Motion No. 1
Councillor Bridgett to move the following motion, received by the Head of Democratic and Electoral Services on 20 December 2021:-
Considering the recent events both during and in the aftermath of Storm Arwen and rather than waiting for some form of national enquiry to take place (if it ever does), this council resolves:-
• to agree that it will undertake its own investigation into what occurred during and after the storm and it will task the most appropriate scrutiny/council committee to carry this out. This will include reviewing our own council policies and procedures and gathering evidence from councillors and council officers, but also questioning and gathering evidence from the utility companies such as Northern Powergrid, BT Openreach, Northumbrian Water and the mobile telecoms operators.
• to request, where necessary, that they come and provide information to the relevant scrutiny committee so that as a council, we can ensure lessons are learnt from this storm to enable all parties to build better resilience into their systems with the ultimate goal of ensuring that our residents will hopefully never have to experience such significant problems as they did as a result of Storm Arwen
• to request that the relevant scrutiny committee (in conjunction with officers) will bring together a report which outlines the issues and how those problems can potentially be mitigated. This will be brought back to the full council for debate and agreement, and will be used by this authority as a formal response should any government body or agency decide to carry out an enquiry into what happened as a result of the storm.
Motion No. 2
Councillor Morphet to move the following motion, received by the Head of Democratic and Electoral Services on 20 December 2021:-
The Councils for Fair Tax Declaration: An opportunity for the County Council to show support for responsible tax conduct
Full Council notes that:
1. Organisations are morally obliged to pay the right amount of tax, in the right place, at the right time.
2. Polling from the Institute for Business Ethics finds that “corporate tax avoidance” has, since 2013, been the number one concern of the British public when it comes to business conduct.
3. Almost two-thirds (63%) of the public agree that the Government and local authorities should consider a company’s ethics and tax conduct, as well as value for money and quality of service provided, when undertaking procurement.
4. Around 17.5% of public contracts in the UK have been won by companies with links to tax havens.
5. It has been conservatively estimated that losses from multinational profit-shifting (just one form of tax avoidance) could be costing the UK some £7bn per annum in lost corporation tax revenues.
6. The Fair Tax Mark offers a means for business to demonstrate good tax conduct and has been secured by a wide range of businesses across the UK, including FTSE-listed PLCs, co-operatives, social enterprises and large private businesses.
?
Full Council believes that:
1. Paying tax is often presented as a burden, but it shouldn’t be.
2. Tax enables us to provide services from education, health care and social care, to flood defences, road maintenance and policing. It also helps to counter financial inequalities and rebalance distorted economies.
3. As recipients of significant public funding, local authorities should take the lead in the promotion of exemplary tax conduct, be that by ensuring contractors are paying their proper share of tax or by refusing to go along with offshore tax dodging when buying land and property.
4. Where substantive stakes are held in private enterprises, then influence should be wielded to ensure that such businesses are exemplars of tax transparency and tax avoidance is shunned. For example, there should be no use of marketed schemes requiring disclosure under Disclosure Of Tax Avoidance Schemes (DOTAS) regulations or arrangements that might fall foul of the General Anti-Abuse Rule.
5. More action is needed, but current law significantly restricts councils’ ability to either penalise poor tax conduct or reward good tax conduct when buying goods or services.
6. Local authorities can and should stand up for responsible tax conduct – by doing what they can within existing frameworks and by pledging to do more, given the opportunity, as active supporters of international tax justice.
?
Full Council resolves to:
1. Approve the Councils for Fair Tax Declaration.
2. Lead by example and demonstrate good practice in our tax conduct, right across our activities.
3. Ensure contractors implement IR35 robustly and pay a fair share of employment taxes.
4. Not use offshore vehicles for the purchase of land and property, especially where this leads to reduced payments of stamp duty.
5. Undertake due diligence to ensure that not-for-profit structures are not being used inappropriately as an artificial device to reduce the payment of tax and business rates.
6. Demand clarity on the ultimate beneficial ownership of suppliers and their consolidated profit & loss position.
7. Promote Fair Tax Mark certification for any business in which we have a significant stake and where corporation tax is due.
8. Support Fair Tax Week events in Northumberland and celebrate the tax contribution made by responsible businesses who “say what they pay" with pride.
9. Support calls for urgent reform of UK law to enable local authorities to better penalise poor tax conduct and reward good tax conduct through their procurement policies.
Minutes:
Motion No. 1
Councillor Bridgett moved the following motion, received by the Head of Democratic and Electoral Services on 20 December 2021:-
Considering the recent events both during and in the aftermath of Storm Arwen and rather than waiting for some form of national enquiry to take place (if it ever does), this council resolves:-
· to agree that it will undertake its own investigation into what occurred during and after the storm and it will task the most appropriate scrutiny/council committee to carry this out. This will include reviewing our own council policies and procedures and gathering evidence from councillors and council officers, but also questioning and gathering evidence from the utility companies such as Northern PowerGrid, BT Openreach, Northumbrian Water and the mobile telecoms operators.
