Agenda item

Standing in the name of Councillor Dr. Martin Cahn

In the 2016 Referendum on the European Union the South Cambridgeshire District voted 60.2% in favour of remaining in the European Union.

 

The negotiations on withdrawal that have followed the national decision to leave the EU have progressed at a slow rate and the precise nature of any final deal is still uncertain with clear divisions among those who voted to leave and a lack of support among the Government’s members of parliament for the adopted ‘Chequers proposals’. It is therefore clear that there is uncertainty whether any final deal will have wholehearted support and can be carried through Parliament.

 

In recent months a campaign has developed which proposes a People’s Vote on any final deal (or no deal), with the alternative to remain in the EU, to ensure that the path taken has majority support among the electorate.

 

A number of letters have been received by members asking the Council to support this initiative.

 

The Council notes that:

(i)    The Governor of the Bank of England has stated that the average household income in Britain is now £900 lower than that anticipated if the decision to leave the EU had not been taken.

(ii)   There are a large number of non-UK EU nationals resident in the district whose life, and that of their UK-national families, has been destabilised by uncertainty. Apart from the social impacts, this has resulted in the loss of staff by local businesses and the NHS. 

(iii)  Due to uncertainty about whether the deal that will be agreed with the EU will achieve a Parliamentary majority, ‘no deal’ appears a very credible outcome. This has been described by Chancellor Hammond as having “large fiscal consequences” and by independent observers as “overwhelmingly negative”.

(iv) All avenues currently being considered by the Government impose increasing delays for goods at our international frontiers and no facilitation would be provided for trade in services which form a major element in the local economy.

(v)  Recent opinion poll evidence has suggested an overall trend in public opinion away from support for leaving  the EU and in favour of a vote on the conditions of any departure. A vote on the terms of withdrawal with the option to remain would ensure that we leave, should we do so, with wholehearted support for the actual conditions of withdrawal.

(vi) The anticipated rapidly deteriorating economic situation if Brexit proceeds is likely to accelerate austerity, which has already caused acute problems in providing local authority services and has severely affected local residents, in particular those in social housing or in receipt of benefits.

(vii)Evidence of illegal overspending has been presented (and accepted by the Electoral Commission) and court challenges on the constitutional position are still continuing. A vote on the withdrawal terms would ensure that any decision is accepted as sound by both sides of the argument rather than being fought out in the courts.

 

The Council believes that the interests of its residents would be best protected by a referendum on the terms of leaving the European Union with the possibility of rescinding Article 50 and remaining in the EU.

 

The Council calls on the Government to abandon plans for a hard Brexit and to give the South Cambridgeshire electorate the opportunity to assess the original promises of a seamless Brexit with minimal impact made by the Leave campaign by giving theelectorate (including resident European citizens) a vote on whether to accept the proposed withdrawal arrangements or to retain the many benefits local residents currently enjoy by staying in the European Union.

 

The Council should write to our two local MPs calling on them to defend the interests of the District’s citizens by supporting this campaign.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Decision:

Following alteration of the original motion by the mover, with the consent of Council, Council AGREED the following motion:

 

In the 2016 Referendum on the European Union the South Cambridgeshire District voted 60.2% in favour of remaining in the European Union.

 

The negotiations on withdrawal that have followed the national decision to leave the EU have progressed at a slow rate and the precise nature of any final deal is still uncertain with clear divisions among those who voted to leave and a lack of support among the Government’s members of parliament for the adopted ‘Chequers proposals’. It is therefore clear that there is uncertainty whether any final deal will have wholehearted support and can be carried through Parliament.

 

In recent months a campaign has developed which proposes a People’s Vote on any final deal (or no deal), with the alternative to remain in the EU, to ensure that the path taken has majority support among the electorate.

 

A number of letters have been received by members asking the Council to support this initiative.

 

The Council notes that:

(i)    The Governor of the Bank of England has stated that the average household income in Britain is now £900 lower than that anticipated if the decision to leave the EU had not been taken.

(ii)   There are a large number of non-UK EU nationals resident in the district whose life, and that of their UK-national families, has been destabilised by uncertainty. Apart from the social impacts, this has resulted in the loss of staff by local businesses and the NHS. 

(iii)  Due to uncertainty about whether the deal that will be agreed with the EU will achieve a Parliamentary majority, ‘no deal’ appears a very credible outcome. This has been described by Chancellor Hammond as having “large fiscal consequences” and by independent observers as “overwhelmingly negative”.

