Agenda item

To consider the Motion from Cllrs Dominic Muns and Nick Holder.

 

On the invitation of the Chairman, Cllr Dominic Muns proposed the motion as set out in the agenda, which was seconded by Cllr Nick Holder.

 

Cllr Muns emphasised the importance of retaining public opinion in working towards net zero targets and warned against counterproductive forms of environmental activism. Concerns were raised by Cllr Muns that the impact of imposing Low Traffic Neighbourhoods (LTNs) was often to disperse, rather than reduce, traffic. He argued that the rural landscape of Wiltshire meant that careful consideration would be required before introducing such measures in the county. Statistical evidence was provided, including that 44 percent of Wiltshire’s population lived in villages and that 28 percent of people were unable to access a town centre within half an hour, by walking or using public transport. Cllr Muns emphasised that the motion did not divert from Wiltshire Council’s Air Quality Action Plan but recognised the disparity in travel opportunities between Wiltshire’s residents and those in large urban conurbations.

 

Cllr Tamara Reay, Cabinet Member with responsibility for transport, responded and welcomed the motion. She was pleased to report that Wiltshire’s Local Transport Plan would come forward to Cabinet in November 2024 and that transport emissions in Wiltshire had fallen by two percent over the past year. She stressed that she was keen to do more to improve the availability of sustainable transport options and spoke about several measures that were being implemented, such as 23 electric busses being purchased for use in Salisbury from 2026. Other examples included the introduction of the Wiltshire Connect demand responsive transport service, which had been used by over 48,000 people, and the creation of seven new Local Cycling and Walking Infrastructure Plans in towns.

 

Members of the public that had registered to make a statement were then given the opportunity to speak.  

 

Andrew Nicholson, on behalf of Wiltshire Climate Alliance, and Katherine Reed both made statements in opposition to the motion.

 

The Chairman then moved that the Council debate the motion, which was seconded by the Vice-Chairman and agreed by Council.

 

Group Leaders were then given the opportunity to comment.

 

Cllr Richard Clewer, Leader of the Council, welcomed the motion. He spoke about the need to ensure that decarbonisation did not penalise residents. He noted that environmental policy needed to be implemented in a way that respected the rural character of Wiltshire, including its reliance on the use of private motor vehicles. He explained that lots of good work was going on to support active travel in Wiltshire but that he would not support measures to force people out of their cars unless alternative dedicated infrastructure was in place. He argued that cars should be decarbonised, not penalised.

 

Cllr Ian Thorn, Leader of the Liberal Democrat Group, stated he could not support the motion, which he argued was trying to solve a problem that did not exist, and that he did not see the logic of a motion from the group that ran the council telling themselves how to run the council. He agreed that high car usage was necessary in the county and that policies should require community support but described the motion as divisive for communities.

 

Cllr Ricky Rogers, Leader of the Labour Group, explained that he was confused about the need for the motion when there were not any plans to introduce LTNs in Wiltshire.

 

The Chairman then opened the item for general debate.

 

During the debate Cllr David Vigar, proposed an amendment, which was seconded by Cllr Adrian Foster, to add the following wording to the end of the motion:

 

This council will pursue all means to increase accessible and affordable walking and cycling opportunities, as well as public transport services, across the county to provide sustainable alternatives to car travel.

 

Cllr Muns, the proposer of the original motion, did not accept Cllr Vigar’s suggestion as a friendly amendment. He explained that Wiltshire Council was already taking measures to increase opportunities for sustainable travel, so the additional wording was unnecessary. He also emphasised that punitive measures were being implemented in other parts of the country to restrict car use that would not be appropriate in Wiltshire.  

 

Group Leaders then had the opportunity to comment on the proposed amendment.

 

Cllr Clewer, Leader of the Council, stated that he could not support the amendment as he did not feel that it was thought through. He explained that agreeing to support all means would create an open-ended financial commitment that had the potential to bankrupt the council.

 

Cllr Thorn, Leader of the Liberal Democrat Group, welcomed the amendment and thought that it showed healthy ambition.

 

Cllr Jon Hubbard, deputising for the Independent Group, commented that the original motion refused to support any scheme to force people out of private vehicles and the amendment supported all means to help people do this, with both therefore being open ended.

 

Cllr Rogers, Leader of the Labour Group, stated that he remained open minded on the amendment.

 

The Chairman then opened the amendment to general debate.

 

Points made in support of the amendment included that it encouraged the promotion of health in the community. A member noted that a study of LTAs had shown that they helped to promote walking and to reduce crime.

 

Points made in opposition to the amendment included that it would create an unlimited financial commitment, was an example of reactive policymaking and was unnecessary given that the original motion did not oppose all schemes to reduce vehicle usage.

 

Cllr Vigar, as mover of the amendment, then had the opportunity to comment. He stated that his amendment would not create an unlimited financial commitment and had been deliberately misinterpreted by some members. He said that he would be content to amend the wording to ‘any economical means’ if it reassured members. He also highlighted that it committed to pursuing, rather than adopting, all means.

 

The moved of the original motion, Cllr Muns, then had the opportunity to comment.

 

There was then a vote on the amendment.

 

Votes for the amendment (27)

Votes against the amendment (41)

Votes in abstention (7)

 

In accordance with the Constitution there was a recorded vote. Details of the recorded vote are attached to these minutes.

 

The vote was therefore lost.

 

The Chairman re-opened debate on the original motion.

 

There were comments endorsing points raised during debate on the amendment.

 

Views expressed in support of the motion emphasised that measures to restrict car use tended to have a disproportionate impact on poorer and disabled drivers, and that the motion did not dilute the council’s commitment to promoting active travel. The motion was praised as a measure against what some members perceived to be extreme policies implemented in other areas. It was stated that it that pay-per mile schemes could be imposed in future and that LTNs had been forced on some other areas despite strong local opposition.

 

Speaking in opposition to the motion some members stated that LTNs often enjoyed the support of residents in areas where they were implemented. There were several comments from members emphasising that they were not aware of any plans to impose schemes on Wiltshire to restrict car use, so did not see a need for the motion. Other statements criticised the language in the motion as inflammatory and argued that the motion should be worded in a more positive fashion to promote active travel.

 

Cllr Reay, the Cabinet Member with responsibility for transport, was given the opportunity to speak in accordance with the constitution.

 

At the conclusion of the debate, Cllr Muns, mover of the motion, stressed that the logic of the motion was simple and that it acknowledged the discrepancy in travel opportunities between Wiltshire residents and those living in large cities. He highlighted that some members that had described the motion as unnecessary had also expressed reservations about schemes implemented schemes in Bath and North East Somerset or Oxfordshire. He also reemphasised that the motion did not dilute the council’s commitment to tackle air quality.

 

It was then,

 

Resolved:

 

We ask that this Council refuses to support any scheme that seeks to force people out of their private vehicles without a high quality, efficient, reliable and cost-effective alternative. Until every person who stands to be affected by such schemes has a viable alternative means of travel for education, employment, healthcare, and leisure, we request that this Council refuses to incorporate such controls over our residents.

 

In accordance with the Constitution there was a recorded vote.

 

Votes for the motion (41)

Votes against the motion (23)

Votes in abstention (12)

 

Details of the recorded vote are attached to these minutes.