Agenda item

Requests to speak at the Committee on a matter within its terms of reference must be made in writing to the clerk named on the front of this agenda by 5pm two working days before the meeting.

 

The Chair informed members that two deputations had been received and accepted, copies of the deputation statements were included in the supplementary agenda.

 

The first deputation was from Sam Ebner-Landy and was about providing plant-based catering at council events; and

 

The second deputation was from Ben Pearson of the Save London Motorcycling Group regarding the Council’s policies towards motorcyclists in the borough.

The deputation was presented by:

 

·       Sam Ebner-Landy

 

The following responses were given by the deputees to Members questions:

 

• In terms of the cost implications of the Council switching to Plant based catering, the Cambridge City example indicated that there was no difference in terms of the cost and impact on the budget, it however had a massive climate impact.
• It was a powerful way of showing people that it was something that could be done in their own home, providing sustainable environmentally friendly food.
• It was being approached from the environmental angle rather than an ethical angle because in terms of the environment it could create drastic change as seen with other Councils around the UK. There was an absolute commitment to plant-based foods in total while still providing people with the choice to bring their own food which would have a powerful effect.
• It was important to be aware of where all nutrients consumed in all diets came from. There should be education about whatever diet you had.
• Introducing plant-based food in schools involved a lot of overly complicated issues which would need to be pitched correctly and need to address issues in terms of the cost-of-living crisis and what people could afford.
• Some of the supermarket staples which were often plant based could help to feed a lot of people at a relatively small cost.
• Camden was one of the richest Councils, also situated in London where there were so many vegan options readily available. It had the ability to lead the way in what was being provided showcasing excellent plant-based food to residents.
• It would be a good idea when events occurred in Camden to work with the Events Team to show everyone that came to Camden to show case what could be done in homes in relation to plant-based food highlighting the impact this would have on climate action.

 

In response, Richard Bradbury (Director of Environment and Sustainability), made the following comments:

 

·       Camden Food Mission was working to ensure that by 2030, everyone ate well everyday with nutritious, affordable, sustainable food outcomes.

·       So that residents were food secure and did not need to access crisis food provision and food was a foundation of children's and young people's flourishing lives.

·       Camden's food system contributed to tackling the climate crisis and enabled residents to have healthy and balanced diet.

·       The mission, included running public awareness campaigns to encourage more climate friendly diets, including the recent Camden and Re London eat like a Londoner, a campaign which was now live in bus stops and social media, and specifically took planet friendly meals to its heart.

·       In terms of food procurement Camden Food Mission sought to ensure that food secured by the Council promoted the provision of sustainable and healthy food.

·       With regards to the Camden event service, currently the service worked on a 50% provision of meat free options with vegan and gluten free options which were included in this menu.

·       They concentrated on only meat being chicken, which had to be halal.
There were some fish and prawn options with an asortment of mixed bread and sandwiches. They always provided fresh fruits.

·       On the point made about buying catering through the events team and putting on an event, various caterers could be used. You could bring in your own caterer if that were what you were looking for.

·       When an event was being run in Camden, the Council did have a specific caterer. If the request were for the Council to cater for a fully plant based or meat free event or that was what you wanted that could be arranged. So, there was a broad range available.

·       The Camden food buying standards, built on this work and emerged as a priority through the food mission. Developing a set of standards would give Camden the opportunity to take a food systems approach to the food purchased by the Council.

·       The Council could positively influence changes across health, environment, social and economic domains. Ensuring that food was nutritious, supported a healthy weight and was environmentally sustainable, taking into consideration how food was produced, processed and transported.

·       Minimised waste in terms of food waste and packaging, supported ethical systems like fair trade promoted local food production and investment in local small medium sized enterprises and the wider Camden economy. So, it was appropriate for the main target group for any particular setting.

·       The Council was currently forming these proposed standards around the Soils Associations Food for Life, silver standards, and as these had been shown to be fit for purpose in their use by many other boroughs, the Council would adapt them according to the consultation that was taking place in the coming months, along with examples of good practice.

·       The consultative group was being set up, working in all areas of the Council that purchased foods for schools, internal meetings, events, holiday activities, 5, St Pancras Cafe and other venues like Libraries, Leisure Centres and Parks.

·       The standards that the Council worked with and would develop further while working with the consultative group would aim to have draft proposals in place by around early February.

·       Specifically for the deputation that was being discussed today currently the Camden standards would be aiming towards a 50% plant-based target and from a population health and nutrition perspective, the standards set could significantly reduce the amount of meat being consumed.

·       Alongside such a change, it was important to focus on optimizing nutrition, including reducing levels of food high in fat, sugar and salt, as well as levels of ultra processed food that has already been discussed.

·       So, getting the balance right on these issues was critical for population health, environment and wellbeing.

·       There was an opportunity for the Council to develop the conversation that had occurred today around the Camden food buying standards which in early 2024 would be developed by the organization.

 

The Director of Environment and Sustainability provided the following information in response to Committee members questions:

 

·       The working aim of the food buying standards was towards a 50% plant-based target on all food bought by the Council which was broader than the focus of the deputation.

·       It was about the full buying capacity of the Council around food.

·       The Council did not do a lot of catering for internal meetings and the Council’s event service was broadly an income-based service.

·       People that hired the Council’s venues for events could bring in their own caterers which from an Events Management perspective eroded the leverage the Council might have.