(iv) All avenues currently being considered by the Government impose increasing delays for goods at our international frontiers and no facilitation would be provided for trade in services which form a major element in the local economy.

(v)  Recent opinion poll evidence has suggested an overall trend in public opinion away from support for leaving  the EU and in favour of a vote on the conditions of any departure. A vote on the terms of withdrawal with the option to remain would ensure that we leave, should we do so, with wholehearted support for the actual conditions of withdrawal.

(vi) The anticipated rapidly deteriorating economic situation if Brexit proceeds is likely to accelerate austerity, which has already caused acute problems in providing local authority services and has severely affected local residents, in particular those in social housing or in receipt of benefits.

(vii)Evidence of illegal overspending has been presented (and accepted by the Electoral Commission) and court challenges on the constitutional position are still continuing. A vote on the withdrawal terms would ensure that any decision is accepted as sound by both sides of the argument rather than being fought out in the courts.

 

The Council believes that the interests of its residents would be best protected by a referendum on the terms of leaving the European Union with the possibility of rescinding Article 50 and remaining in the EU.

 

The Council calls on the Government to abandon plans for a hard Brexit and to give the electorate, in particular the South Cambridgeshire electorate, the opportunity to assess the original promises of a seamless Brexit with minimal impact made by the Leave campaign by givingthe electorate (including resident European citizens) a vote on whether to accept the proposed withdrawal arrangements or to retain the many benefits local residents currently enjoy with the option of staying in the European Union.

 

The Council should write to our two local MPs calling on them to defend the interests of the District’s citizens by supporting this campaign.

 

 

Minutes:

In accordance with Council Standing Order No. 14.7 (a), Councillor Dr. Martin Cahn altered the motion of which he had given notice, with the consent of the meeting by revision of the seventh paragraph of the motion to read as follows (additions shown in underlined text and deletions in strikethrough text):

 

“The Council calls on the Government to abandon plans for a hard Brexit and to give the electorate, in particular the South Cambridgeshire electorate, the opportunity to assess the original promises of a seamless Brexit with minimal impact made by the Leave campaign by givingthe electorate (including resident European citizens) a vote on whether to accept the proposed withdrawal arrangements or to retain the many benefits local residents currently enjoy by with the option of staying in the European Union.

 

Councillor Dr. Martin Cahn accordingly moved the following motion as altered:-

 

“In the 2016 Referendum on the European Union the South Cambridgeshire District voted 60.2% in favour of remaining in the European Union.

 

The negotiations on withdrawal that have followed the national decision to leave the EU have progressed at a slow rate and the precise nature of any final deal is still uncertain with clear divisions among those who voted to leave and a lack of support among the Government’s members of parliament for the adopted ‘Chequers proposals’. It is therefore clear that there is uncertainty whether any final deal will have wholehearted support and can be carried through Parliament.

 

In recent months a campaign has developed which proposes a People’s Vote on any final deal (or no deal), with the alternative to remain in the EU, to ensure that the path taken has majority support among the electorate.

 

A number of letters have been received by members asking the Council to support this initiative.

 

The Council notes that:

(i)    The Governor of the Bank of England has stated that the average household income in Britain is now £900 lower than that anticipated if the decision to leave the EU had not been taken.

(ii)   There are a large number of non-UK EU nationals resident in the district whose life, and that of their UK-national families, has been destabilised by uncertainty. Apart from the social impacts, this has resulted in the loss of staff by local businesses and the NHS. 

(iii)  Due to uncertainty about whether the deal that will be agreed with the EU will achieve a Parliamentary majority, ‘no deal’ appears a very credible outcome. This has been described by Chancellor Hammond as having “large fiscal consequences” and by independent observers as “overwhelmingly negative”.

(iv) All avenues currently being considered by the Government impose increasing delays for goods at our international frontiers and no facilitation would be provided for trade in services which form a major element in the local economy.

(v)  Recent opinion poll evidence has suggested an overall trend in public opinion away from support for leaving the EU and in favour of a vote on the conditions of any departure. A vote on the terms of withdrawal with the option to remain would ensure that we leave, should we do so, with wholehearted support for the actual conditions of withdrawal.

(vi) The anticipated rapidly deteriorating economic situation if Brexit proceeds is likely to accelerate austerity, which has already caused acute problems in providing local authority services and has severely affected local residents, in particular those in social housing or in receipt of benefits.

