Agenda item

To consider any motions, due notice of which have been given in accordance with Standing Order 4.8.12.

There were two motions submitted in accordance with Standing Order 4.8.12.

 

(A)  Motion of No Confidence in the Leader of the Council

 

RESOLVED: That the current Leader of the Council was removed.

 

(B)  The Local Government Pension Scheme & Responsible Investment

 

RESOLVED: That Council:

 

(1)   Instructed the Acting Leader of the Council to write formally to the Pensions Committee of Hertfordshire County Council to:

 

1. Express our concerns above, and request that under its fiduciary duty, it takes action to divest from all pension fund investments in companies that profit from the manufacture of weapons and military technology used contrary to international law, and from any companies found to be profiting from business activity which is illegal under international law.

 

2. Request the Hertfordshire Pension Fund to apply Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG) standards to not just directly held managed funds but also pension fund assets pooled with ACCESS.

 

3. Request that the Hertfordshire Pension Committee will regularly disclose details of all holdings (including directly managed and those pooled with ACCESS) annually for the public to see that the fund is complying with International Law.

 

(2)   Instructed that at the next scheduled review of North Hertfordshire District Council’s own Investment Strategy; the review specifically considers how to align with the above investment principles.

 

Audio recording – 25 minutes 15 seconds

 

There were two motions submitted in accordance with Standing Order 4.8.12.

 

Before motions were considered, Councillor Keith Hoskins, as Chair, proposed that Standing Orders 4.8.12(d) and 4.8.12(e) be suspended for the item ‘Notice of Motions’. This was seconded by Councillor Sadie Billing and, following a vote, it was:

 

RESOLVED: That Standing Orders 4.8.12(d) and 4.8.12(e) be suspended for the duration of Agenda Item 9 – Notice of Motions.

 

(A)  Motion of No Confidence in the Leader of the Council

 

Councillor Ruth Brown proposed the motion as follows:

 

‘This Council no longer has confidence in the Leader of the Council.

 

As such Council resolves:

 

That the current Leader of the Council is removed.’

 

Councillor David Chalmers seconded the motion Councillors Dominic Griffiths, Matt Barnes and Paul Ward confirmed that they were the three further signatories required for such a motion.

 

The following Members took part in the Debate:

 

·         Councillor Dominic Griffiths

·         Councillor Ralph Muncer

·         Councillor Donna Wright

·         Councillor Daniel Wright-Mason

·         Councillor Matt Barnes

·         Councillor Laura Williams

·         Councillor Tamsin Thomas

·         Councillor Steven Patmore

·         Councillor David Chalmers

·         Councillor Sadie Billing

·         Councillor Joe Graziano

·         Councillor Val Bryant

·         Councillor Emma Fernandes

·         Councillor Claire Strong

·         Councillor Paul Ward

·         Councillor Amy Allen

·         Councillor Nigel Mason

·         Councillor Ian Albert

·         Councillor Mick Debenham

·         Councillor Dave Winstanley

·         Councillor Vijaiya Poopalasingham

·         Councillor Claire Winchester

·         Councillor Daniel Allen

 

N.B. During the debate Councillor Dominic Griffiths left the Chamber and returned at 20:27, Councillor Joe Graziano left the Chamber and returned at 20:38, Councillor Ruth Clifton left the Chamber and returned at 20.41, Councillor Tina Bhartwas left the Chamber and returned at 20:45, Councillor Alistair Willoughby left the Chamber and returned at 20:45, Councillor Sean Nolan left the Chamber and returned at 20:46, Councillor Steven Patmore left the Chamber and returned at 20:47, Councillor Sean Prendergast left the Chamber and returned at 20:47.

 

Points raised during the Debate included that:

 

·         Redebating the points of Local Government Reorganisation (LGR) debate was not the point of this motion.

·         Trust had been broken between the Leader of the Council and members of the opposition.

·         The process of removing the current leader and electing a new leader would cost time and resources which was unnecessary.

·         Of the eleven Hertfordshire councils, six of chose to submit the 4 unitary model on LGR to National Government.

·         Regardless of the decision of the Council, the Government had the final say on LGR, so the decision taken at Cabinet was redundant.

·         The Leader of the Council has given lots to the community in his time as Leader.

·         Without an elected Leader, certain decisions cannot be made which would slow down all processes, including any decisions relating to LGR.

·         The argument that four Unitary Authorities was the preference of the public was not relevant, given only 587 responses were received to the consultation, out of a population of 133,000 in the district.

·         Under this Leadership the council has made strides towards being net zero by 2030.

·         Difficult decisions had to be made as part of LGR - deciding to agree with the consensus of Council would have been the easy decision.

·         The Leader had encouraged Cabinet members to have a sense of self pride and do the best they can within their roles as Executive Members.

·         Trust once broken was hard to mend and telling the public about a private conversation between two Councillors has broken that trust in the Leader.

·         A responsible Leader would have listened to Full Council. By not listening to Members, the Leader had demonstrated a lack of respect to fellow Members.