 

The Cabinet Member for a Sustainable Camden invited to comment on the deputation remarked that there had been a discussion at full Council about the opt out in schools for meat free Mondays, noting that most schools in the borough had decided to do meat free Mondays which he felt had been a success. He felt that the recommendation of a trial period was a good suggestion, alongside all the other work the Council was doing on food security and standards.

 

Committee members made the following comments:

 

·       It would not be a good idea for the Council to lose revenue from holding events particularly at the time of a cost-of-living crisis, it made sense for the Council to do things which were in its control and for officers to look at those aspects which were in the Council’s control.

·       The Council needed to do more particularly as there was a climate crisis which was only going to get worse. Camden was good at leading the way and it would be good if the Council could support plant-based food catering at all internal events which could be conducted on a trial basis which would hopefully show that it was doable.

·       There were lots of different settings and variables, including commercial aspects, given that there was very little catering done for Camden internal meetings, these were hardly the global changes being sought and it was doubtful whether this really had any impact or meaning but happy to support this for internal meetings on a gesture basis.

 

The Committee were generally supportive of the idea of using plant-based catering for Council internal meetings and the aspiration going forward of the Council carrying this out on a trial basis. Members requested a report back from officers exploring the feasibility and implications of these recommendations for the Council and Camden schools.

 

RESOLVED

 

That officers provide a report back on the implications of using plant-based food for all Camden internal catering events before recommendations are made to Cabinet.

Action By: Director of Environment and Sustainability

 

 

 

The deputation was presented by:

 

·       Ben Pearson accompanied by Rachel Mawby

 

The following responses were given by the deputees to Members questions:

 

• The reason for asserting that the Council was anti motor cyclist was because the response from the Council to complaints about noise and anti-social behaviour was disproportionate for motorcyclists. For example, a complaint from one individual about pollution and noise resulted in the targeting of only motorcycle parking while car parking was left untouched.
• The justification from the Council for taking out motorcycling bays was that complaints had been received from residents over a number of years and putting in greening was an additional benefit.
• With regards to harassment of the motorcyclist, the person concerned was not comfortable contacting the Police.
• The issue of harassment of the motorcyclist had been raised with the Council, which appeared not to have taken any steps to address this. If any other road user had raised this the response would have been different.
• From the evidence provided in response to the Freedom of Information (FOI) request it appeared that no monitoring was undertaken. The information obtained from the FOI could be shared with ward Councillors.
• In agreement with a member’s comment, it was noted that motorcyclists were grouped with motor vehicles in Camden’s Transport Strategy at the bottom of the transport hierarchy. The mindset that motorcycles were indistinguishable from cars was what essentially underpinned the Council’s policy decisions and where recent parking proposals had come from.
• It was irrational under the new proposals that electric motorcycles and electric mopeds would pay the same charges as electric cars. There was no way this could be defended from a carbon or environmental impact.
• The evidence was extremely clear that allowing motorcyclists to use bus lanes would not pose a safety risk to cyclists. Around London it was becoming the norm to allow motorcyclists to use bus lanes.
• Another implication of the new parking charge proposals was that a resident who had a small scooter and a car would need to choose between the different modes of transport. So, the policy which was aimed at reducing emissions could result in increased car use.
• Allowing motorcyclists into bus lanes was probably the single biggest intervention that could be taken to improve motorcycle safety which was also part of the net zero vision.
• The issue being raised was that the policy framework in which the officers were operating would not move forward without the political will to deal with the issues.

 

In response, Richard Bradbury (Director of Environment and Sustainability), made the following comments:

 

·       As already highlighted Camden’s Transport Strategy was scheduled to be considered by the Committee at the meeting in February and a fuller response would be provided to the deputation then as well as a number of points raised by the Committee.

·       The Committee had discussed Flaxman Terrace, there were currently 377 motorcycling bays in Camden of which the highest concentration was located in the southern area of the borough where Flaxman Terrace was situated.

·       The removal of two motorcycle bays in Flaxman Terrace was a public decision made following public consultation with a report on the Council’s website.

·       There was a 50/50 split in terms of removal and non-removal of the bays which considered views of residents and businesses as well as the underutilisation of motorcycle bays in nearby areas on Burton and Duke Roads.

·       There was a recognition by the Council of the disappointment of motorcycle groups on the decision, officers had developed good engagement and dialogue with the motor cycling groups in the borough.

·       Camden’s established policy of not allowing two wheel powered vehicles in bus lanes had long been established since 2008 and was consistent with a number of other boroughs.

·       Camden shared borough boundaries with many other boroughs including Westminster, Hackney, Haringey and Barnet, there had been contradictory information and some difficulty in establishing the impact on the casual rate or safety of cyclists in bus lanes when used by motorcyclists. Evidence did however show that motorcyclists speed increased by 10 miles an hour when using the bus lane and the Council’s view was that this increased the risk for vulnerable users such as pedestrians and cyclists when using bus lanes as a buffer from the main traffic flow.

 

Committee members were of the view that it would be a good idea to see the Council’s updated Transport Strategy as well as the deputation response being picked up in the wider context of the strategy at the February meeting. A Committee member also requested that as part of the response consideration be given to why an individual could only register one vehicle whereas there were categories of people in the borough who had a good reason to have two different types of vehicle or modes of transport.

 

The Committee thanked all the deputees for attending and for their deputations.

 

RESOLVED –

 

THAT

 

The response to the motorcycle deputation be included as part of the wider context of the Transport Strategy update report to the Committee in February.

 

Action By: Director of Environment and Sustainability / Head of Transport Strategy and Projects