· to request, where necessary, that they come and provide information to the relevant scrutiny committee so that as a council, we can ensure lessons are learnt from this storm to enable all parties to build better resilience into their systems with the ultimate goal of ensuring that our residents will hopefully never have to experience such significant problems as they did as a result of Storm Arwen
· to request that the relevant scrutiny committee (in conjunction with officers) will bring together a report which outlines the issues and how those problems can potentially be mitigated. This will be brought back to the full council for debate and agreement, and will be used by this authority as a formal response should any government body or agency decide to carry out an enquiry into what happened as a result of the storm.
In introducing his motion, Councillor Bridgett advised that he should have included a thank you to Council staff, the Police, Fire Service, Armed Forces, local councillors, volunteers and everyone else who had helped to keep residents safe. He wanted to add this statement as an amendment to his motion. This amendment was seconded by Councillor Dickinson.
Councillor Dale queried whether all members could have an input, not just Scrutiny members. Councillor Bridgett wished to keep his motion as it stood as the Leader had already given that assurance in his earlier statement. Councillor Reid added that as Chair of the Scrutiny Committee, this would be the case.
Councillor Castle pointed out that work had actually already begun on this.
Councillor Hill commented on the fantastic job done by Councillor Bridgett on the relief effort in his area. She queried whether the County Council could feed into the debriefings being undertaken by the utility companies as well as doing its own review.
Councillor Kennedy commented that it was the question of resilience which had presented the challenge for the County. It was not acceptable for people to be without power for two weeks.
Councillor Dickinson sought clarity on whether members were now debating the amended motion, or the amendment. The Monitoring Officer advised that technically, it was an alteration to the motion which had been seconded and was now being debated and there would be a right of reply at the end from the mover of the motion. There appeared to have been a general consensus in the room that members were happy with the alteration proposed.
Councillor Gallacher hoped that Scrutiny would be given sufficient time to do its job properly and bring back thorough reports and that all comments made through Scrutiny would be reported. Councillor Reid advised that the meeting the following week would establish the programme for the review and he encouraged all members who wanted to contribute to do so.
Councillor Flux wished to mention other councillors who had done sterling work in their vast wards including Councillors Mather, Jones, Pattison, Sanderson and Horncastle and he was sure there were many others, as well as those in the community.
Councillor Dickinson recognised the efforts of staff but felt it was equally important to recognise the efforts of the third sector, volunteers and ordinary residents who had helped each other. What was clear was that the infrastructure needed to be able to cope with these events was outdated with no investment for decades. He welcomed the way Councillors Sanderson and Bridgett had brought this forward. The Labour Group would support this because there had been problems across the County and he felt sure every member would have played a part in supporting residents. It was fundamental to recognise the issues from the utility companies, the lack of communication, lack of investment and all other issues which were outside of the Council’s control but had been left to the Council to deal with. For this reason, he fully supported the amended motion.
Following an invitation from the Business Chair, Councillor Bridgett reminded members of his altered motion to add the following wording to the end “this Council thanks the hard work and efforts during Storm Arwen which were put in by both Northumberland County Council staff, Northumberland Fire and Rescue Service, Northumbria Police, Armed Forces personnel, local councillors both County and Town/Parish, volunteers and neighbours and anyone else who assisted in helping keep residents of Northumberland safe and well”.
On the altered motion being put to the vote there voted FOR: a substantial majority; AGAINST:0; ABSTENTIONS;0.
It was therefore RESOLVED that:-
(a) Council agree that it will undertake its own investigation into what occurred during and after the storm and will task the most appropriate scrutiny/council committee to carry this out. This will include reviewing council policies and procedures and gathering evidence from councillors and council officers, but also questioning and gathering evidence from the utility companies such as Northern PowerGrid, BT Openreach, Northumbrian Water and the mobile telecoms operators;
(b) Council will request, where necessary, that they come and provide information to the relevant scrutiny committee so that as a council, we can ensure lessons are learnt from this storm to enable all parties to build better resilience into their systems with the ultimate goal of ensuring that our residents will hopefully never have to experience such significant problems as they did as a result of Storm Arwen;
(c ) Council request that the relevant scrutiny committee (in conjunction with officers) will bring together a report which outlines the issues and how those problems can potentially be mitigated. This will be brought back to the full council for debate and agreement, and will be used by this authority as a formal response should any government body or agency decide to carry out an enquiry into what happened as a result of the storm; and
(d) Council thanks the hard work and efforts during Storm Arwen which were put in by Northumberland County Council staff, Northumberland Fire and Rescue Service, Northumbria Police, Armed Forces personnel, local councillors both County and Town/Parish, volunteers and neighbours and anyone else who assisted in helping keep residents of Northumberland safe and well.
