Agenda and minutes

The apologies of those Members unable to attend this meeting of the Court were noted.

There were no additional declarations.

To agree the minutes of the meeting of the Court of Common Council held on 16 July 2020.

Resolved – That the minutes of the last Court are correctly recorded.

There were no resolutions.

The Right Honourable The Lord Mayor to report on his recent overseas visits.

The Right Honourable The Lord Mayor took the opportunity to update the Court on his virtual engagement programme.

To receive a statement from the Chairman of the Policy and Resources Committee.

The Chair of the Policy and Resources Committee spoke to outline priorities for the coming period, linked to the Corporate Plan. Specifically, she touched on recovery, finalising our programme of internal reform, progressing the City’s major projects, working to support London at this pivotal time, and supporting UK competitiveness, especially for the financial and professional services sector.

There were no docquets for the Seal.

To consider a circulated list of applications for the Freedom of the City.

The Chamberlain, in pursuance of the Order of this Court, presented a list of the under-mentioned, persons who had made applications to be admitted to the Freedom of the City by Redemption:-

To:-

·         Provide for the date of next ordinary Common Council elections being postponed from 18 March 2021 until 23 March 2022.

(First and Second Reading).

(Together with a report of the Policy and Resources Committee thereon).

A Bill for an Act of Common Council, to provide for the date of the next ordinary Common Council elections being postponed from 18 March 2021 until 23 March 2022, was presented to the Court for its first and second reading, together with a report of the Policy and Resources Committee thereon.

The Chair of the Policy and Resources Committee spoke to introduce the report, outlining the rationale for the proposal and, in particular, commenting on the difficulties associated with voter registration in the current climate.

Several Members spoke to oppose the proposal, with the following comments made:

• Whilst concerns around the impact of COVID-19 on turnout were noted, it was argued that protecting the democratic mandate should take precedence. It should be for voters to decide whether or not to go to polling stations, not for the City Corporation to presume to judge whether they would wish to or not.
• The opportunity to push for increased use of postal votes and to explore electronic voting was also raised, with it suggested that this could go some way towards off-setting turnout concerns.
• It was also observed that turnout varied significantly across Wards and across elections in any case, depending on the candidates and the specific issues in play.
• The rationale given for postponement was questioned, with it cautioned that there would be an external perception of Members voting in their own interests in delaying elections. The fact that the US Presidential Elections were proceeding demonstrated that such things were possible and reflected poorly on the City should it not also seek to proceed.
• Questions were raised as to the legalities of Bill, with it noted that a response on these matters was expected from the Recorder prior to the Bill’s third reading.
• A Member suggested that the impact of COVID

To receive a report setting out measures introduced into Parliament which may have an effect on the services provided by the City Corporation.

The Court received a report on measure introduced by Parliament which might have an effect on the services provided by the City Corporation as follows:-

To consider the following appointments:

(A)         One Member on the Education Board, for the balance of a term expiring in April 2022.

Nominations received:-

Shravan Jashvantrai Joshi

Jeremy Lewis Simons

(B)         One Member on the Culture, Heritage & Libraries Committee, for the balance of a term expiring in April 2021.

Nominations received:-

Matthew Bell

(C)         One Member on the Board of Governors of the Museum of London, for a term expiring in October 2024.

Nominations received:-

Alderman Alison Gowman

The Court proceeded to consider appointments to the following Committees and Outside Bodies:-

Where appropriate:-

* denotes a Member standing for re-appointment.

(A)         One Member on Education Board, for the balance of a term expiring in April 2022.

Nominations received:-

Shravan Jashvantrai Joshi

Jeremy Lewis Simons

Read.

Resolved – That, in accordance with the outcomes of the indicative ballot process, the appointment to the Education Board of Shravan Joshi, for a term expiring in April 2022, be confirmed.

(B)      One Member on the Culture, Heritage & Libraries Committee, for a term expiring in April 2021.

Nominations received:-

Matthew Bell

Read.

Whereupon the Lord Mayor declared Matthew Bell to be appointed to the Culture, Heritage & Libraries Committee, for a term expiring April 2021.

(C)      One Member on the Board of Governors of the Museum of London, for a term

expiring in October 2024.

Nominations received:-

*Alderman Alison Gowman

Read.