(vii)Evidence of illegal overspending has been presented (and accepted by the Electoral Commission) and court challenges on the constitutional position are still continuing. A vote on the withdrawal terms would ensure that any decision is accepted as sound by both sides of the argument rather than being fought out in the courts.

 

The Council believes that the interests of its residents would be best protected by a referendum on the terms of leaving the European Union with the possibility of rescinding Article 50 and remaining in the EU.

 

The Council calls on the Government to abandon plans for a hard Brexit and to give the electorate, in particular the South Cambridgeshire electorate, the opportunity to assess the original promises of a seamless Brexit with minimal impact made by the Leave campaign by givingthe electorate (including resident European citizens) a vote on whether to accept the proposed withdrawal arrangements or to retain the many benefits local residents currently enjoy with the option of staying in the European Union.

 

The Council should write to our two local MPs calling on them to defend the interests of the District’s citizens by supporting this campaign.”

 

In support of his motion, Councillor Dr. Cahn commented that 60.2% of electors in South Cambridgeshire had voted to remain in the European Union.  He referred to the current national position with regard to the Brexit negotiations and to the continuing uncertainty.  With regard to the position locally, Councillor Dr. Cahn noted that the uncertainty with regard to the future of EU citizens had already led to difficulties in recruiting staff in the service, health and agricultural sectors. He spoke in support of the People’s Vote which would give the electorate the opportunity to vote on any final deal or no deal, with the alternative to remain in the EU.

 

The motion was seconded by Councillor Nigel Cathcart.  Councillor Cathcart spoke in favour of the motion, commenting that many details had not been dealt with adequately before the Brexit referendum, including the implications for migration and cross border trading.  He believed that parameters had changed in the two years since the referendum and therefore argued that electors should have an opportunity to vote on any final deal, with the option of staying in the EU. 

 

During discussion on the motion:

 

·         Councillor Deborah Roberts felt it was inappropriate for such a motion to be debated in the Council meeting, particularly in view of the earlier declared membership of a pro-EU pressure group.  She spoke strongly against the motion, noting that a majority of electors had voted to leave the EU and argued that it would be undemocratic to seek a further vote on the issue.

·         Councillor Ruth Betson was surprised the motion was on the agenda as it appeared to relate to national business.  She opposed the motion arguing that it would not be democratic to seek a further vote and that it was wrong to defy the outcome of the referendum in June 2016.

·         Referring to earlier comments, the Chairman ruled that the subject matter of the motion did affect the District and accordingly the motion was in order.

·         Councillor Dr. Shrobona Bhattacharya commented that there were many highly skilled workers outside the EU and that there might now be a level playing field in terms of filling vacancies.

·         Councillor Heather Williams felt her role was to represent her residents and did not feel she had a mandate to vote either way on this national issue. She believed it was the role of national government to resolve this issue.

·         Councillor Phillip Allen, quoting the former Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union, David Davis, argued that a democracy that could not change its mind ceased to be a democracy.   He referred to the spike in hate crime, the increase in nationalism and the apparent rise in the extreme right wing.

·         Councillor Philippa Hart reflected that it was important to uphold democracy but it was the job of Councillors to represent the interests of their residents.

·         Councillor Geoff Harvey pointed out that the Cambridgeshire and Peterborough Independent Economic Review (CPIER) report had highlighted a bad settlement of the Brexit process as one of two major risks to the wider economies of Cambridgeshire and Peterborough.  He argued that in view of the lack of specificity in the original referendum and the potential impact for the local economy, it was justified to call for the electorate to be given the opportunity to vote.

·         Councillor Nick Wright felt strongly that the will of the public had been expressed in the referendum in 2016 and therefore did not support the motion. 

·         Councillor Peter McDonald referred to the continuing lack of certainty about the terms of withdrawal some 27 months after the original referendum and felt it was right that the motion was before Council for debate.

·         Councillor Dr. Tumi Hawkins echoed earlier comments about the rise in intolerance and supported the motion to write to the MPs calling for a People’s Vote, arguing that people could still vote to leave.

·         Councillor Sarah Cheung Johnson highlighted the potential impacts of Brexit for the local economy.  She spoke in support of the motion noting that electors should be asked to vote on the terms of the final deal, or no deal.

 

The Chairman ruled that the 30 minutes allowed for debate under Council Standing Order No. 12.5 had expired and invited Councillor Dr. Cahn, as mover of the motion, to sum up.

 

Councillor Dr. Cahn spoke in favour of allowing electors to have a say on the terms of any final deal, or no deal and urged Members to vote in favour of his motion.

