Council Motions & Questions 10 Jul 2012



To be moved by Councillor Karmani Seconded by Councillor Collector

This Council notes:

The high levels of unemployment, and in particular youth unemployment, in the Bradford district.

The redundancies, some of them compulsory, being made by Bradford council which is adding to this unemployment.

That more than 500 more redundancies have recently been announced at Thomas Cook, adding to the rapidly rising unemployment in the city.

The closure of the Thomas Cook office is the product of the company incurring a reckless amount of debt following its s hare flotation and is not the product of a fundamental change in conditions in the holiday market.

This council welcomes

The initiative by MPs George Galloway and Gerry Sutcliffe to seek a meeting with the chief executive of Thomas Cook to try to persuade him to review the decision to shut Thomas Cook’s office in Bradford.

The £7.7 million plan ‘Get Bradford Working’ but recognises it is woefully inadequate to actually get Bradford working.

Council resolves:

That the council leadership should immediately contact the Thomas Cook’s management to see what might persuade them to keep the Thomas Cook office open in Bradford instead of transferring operations to Peterborough.

That a clear action plan is developed, detailing when the four elements of the ‘Get Bradford Working’ plan will be into operation and ensuring that investment, such as it is, is targeted in the areas in Bradford where youth unemployment in particular is at its highest levels.


To be moved by Councillor Collector Seconded by Councillor Shabbir

This council notes:

That the government is introducing new family migrant rules on 9th July

These rules will require someone wishing to marry and bring to this country their spouse an individual annual income of at least £18,500 and that even higher income is required if children are involved

These rules impose punitive language knowledge conditions

That the probationary period of entry will be extended from two years to five years

That these changes to the rules come on top of what are already very severe restrictions on family migration to this country

This council believes:

These rules will have a dramatic and adverse impact on thousands of people in the Bradford area, both from the ethnic minority communities and more broadly

These rules are being introduced as a blatant pandering to ignorance and racial prejudice

These rules constitute a blatant attack on the hum an rights of British citizens to marry whom they wish and to enjoy family life with their spouses and children

This council resolves:

To make urgent representations to the government urging them to withdraw these proposals

To inform residents in the Bradford area of the changes to the rules relating to family migration

To assist residents to preserve their basic human rights in relation to family life


To be moved by Councillor Faisal Khan Seconded by Councillor Ishtiaq Ahmed

This council notes:

The Bradford Bulls has been put into administration

The Bulls are a central part of Bradford’s history and enjoy the support active and passive of thousands of Bradfordians

The Bulls’s difficulties seem to stem from specific difficulties and decisions made by the Bradford Bulls management, including selling Odsal to the Rugby Football League but that financial difficulties afflict the rugby league as a whole.

This council believes:

There needs to be urgent action by the government to review the situation of rugby league with a view to putting it on a sound financial footing.

The Bulls must be saved and restored to the glory which saw them win the Super League and the world championship just half a dozen years ago.

This council resolves:

To call upon the government centrally to become involved in helping to save rugby league and the Bulls

That the council contacts the Bulls administrator, as MPs George Galloway and Gerry Sutcliffe have already done, to see what the council can do to save the Bulls.


To be moved by Councillor Karmani Seconded by Councillor Collector

This council notes:

a) The Condem government is planning an extra £18 billion welfare cuts, on top the £18 billion already in train

b) This will condemn more families to poverty and undermine progress made in reducing child poverty in Bradford and nationally.

c) Government attempts to depict these cuts as largely affecting the long term unemployed or disabled are misleading

d) Most of those drawing benefits are the working poor like cleaners, carers and caterers who are working hard yet need benefits to survive because of their very low pay.

e) Britain’s low wage economy and lack of jobs are driving up our benefits bill, as is our failing housing market

f) 95% of the recent £1 billion rise in housing benefit is paid to those in work.

This council agrees:

a) The defence of the welfare state from Tory driven attempts to dismantle it is a political priority for the people of Bradford.

b) That government austerity is self-defeating

c) Instead of creating growth and jobs these policies are shrinking the economy, strangling growth, increasing unemployment, and driving the country deeper into recession.

d) That we urgently need a programme of job creation, housing building, and measures to ensure people are paid a real living wage and have access to decent, affordable and secure housing.


A10. Councillor Faisal Khan Could the portfolio holder for Children and Young People services explain why so many of Bradford’s secondary schools are below average and could he outline why he thinks the new Education Improvement Strategy 2012-15 will work better than previous failed initiatives to raise educational achievement?

B7. Councillor Shabbir Could the Portfolio holder for Highways institute a review of traffic flows in Lower Lane which are considered by carers at the Yew Tree Farm care home to be a danger to its residents and would she agree to consider making traffic one way in this area and to bring in traffic calming measures?

C10. Councillor Karmani Could the executive member for regeneration clarify the status of planning permission in relation to the Odeon/Victoria Place development and confirm that he will investigate whether current planning permission is compatible with the proposals recently announced by the developer Langtree?

C15. Councillor Ishtiaq Ahmed Would the Leader say what the council is doing, if anything, to ensure that body scanners are readily available at no additional cost to the bereaved for post mortems on the bodies of people whose religious faith require s the preservation of the integrity of the body if at all possible?

C20. Councillor Collector Would the leader of the council agree to support a protest at Westfield’s Stratford in London, drawing attention to the fact Westfield prioritised building new shopping centres in London at Shepherds Bush and Stratford, where it hopes to make a fortune out of the Olympics, whilst leaving a scar on the face of Bradford City Centre with no prospect of any relief in the foreseeable future?

C25. Councillor Karmani Would the executive member for regeneration agree to institute an investigation into the persistent allegations of conflict of interest issues around the Odeon/Victoria Place development relating to former council officials?

C26. Councillor Collector Can the leader inform the chamber if there are plans to change the criteria in the selection of Chair for the West Yorkshire Pension Fund? C an we have an assurance that only a sitting councillor can remain a Chair.