In accordance with Minute No. 63, Councillor Kennedy left the meeting.
Motion No. 2
Councillor Morphet moved the following motion, received by the Head of Democratic and Electoral Services on 20 December 2021:-
The Councils for Fair Tax Declaration: An opportunity for the County Council to show support for responsible tax conduct
Full Council notes that:
1. Organisations are morally obliged to pay the right amount of tax, in the right place, at the right time.
2. Polling from the Institute for Business Ethics finds that “corporate tax avoidance” has, since 2013, been the number one concern of the British public when it comes to business conduct.
3. Almost two-thirds (63%) of the public agree that the Government and local authorities should consider a company’s ethics and tax conduct, as well as value for money and quality of service provided, when undertaking procurement.
4. Around 17.5% of public contracts in the UK have been won by companies with links to tax havens.
5. It has been conservatively estimated that losses from multinational profit-shifting (just one form of tax avoidance) could be costing the UK some £7bn per annum in lost corporation tax revenues.
6. The Fair Tax Mark offers a means for business to demonstrate good tax conduct and has been secured by a wide range of businesses across the UK, including FTSE-listed PLCs, co-operatives, social enterprises and large private businesses.
?
Full Council believes that:
1. Paying tax is often presented as a burden, but it shouldn’t be.
2. Tax enables us to provide services from education, health care and social care, to flood defences, road maintenance and policing. It also helps to counter financial inequalities and rebalance distorted economies.
3. As recipients of significant public funding, local authorities should take the lead in the promotion of exemplary tax conduct, be that by ensuring contractors are paying their proper share of tax or by refusing to go along with offshore tax dodging when buying land and property.
4. Where substantive stakes are held in private enterprises, then influence should be wielded to ensure that such businesses are exemplars of tax transparency and tax avoidance is shunned. For example, there should be no use of marketed schemes requiring disclosure under Disclosure Of Tax Avoidance Schemes (DOTAS) regulations or arrangements that might fall foul of the General Anti-Abuse Rule.
5. More action is needed, but current law significantly restricts councils’ ability to either penalise poor tax conduct or reward good tax conduct when buying goods or services.
6. Local authorities can and should stand up for responsible tax conduct – by doing what they can within existing frameworks and by pledging to do more, given the opportunity, as active supporters of international tax justice.
?
Full Council resolves to:
1. Approve the Councils for Fair Tax Declaration.
2. Lead by example and demonstrate good practice in our tax conduct, right across our activities.
3. Ensure contractors implement IR35 robustly and pay a fair share of employment taxes.
4. Not use offshore vehicles for the purchase of land and property, especially where this leads to reduced payments of stamp duty.
5. Undertake due diligence to ensure that not-for-profit structures are not being used inappropriately as an artificial device to reduce the payment of tax and business rates.
6. Demand clarity on the ultimate beneficial ownership of suppliers and their consolidated profit & loss position.
7. Promote Fair Tax Mark certification for any business in which we have a significant stake and where corporation tax is due.
8. Support Fair Tax Week events in Northumberland and celebrate the tax contribution made by responsible businesses who “say what they pay" with pride.
9. Support calls for urgent reform of UK law to enable local authorities to better penalise poor tax conduct and reward good tax conduct through their procurement policies.
In introducing the motion, Councillor Morphet referred to those organisations and businesses who were accredited by the Fair Tax Foundation. Seventeen Councils had demonstrated their support so far. Responsible tax conduct mattered because of public concern regarding corporate tax avoidance and the Government and councils should consider a company’s ethics and tax conduct when they made procurement decisions. £7billion a year was lost to profit shifting by companies, which could have been used to fund public services and action on tax evasion and tax avoidance was needed at all levels of government. He outlined some of the measures being proposed to level the playing field and make things fairer. If the Council supported the motion today, it would be joining a very important movement that sought to make poor tax conduct a thing of the past, and which transcended party politics.
The Council’s Head of Procurement was very supportive of the motion and he advised that he wished to alter his motion with the addition of the following words as No.7 under the first section:-
“7. The Procurement Service supports the motion in principle to ensure that the Council can do what it can to promote greater tax transparency from suppliers, subject to completing legal due diligence before implementation.”
He hoped members would support the motion. This was seconded by Councillor Swinbank.
Councillor Ezhilchelvan agreed with the spirit of the motion but queried how it could be implemented. He asked who the judge of poor conduct would be.