 

Prior to the vote being put, Councillors Dr. Cahn declared a non pecuniary interest as a member of the Cambridge Stays and South East Cambridgeshire for Europe.  Councillor Harvey declared a non pecuniary interest as a member of Cambridge Stays.  Both Members indicated that they would not participate in voting upon the motion.

 

(Note: Councillor Brian Milnes declared a disclosable pecuniary interest as a service provider to the EU and withdrew from the meeting and took no part in discussion or voting on the item).

 

Upon being put to the vote, votes were cast as follows:-

 

In favour (28):

 

 

Councillors Phillip Allen, Henry Batchelor, John Batchelor, Anna Bradnam, Nigel Cathcart, Sarah Cheung Johnson, Dr. Claire Daunton, Clare Delderfield, Peter Fane, Neil Gough, Jose Hales, Bill Handley, Philippa Hart, Tumi Hawkins, Pippa Heylings, Steve Hunt, Alex Malyon, Tony Mason, Peter McDonald, Dawn Percival, Judith Rippeth, Nick Sample, Bridget Smith, Hazel Smith, Dr. Ian Sollom, Aidan Van de Weyer, John Williams and Eileen Wilson

 

Against (11):

 

Ruth Betson, Dr. Shrobona Bhattacharya, Tom Bygott,  Graham Cone, Dr. Douglas de Lacey Sue Ellington, Mark Howell, Deborah Roberts, Peter Topping, Bunty Waters and Nick Wright

 

Abstain (2):

 

Geoff Harvey and Heather Williams

 

Council

 

RESOLVED:

 

In the 2016 Referendum on the European Union the South Cambridgeshire District voted 60.2% in favour of remaining in the European Union.

 

The negotiations on withdrawal that have followed the national decision to leave the EU have progressed at a slow rate and the precise nature of any final deal is still uncertain with clear divisions among those who voted to leave and a lack of support among the Government’s members of parliament for the adopted ‘Chequers proposals’. It is therefore clear that there is uncertainty whether any final deal will have wholehearted support and can be carried through Parliament.

 

In recent months a campaign has developed which proposes a People’s Vote on any final deal (or no deal), with the alternative to remain in the EU, to ensure that the path taken has majority support among the electorate.

 

A number of letters have been received by members asking the Council to support this initiative.

 

The Council notes that:

(i)    The Governor of the Bank of England has stated that the average household income in Britain is now £900 lower than that anticipated if the decision to leave the EU had not been taken.

(ii)   There are a large number of non-UK EU nationals resident in the district whose life, and that of their UK-national families, has been destabilised by uncertainty. Apart from the social impacts, this has resulted in the loss of staff by local businesses and the NHS. 

(iii)  Due to uncertainty about whether the deal that will be agreed with the EU will achieve a Parliamentary majority, ‘no deal’ appears a very credible outcome. This has been described by Chancellor Hammond as having “large fiscal consequences” and by independent observers as “overwhelmingly negative”.

(iv) All avenues currently being considered by the Government impose increasing delays for goods at our international frontiers and no facilitation would be provided for trade in services which form a major element in the local economy.

(v)  Recent opinion poll evidence has suggested an overall trend in public opinion away from support for leaving the EU and in favour of a vote on the conditions of any departure. A vote on the terms of withdrawal with the option to remain would ensure that we leave, should we do so, with wholehearted support for the actual conditions of withdrawal.

(vi) The anticipated rapidly deteriorating economic situation if Brexit proceeds is likely to accelerate austerity, which has already caused acute problems in providing local authority services and has severely affected local residents, in particular those in social housing or in receipt of benefits.

(vii)Evidence of illegal overspending has been presented (and accepted by the Electoral Commission) and court challenges on the constitutional position are still continuing. A vote on the withdrawal terms would ensure that any decision is accepted as sound by both sides of the argument rather than being fought out in the courts.

 

The Council believes that the interests of its residents would be best protected by a referendum on the terms of leaving the European Union with the possibility of rescinding Article 50 and remaining in the EU.

 

The Council calls on the Government to abandon plans for a hard Brexit and to give the electorate, in particular the South Cambridgeshire electorate, the opportunity to assess the original promises of a seamless Brexit with minimal impact made by the Leave campaign by givingthe electorate (including resident European citizens) a vote on whether to accept the proposed withdrawal arrangements or to retain the many benefits local residents currently enjoy with the option of staying in the European Union.

 

The Council should write to our two local MPs calling on them to defend the interests of the District’s citizens by supporting this campaign.