Whereupon the Lord Mayor declared Alderman Alison Gowman to be appointed to the Board of Governors of the Museum of London, for term expiring October 2024.

Training of City of London Police Officers

William Pimlott asked a question of the Chair of the City of London Police Authority Board concerning the training of officers at all levels, particularly in relation to unconscious bias, policing of protests, lawfulness of stop and search, dealing with young people, and?de-escalation?training.

?

Responding, the Chair noted the importance of public support for the UK’s policing by consent model and, by extension, the importance of ensuring trust in the police is maintained. He reassured Members that efforts in ensuring equality, eliminating bias, and maintaining a zero tolerance to racism were constantly under review and scrutiny, with recommendations for continual improvement and such recommendations tracked against implementation. Consequently, he was satisfied that there was sufficient existing oversight and scrutiny of these areas.  The Chair also outlined the various training plans in place for all officers in relation to the appropriate, proportionate and legitimate use of powers.

With reference to Stop and Search in particular, the Chair noted that this was a complex matter but, used appropriately, could be a highly effective tool in combating serious crime. He provided statistics in relation to its usage over the last quarter noting that, of those whose ethnicity was identified, 28% of the Force’s stops had been of those of BAME background, compared with 56% in the same period for the Metropolitan Police. By way of context, across London 59% of people identified as White, 18% as Asian, 12% as Black and 11% as Mixed or Other. The Chair also outlined the significant scrutiny mechanisms in place as to the performance, outcomes and legitimacy of stop and search usage within both the Force and the Police Authority, as well as through Community Oversight groups such the Independent Advisory Group and Scrutiny Group.

In response to a

By Mark Raymond Peter Henry Delano Wheatley

To consider a Motion, submitted by Mark Wheatley, in relation to the Law of the People's Republic of China on Safeguarding National Security in the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region.

Resolved – That Barbara Newman and Adrian Bastow be appointed to the Barbican Residential Committee, both for the Ward of Aldersgate.

Resolved – That Deputy David Bradshaw, Deputy John Tomlinson, Mary Durcan, and Mark Bostock, be appointed to the Barbican Residential Committee for the Ward of Cripplegate.

Motion - “That this Honourable Court reiterates our support for the 1984 Sino-British Joint Declaration on Hong Kong.

It notes the view of the British Government that China's imposition of the new National Security law breaches the terms of this treaty.

It notes the view it undermines the right of Hong Kong citizens to enjoy "a high degree of autonomy" in the governance of their affairs.

It notes the British Government has in response extended residence rights to British Nationals (Overseas) citizens living in Hong Kong.

It notes this offer extends the right to live and work in the UK from 6 months to 5 years, with a right to apply to settle after a further 12 months.

This Honourable Court welcomes this policy and adds further that those seeking to live, work, settle under this scheme or to apply for asylum if persecuted under the new National Security law will always be welcome in the City of London.

This Honourable Court welcomes the 23 years of cooperation, investment and friendship between Britain and China, between the City of London and Hong Kong, prior to the imposition of the new National Security law, and hopes for a return to that state of affairs at the earliest opportunity.”

Mark Wheatley spoke to introduce the Motion, noting the strong historical relationship with Hong Kong, the commitments made through the Sino-British Joint Declaration and recently reaffirmed by the Government, and referencing the strong British legacy of welcoming others to work and trade. He clarified that the

There was no report.

To note action taken under urgency procedures concerning a minor amendment to Standing Orders.

POLICY AND RESOURCES COMMITTEE

(Deputy Catherine McGuinness)

1 September 2020

Report of Urgent Action Taken: Proposed revisions to SO 29(4) and SO 30(5): Election of Chairmen and Deputy Chairmen

During the annual election process for Chairmen and Deputy Chairmen of Committees, the provisions of Standing Orders 29(4) and 30(5) have long required the committee clerk to call out the list of all those Members eligible to stand.

Although this had been the practice for many years, the process can delay the elections unnecessarily, especially when the committee is particularly large or where the election is uncontested, and there are other ways in which Members might more helpfully be made aware of who is/is not eligible to stand for either position.

