surveyed, over 50% believed that central government funding cuts have made it harder for their council to support services for children and young people, and further notes that the Local Government Association (LGA) has warned that the number of children in care was at a “tipping point” with record high numbers continuing to rise;

(m)      notes, with shock and anger, that the Chancellor of the Exchequer’s recent budget provided no additional funds for children’s services and he made no mention of children services in his speech to the Commons;

(n)       further notes that the Government’s own economic predications denote that absolute child poverty is projected to increase by four percentage points, with about three-quarters of that increase - or 400,000 children - accounted for by planned tax and benefit reforms, with the freeze to most working-age benefits and the limiting of means-tested benefits to the first two children being of particular importance;

(o)       believes that the next few years are likely to be tough for living standards, with benefit cuts making things tougher still for poorer households - especially those with children - and regions and nations where poor households are more dependent upon benefits for their income are likely to bear the brunt of the increase in child poverty, which will have a damaging impact in Sheffield; and

(p)       supports the Labour Party’s position to oppose the two child benefit cap, oppose the continued roll out of Universal Credit, and backs its manifesto commitment to reverse the damaging cuts to children’s services since 2010.

7.2

Whereupon, it was moved by Councillor Alison Teal, and formally seconded by Councillor Magid Magid, as an amendment, that the Motion now submitted be amended by:-

1.         the replacement, in paragraph (k), of the words “believes that this Administration will do everything it can to protect the city’s children” by the words “believes that this Administration has a moral duty to  protect the city’s children”; and

2.         the deletion of paragraph (j) and the relettering of paragraphs (k) to (p) as new paragraphs (j) to (o).

7.3

It was then moved by Councillor Colin Ross, and seconded by Councillor Andrew Sangar, as an amendment, that the Motion now submitted be amended by the deletion of all the words after the words “That this Council” and the addition of the following words:-

(a)       notes that amongst the Lib Dem achievements in government related to young people, was the roll out of Free School Meals for all Key Stage One pupils and the extension of pre-school education;

(b)       notes that Liberal Democrats support the principal of Universal Credit, however, are deeply concerned by the delays in some people receiving their payments, and therefore, calls on the Government to pause the rollout of Universal Credit until it has managed to resolve the issues related to delayed payments;

(c)        also notes that key Lib Dem policies related to welfare and young people include the following:-

(i)           abandoning the two-child policy on family benefits and abolishing the “rape clause”;

(ii)          reversing cuts to work allowances in Universal Credit and housing benefit for 18 to 21 year olds;

(iii)         increasing Jobseeker’s Allowance and Universal Credit for 18 to 24 year olds;

(iv)         upgrading working-age benefits at least in line with inflation; and

(v)          extending free childcare to all two-year-olds and to the children of working families from the end of paid parental leave; and

(d)       requests that the Leader of Council writes to the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions requesting that he notes the contents of this motion and pauses the rollout of Universal Credit.

7.4

After a contribution from another Member, and following a right of reply from Councillor Andy Bainbridge, the amendment moved by Councillor Alison Teal was put to the vote and negatived.

7.5

The amendment moved by Councillor Colin Ross was then put to the vote and was also negatived.

7.6

The original Motion was then put to the vote and carried as follows:-

7.6.1

(NOTE: 1. Councillors Andy Nash, Bob Pullin, Richard Shaw, Adam Hanrahan, Joe Otten, Colin Ross, Martin Smith, Roger Davison, Shaffaq Mohammed, Paul Scriven, Sue Alston, Andrew Sangar, Ian Auckland, Sue Auckland, Steve Ayris, David Baker, Penny Baker and Vickie Priestley voted for paragraphs (a) to (d), (f) to (i), and (k) to (o) of the Motion, and voted against paragraphs (d), (j) and (p) of the Motion, and asked for this to be recorded; and

2. The Deputy Lord Mayor (Councillor Magid Magid) and Councillors Douglas Johnson, Robert Murphy and Alison Teal voted for paragraphs (a) to (i) and (k) to (p) of the Motion, and abstained from voting on paragraph (j) of the Motion, and asked for this to be recorded).