Please note that all questions must be received by the committee officer detailed on the front of the agenda by 10am Thursday 18 January 2018.

For guidance on submitting questions please see appendix 1 of the council's constitution.

Please note petitions must be received by the committee officer detailed on the front of the agenda by 10am Monday 22 January 2018.

For guidance on submitting petitions please see appendix 1 of the council's constitution.

Proposer Councillor Wright

Seconder Councillor Ackroyd

Many people are rightly alarmed by the rise in anti-Semitism in recent years across the UK. This includes incidents when criticism of Israel has been expressed using anti-Semitic tropes. Criticism of Israel can be legitimate, but not if it employs the tropes and imagery of anti-Semitism.

On 11 December 2016 the UK Government announced that it will sign up to the internationally recognised International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) guidelines on anti-Semitism which define anti-Semitism.

Council RESOLVES to:-

1. Ask cabinet to alter the Equality Information Report to make it explicit that the council has adopted the following definition of anti-Semitism it its entirety:

Antisemitism is a certain perception of Jews, which may be expressed as hatred toward Jews. Rhetorical and physical manifestations of antisemitism are directed toward Jewish or non-Jewish individuals and/or their property, toward Jewish community institutions and religious facilities.

To guide IHRA in its work, the following examples may serve as illustrations:

Anti-Semitic acts are criminal when they are so defined by law (for example, denial of the Holocaust or distribution of anti-Semitic materials in some countries).

Criminal acts are anti-Semitic when the targets of attacks, whether they are people or property – such as buildings, schools, places of worship and cemeteries – are selected because they are, or are perceived to be, Jewish or linked to Jews.

Anti-Semitic discrimination is the denial to Jews of opportunities or services available to others and is illegal in many countries.

• Manifestations might include the targeting of the state of Israel, conceived as a Jewish collectively. However, criticism of Israel similar to that levelled against any other country cannot be regarded anti-Semitic. Anti-Semitism frequently charges Jews with conspiring to harm humanity, and it is often used to blame Jews for “why things go wrong.” It is expressed in speech, writing, visual forms and action, and employs sinister stereotypes and negative character traits.

   

• Contemporary examples of anti-Semitism in public life, the media, schools, the workplace, and in the religious sphere could, taking into account the overall context, include, but are not limited to:

• Calling for, aiding, or justifying the killing or harming of Jews in the name of a radical ideology or an extremist view of religion.

• Making mendacious, dehumanising, demonising, or stereotypical allegations about Jews as such or the power of Jews as collective — such as, especially but not exclusively, the myth about a world Jewish conspiracy or of Jews controlling the media, economy, government or other societal institutions.

• Accusing Jews as a people of being responsible for real or imagined wrongdoing committed by a single Jewish person or group, or even for acts committed by non-Jews.

• Denying the fact, scope, mechanisms (e.g. gas chambers) or intentionality of the genocide of the Jewish people at the hands of National Socialist Germany and its supporters and accomplices during World War II (the Holocaust).

• Accusing the Jews as a people, or Israel as a state, of inventing or exaggerating the Holocaust.

• Accusing Jewish citizens of being more loyal to Israel, or to the alleged priorities of Jews worldwide, than to the interests of their own nations.

• Denying the Jewish people their right to self-determination, e.g., by claiming that the existence of a State of Israel is a racist endeavour.

• Applying double standards by requiring of it behaviour not expected or demanded of any other democratic nation.

• Using the symbols and images associated with classic antisemitism (e.g., claims of Jews killing Jesus or blood libel) to characterise Israel or Israelis.

• Drawing comparisons of contemporary Israeli policy to that of the Nazis.

• Holding Jews collectively responsible for actions of the state of Israel.

   

    2. condemn all forms of racism, islamophobia, homophobia and sexism and commit to continue fighting against them.

Proposer Councillor Wright

Seconder Councillor Ackroyd

A 2016 report by The Children’s Society found that when care leavers move into independent accommodation they begin to manage their own budget fully for the first time. The report showed that care leavers can find this extremely challenging and with no family to support them and insufficient financial education, are falling into debt and financial difficulty.

Research from The Centre for Social Justice found that 57% of young people leaving care have difficulty managing their money and avoiding debt.

The local authority has statutory corporate parenting responsibilities towards young people who have left care up until the age of 25.

Council RESOLVES to

1.         note that The Children and Social Work Act 2017 places corporate parenting responsibilities on district councils for the first time, requiring them to have regard to children in care and care leavers when carrying out their functions.

2.         include in the next consultation for the 2019/20 council tax reduction scheme a provision for the scheme to include a reduction to zero council tax payable by care leavers up to the age of 25 regardless of income

3.         write to the county council’s Leader and Director of Children’s Services to urge them to use their convening powers and expertise in corporate parenting to work with all council tax collecting authorities within the county area to exempt all care leavers in the county from council tax up to the age of 25, sharing any arising costs proportionately.

Proposer: Councillor Waters

Seconder: Councillor Davis

Nationally, according to the TUC, 3.2 million people now face insecure work which has risen by 27% over the last 5 years (this work includes those in zero-hour contracts, in agency and other insecure temporary work, and in low-paid self-employment). In recent years there has been an increasing development of the ‘gig economy’ in Norwich - a relatively new and expanding industry characterised by the prevalence of short-term contracts or freelance work as opposed to permanent jobs.

Council RESOLVES to:-

(1)        Note with concern

a)         the woefully inadequate rates of pay which leave some people financially worse off than had they been unemployed;

b)         the poor treatment of workers who require time off to see to a family emergency, recover from sickness, or mourn a deceased relative

c)         the ‘grey area’ of self-employment in which many of the flexibilities and commonly accepted practices that are associated with this way of working is totally absent

d)         The confusing and changeable ways in which monthly earnings are calculated; and the ever-present threat of losing work and with it one’s sole source of income, with no notice and no right of appeal.

(2)        ask the cabinet to commission research into the changing nature of work in Norwich with a view to using the findings to promote good employment practices across the city

(3)        ask the Leader of the Council and the cabinet member for resources to write to The Secretary of State for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy asking him to:

a)         Ban zero hours contracts so that every worker gets a guaranteed number of hours each week.

b)         Give all workers equal rights from day one, whether part-time or full-time, temporary or permanent – so that working conditions are not driven down.

c)         Shift the burden of proof so that the law assumes a worker is an employee unless the employer can prove otherwise.

d)         Levy punitive fines on employers not meeting their responsibilities, helping to deter poor practice.

e)         Involve trade unions in enforcement and set up a Ministry of Labour with the resources to enforce all workers’ rights.

f)          Ban payroll companies, sometimes known as ‘umbrella companies’, which create a false structure to limit employers’ tax liabilities and limit workers’ rights.

g)         Give employment agencies and end-users joint responsibility for ensuring that the rights of agency workers are enforced.

h)         Roll out sectoral collective bargaining and strengthening trade union rights, because empowering people to claim their own rights in the workplace is the most effective means of enforcement and ensuring that workers have greater job security and adequate levels of pay to enjoy a decent quality of life. 

(4)        Ask the leader of the council to write to the two Norwich MPs to support resolution (3)