On the basis that the existing practice is unnecessary and, following suggestions from some Members that a more efficient approach could be adopted, revisions were proposed to Standing Orders No. 29(4) and 30(5) to obviate the requirement for all names to be read.

In order to allow for the arrangements to be adjusted in time for the September meetings of various committees (and the elections due to take place there), the proposals were considered and approved under urgency procedures.

Resolved – That the action taken under urgency procedures be noted.

To note action taken under urgency procedures concerning an in-year budget adjustment associated with funding for Heart of the City.

FINANCE COMMITTEE

(Jeremy Paul Mayhew)

10 July 2020

Report of Urgent Action Taken: Funding request to support an extension of Heart of the City’s responsible business programme (and consequent revision to the 2020/21 Budget)

The Court noted action taken under urgency procedures in relation to a budget uplift to facilitate funding for Heart of the City. Heart of the City delivers the City Corporation’s Corporate Strategy Objective 5, points c and d, whilst also working alongside others in the City Corporation to deliver its Responsible Business Strategy and the Social Mobility Strategy.

Normally, any request for funding is submitted to the January meeting of the Policy & Resources Committee (and Resource Allocation Sub-Committee) and, following approval of an appropriate sum, is incorporated within the Corporation’s budget submitted to the February meeting of your Finance Committee, and the March meeting of the Court of Common Council.

However, in January 2020, the Policy & Resources Committee had asked officers to come back with revised proposals. This was done, and a revised sum was approved at the February meeting. Unfortunately, as a consequence of the month’s delay and the timing around the budget submission, this sum was omitted from the budget. It was not immediately noticed due to the unfolding COVID-19 crisis but became apparent thereafter, and so an in-year budget adjustment was required to facilitate the award of the money.

The funding was for core funding of the organisation, primarily covering salaries. As a result of the commitment given by the Policy and Resources Committee in February, the charity continued its operations in 2020-21 in good faith.

Approval was, therefore, granted by the Finance Committee and the Court of Common Council under urgency procedures to agree to one-year’s funding of Heart of the City for 2020/21, totalling £202,000, to be met from City’s Cash,

To receive the City of London Policing Plan for 2020-2023.

CITY OF LONDON POLICE AUTHORITY BOARD

(Deputy James Michael Douglas Thomson)

2 July 2020

City of London Police: Policing Plan 2020-23

The Court received the City of London Policing Plan 2020-2023, representing the plan for policing the City of London over the next three years.

The Chairman spoke to introduce the report, highlighting the critical areas of focus and the intention to make the City the safest in the world. He also advised of the opportunity to participate in the creation of the Policing Plan for 2021-2024 and encouraged Members to do so.

In response to a query concerning the prospective outsourcing of neighbourhood policing to private security firms, the Chair confirmed that neighbourhood policing was a central pillar of the Policing Plan and that policing activities to deliver this would be undertaken by the Force only, with no plans for this to change. However, he clarified that community safety was a shared responsibility and reminded Members of obligations in respect of the Safer City Partnership, through which the City Police and City Corporation worked with a range of partners to achieve a safe environment, and that third party organisations were used by the City Corporation to deliver some of these associated services.

A Member asked a further question in relation to concerns from the BAME community in respect of equal treatment by the Police, noting that there was currently no specific reference within the Policing Plan on this matter and asking whether an explicit undertaking might be incorporated. Responding, the Chair noted that the current Policing Plan had been articulated in relation to key priorities based on strategic risks, threats, and harm, so there were many items which were priorities for the Force which were not necessarily recorded in this particular document. He confirmed that this issue could absolutely

That the public be excluded from the meeting for the following items of business below on the grounds that they involve the likely disclosure of exempt information as defined in Paragraph 3 of Part 1 of Schedule 12A of the Local Government Act, 1972.

Resolved – that the public be excluded from the meeting for the following items of business below on the grounds that they involve the likely disclosure of exempt information as defined in Paragraph 3 of Part 1 of Schedule 12A of the Local Government Act, 1972.

Summary of exempt items considered whilst the public were excluded:-

To agree the non-public minutes of the meeting of the Court held on 16 July 2020.

Resolved – That the non-public Minutes of the last Court are correctly recorded.

To consider proposals in relation to the granting of a long-term lease.

Property Investment Board

The Court approved the grant of a long-term lease.