Councillor Hill commented that she had had similar concerns but felt that the alteration covered that point. She supported the altered motion and was aware that the Green Party had submitted motions elsewhere regarding universal basic income trials which she hoped would be developed.
Councillor Reid did not support the motion and did not feel it would serve any useful purpose. He believed in paying fair tax but did not feel that the Council could ensure what the motion contained. He suggested that the Petitions Committee should also be tasked with monitoring motions once they had been passed by Council.
Councillor Dickinson advised that his Group fully supported the motion in light of the tax avoidance which happened in business. He would have liked to see the motion being withdrawn with the mover’s agreement so that it could be examined further and the appropriate policy developed to back it up so that it could be monitored and managed. He didn’t want to see a good motion with valid points fall into a place where it couldn’t be implemented.
Councillor Daley felt there was nothing in the motion that the Council couldn’t agree with because it could support what was being asked and the Council’s own Procurement Team already dealt with many of the issues which were referenced in the motion. All that was needed was a Cabinet Member to take this on as a project to see it through.
Councillor Dale felt there was an opportunity for the Council to look at things where it could make a difference even in a small way.
In response, Councillor Morphet advised that the motion didn’t commit the Council to identifying organisations with poor tax conduct, but committed the Council to encourage their suppliers to voluntarily improve their tax conduct, and to push for reform of procurement law. He also gave a commitment to ensure that the motion if passed would not just disappear.
On the altered motion being put to the vote there voted FOR: a substantial majority; AGAINST:0; ABSTENTIONS;0. It was therefore RESOLVED that:-
Council notes that:
1. Organisations are morally obliged to pay the right amount of tax, in the right place, at the right time.
2. Polling from the Institute for Business Ethics finds that “corporate tax avoidance” has, since 2013, been the number one concern of the British public when it comes to business conduct.
3. Almost two-thirds (63%) of the public agree that the Government and local authorities should consider a company’s ethics and tax conduct, as well as value for money and quality of service provided, when undertaking procurement.
4. Around 17.5% of public contracts in the UK have been won by companies with links to tax havens.
5. It has been conservatively estimated that losses from multinational profit-shifting (just one form of tax avoidance) could be costing the UK some £7bn per annum in lost corporation tax revenues.
6. The Fair Tax Mark offers a means for business to demonstrate good tax conduct and has been secured by a wide range of businesses across the UK, including FTSE-listed PLCs, co-operatives, social enterprises and large private businesses.
7. The Procurement Service supports the motion in principle to ensure that the Council can do what it can to promote greater tax transparency from suppliers, subject to completing legal due diligence before implementation.
Council believes that:
1. Paying tax is often presented as a burden, but it shouldn’t be.
2. Tax enables us to provide services from education, health care and social care, to flood defences, road maintenance and policing. It also helps to counter financial inequalities and rebalance distorted economies.
3. As recipients of significant public funding, local authorities should take the lead in the promotion of exemplary tax conduct, be that by ensuring contractors are paying their proper share of tax or by refusing to go along with offshore tax dodging when buying land and property.
4. Where substantive stakes are held in private enterprises, then influence should be wielded to ensure that such businesses are exemplars of tax transparency and tax avoidance is shunned. For example, there should be no use of marketed schemes requiring disclosure under Disclosure Of Tax Avoidance Schemes (DOTAS) regulations or arrangements that might fall foul of the General Anti-Abuse Rule.
5. More action is needed, but current law significantly restricts councils’ ability to either penalise poor tax conduct or reward good tax conduct when buying goods or services.
6. Local authorities can and should stand up for responsible tax conduct – by doing what they can within existing frameworks and by pledging to do more, given the opportunity, as active supporters of international tax justice.
?
Council resolves to:
1. Approve the Councils for Fair Tax Declaration.
2. Lead by example and demonstrate good practice in our tax conduct, right across our activities.
3. Ensure contractors implement IR35 robustly and pay a fair share of employment taxes.
4. Not use offshore vehicles for the purchase of land and property, especially where this leads to reduced payments of stamp duty.
5. Undertake due diligence to ensure that not-for-profit structures are not being used inappropriately as an artificial device to reduce the payment of tax and business rates.
6. Demand clarity on the ultimate beneficial ownership of suppliers and their consolidated profit & loss position.
7. Promote Fair Tax Mark certification for any business in which we have a significant stake and where corporation tax is due.
8. Support Fair Tax Week events in Northumberland and celebrate the tax contribution made by responsible businesses who “say what they pay” with pride.
9. Support calls for urgent reform of UK law to enable local authorities to better penalise poor tax conduct and reward good tax conduct through their procurement policies.
At this point the Business Chair adjourned the meeting for a comfort break. The Chief Executive left the meeting in accordance with Minute No.63 above. The meeting reconvened at 17:01.