Agenda item

Motion 1

(voting: 37 in favour, 8 against, 4 abstentions)

Motion 2

(voting: 37 in favour, 5 against, 2 abstentions)

Motion 1

Councillor Oliver Patrick said that badger culling had been happening for many decades and was felt necessary to control bovine TB (bTB) which caused hardship to farmers who were constantly guarding their cattle against it.  He mentioned previous control methods which he said were all short-term measures as Somerset was still considered a high risk area.  He said that farmers deserved a better solution and that was mentioned in the Godfray Review commissioned by DEFRA, which said it would implement an exit strategy from culling by the mid 2020’s.  He concluded that his motion was proposed to ensure that DEFRA honoured their promise

The Motion was seconded by Councillor Sarah Dyke.

During discussion the following points were made:-

·         The policy of culling should be conducted to its conclusion by DEFRA to monitor its effectiveness in the reduction of bovine TB.

·         Until the vaccination programme is properly implemented there is no other option but culling.  Hopefully the vaccine would be available by the mid 2020’s.

·         The loss of a herd of cattle to TB can have a profound effect on farmers and their families.

·         The farming community deserves a long term solution to TB which the badger cull programmes does not provide.

·         DEFRA also had areas where they were testing the vaccination of badgers.as a comparison to the culling.  Writing to DEFRA would only interfere with their programme which was put together by experts.

·         Culling is a repugnant and haphazard way of dealing with the disease.

·         Pleased to hear that DEFRA are to phase out culling.

·         Every mammal including deer, stoats and weasels all carried TB. 

In response to a question, the Portfolio Holder for Environment confirmed that SSDC did not allow any badger culling on its land.  She confirmed that a relative’s cattle had recently tested positive for bTB and that would have a great impact upon them.  The badger cull was not working and it was clear that a different strategy was required.

At the conclusion of the debate, a vote was taken and the motion was carried by 37 votes in favour, 8 against and 4 abstentions.

(voting: 37 in favour, 8 against, 4 abstentions)

Motion 2

Councillor Mike Hewitson advised that the consultation deadline was 29 October and this was the only opportunity for Full Council to debate the issue prior to the response being sent.  The planning workshop due to be held the following week could add more detail to the response but he felt it was correct for it to be debated in a public forum.  He said that although the planning system needed reform, the proposals in the white paper were inadequate.  He felt it would silence local communities on contentious planning applications and take away their ability to comment which was undemocratic.    He also referred to the loss of affordable houses brought about by Section 106 funding as well as contributions towards community facilities.  He urged Members to support his Motion.

The Motion was seconded by Councillor Crispin Raikes.

During discussion the following points were made:-

·         Section 106 agreements are not working as developers find ways to avoid them.

·         The white paper was a broad brush approach and would not take account of local biodiversity, archaeology, flooding or contamination.

·         Democracy must have its say in what and where development takes place.

·         The Government were not considering the effect of the environment or house building on peoples mental health.

·         Polls show that 61% of Conservative MPs oppose the proposals in the White Paper.

·         Affordable housing is currently agreed for a variety of projects but applications to planning inspectors and the district valuer to say they are no longer viable mean that developers avoid having to build them.

·         Measures should be taken to stop developers from land banking.

·         The Motion is premature and Members have not had the opportunity to be fully informed yet.

·         The White Paper would mean that Neighbourhood Plans were worthless.

Councillor Mike Hewitson concluded by thanking Members for taking part in the debate which he hoped would inform the Council’s final submission to the Government consultation.

At the conclusion of the debate, a vote was taken and the motion was carried by 37 votes in favour, 5 against and 2 abstentions.

(voting: 37 in favour, 5 against, 2 abstentions)