 

After the conclusion of the debate, under Standing Order 4.8.16(d), Councillor Ralph Muncer requested that the vote take place via ballot. This request was supported by Councillors Claire Strong, Joe Graziano, Steven Patmore, Michael Muir, Martin Prescott and David Barnard.

 

Having been proposed and seconded, and following a ballot vote, it was:

 

RESOLVED: That the current Leader of the Council was removed.

 

VOTE TOTALS:

 

YES                 :           25

ABSTAIN        :           1

NO                  :           19

 

Following the result, Councillor Daniel Allen thanked the Officers at the Council for their dedication to delivering for residents and the Chief Executive for his leadership and support. He reassured members of the public that services and progress would still be delivered by the Council.

 

Following the removal of the Leader of the Council, the Chair called for nominations for Leader of the Council. There were no nominations proposed and therefore it was advised that this item would be presented to an Extraordinary Council meeting on Tuesday 13 January 2026.

 

N.B. At 21:18 the was a comfort break and the  meeting reconvened at 21:30. During the break Councillors Dominic Griffiths, David Barnard and Lisa Nash left the Chamber and did not return to the meeting.

 

(B)  The Local Government Pension Scheme & Responsible Investment

 

Councillor Dave Winstanley proposed the motion as follows:

 

‘North Hertfordshire District Council (NHDC) and its staff contribute toward the Hertfordshire Local Government Pension Scheme (LGPS) which is managed through Hertfordshire County Council's Pension Committee (HPC). The overwhelming majority of past and present NHDC staff are scheme members.

 

The Hertfordshire LGPS directly, or indirectly via the ACCESS pool, holds and therefore benefits from shareholdings or funds that have underlying shareholdings, in companies that profit from conflict through the manufacturing of weaponry, and military technology and are alleged to be used in atrocities internationally today.

 

It also invests in various corporate entities which according to an International Court of Justice (ICJ) ruling and subsequent United Nations opinion, are associated with human rights violations and international crimes.

 

It has been calculated that just under £100 million of the £6 billion pension fund is invested in these companies.

 

Residents expect councils to invest public funds in ways that are ethical, responsible and transparent.

This motion requests that HPC withdraw any links - through these investments - to supporting war, weapons manufacturing, military technology, or any other business activities that breach international law.

 

Council therefore resolves:

 

1.    To instruct the Acting Leader of the Council to write formally to the Pensions Committee of Hertfordshire County Council to:

a.    Express our concerns above, and request that under its fiduciary duty, it takes action to divest from all pension fund investments in companies that profit from the manufacture of weapons and military technology used contrary to international law, and from any companies found to be profiting from business activity which is illegal under international law.

 

b.    Request the Hertfordshire Pension Fund to apply Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG) standards to not just directly held managed funds but also pension fund assets pooled with ACCESS.

 

c.     Request that the Hertfordshire Pension Committee will regularly disclose details of all holdings (including directly managed and those pooled with ACCESS) annually for the public to see that the fund is complying with International Law.

 

2.    Council further instructs that at the next scheduled review of North Hertfordshire District Council’s own Investment Strategy; the review specifically considers how to align with the above investment principles.’

 

Councillor Daniel Wright-Mason seconded the motion.

 

The following Members took part in the Debate:

 

·         Councillor Daniel Wright-Mason

·         Councillor David Chalmers

·         Councillor Vijiya Poopalasingham

·         Councillor Sean Nolan

·         Councillor Daniel Allen

·         Councillor Donna Wright

·         Councillor Ian Albert

 

Points raised during the Debate included that:

 

·         Other pension providers already comply with ethical investment practices.

·         This would not result in weakening the pension as there was evidence that ethical investment was also fiscally responsible.

·         Legal obligations should be met in all aspects of the Councils responsibility.

·         Money invested by the Council should meet the ethical standards of the Council, including the pension scheme.

 

N.B. Councillor Emma Rowe declared an interest due to the employment of a close relative and did not take part in the vote.

 

N.B. Councillor Paul Ward declared an interest due to his employment and did not take part in the vote.

 

Having been proposed and seconded, and following a vote, it was:

 

RESOLVED: That Council

 

1.    Instructed the Acting Leader of the Council to write formally to the Pensions Committee of Hertfordshire County Council to:

 

a.    Express our concerns above, and request that under its fiduciary duty, it takes action to divest from all pension fund investments in companies that profit from the manufacture of weapons and military technology used contrary to international law, and from any companies found to be profiting from business activity which is illegal under international law.

 

b.    Request the Hertfordshire Pension Fund to apply Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG) standards to not just directly held managed funds but also pension fund assets pooled with ACCESS.

 

c.     Request that the Hertfordshire Pension Committee will regularly disclose details of all holdings (including directly managed and those pooled with ACCESS) annually for the public to see that the fund is complying with International Law.

 

2.    Instructed that at the next scheduled review of North Hertfordshire District Council’s own Investment Strategy; the review specifically considers how to align with the above investment principles.