Agenda item

To consider the following motions:

 

·  Demanding Real Fairer Funding for Southwark

·  Action to divest the Southwark Pension Fund from conflict and genocide

·  Southwark Council will not water down affordable housing requirements

·  Cleaner and Safer Streets in Southwark

·  Make Peckham Rye Station safe and accessible

·  Our water our way

Motion 1: Demanding Real Fairer Funding for Southwark

 

At this point, Councillor Richard Livingstone left the room, as he had disclosed a pecuniary interest in the motion.

 

This motion was considered prior to the guillotine having fallen. 

 

Councillor Victor Chamberlain moved the motion. Councillor Rachel Bentley seconded the motion.

 

There was one amendment to the motion.  Councillor Esme Hicks moved Amendment B.  Councillor Ian Wingfield seconded Amendment B. After debate (Councillors Cassandra Brown (Councillor Emily Tester made a point of personal explanation; Councillor Ellie Cumbo requested to make a point of order), Helen Dennis, Emily Tester, Sarah King), the guillotine fell.

 

Amendment B was put to the vote and declared to be carried.

 

The amended motion was put to the vote and declared to be carried.

 

Note: This motion will be referred as a recommendation to the cabinet for consideration.

 

1.  Council Assembly notes:

 

a.  In November 2022, Council Assembly passed a motion rightly condemning the assault on local government funding by Conservative and Liberal Democrat governments, which threatened the ability of Southwark Council to continue to deliver vital services for residents.

 

b.  The brutal cuts to local council spending undertaken by the Liberal Democrats in coalition with the Conservatives from 2010.

 

c.  That local government spending will not reach 2010 levels until the 2030s, due to the severity of cuts by undertaken by the Liberal Democrats in coalition with the Conservatives from 2010.

 

d.  That despite this assault from the Conservatives and Liberal Democrats, Southwark Labour have protected our libraries, in-sourced our leisure centres and continued to invest in local services – presenting balanced budgets every year.

 

e.  The Liberal Democrats’ failure to present balanced ‘alternative’ budgets.

 

f.  The Section 151 Officer’s response to the Liberal Democrats’ 2023 ‘alternative’ budget put forward, which stated:

 

  i.  “Collectively, these proposals create significant risk to the 2023-24 budget and are not in line with the recommendations of the s151 officer as set out to Council Assembly, especially with regard to collection rates, one off contributions from reserves and income targets.”

 

g.  This Labour administration’s three-year budget, which has kept the council’s finances stable during a turbulent economic period following Liz Truss’s mini-budget and Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.

 

2.  Council Assembly recognises:

 

a.  The impact of Conservative and Liberal Democrat austerity on local authorities across the country, which hollowed out many councils outside of London

 

b.  The need for wealth to be redistributed around the country.

 

c.  The long-overdue need for local government funding reform, which is being undertaken by the Labour government.

 

3.  Council Assembly welcomes:

 

a.  This council’s engagement with the Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government, as well as other government ministers, which is ensuring a fair settlement or Southwark.

 

b.  This council’s role in leading inner-London boroughs’ campaign for fairer funding in meetings with the Ministry for Housing, Communities and Local Government and, alongside local Labour MPs, in Parliament.

 

c.  The leading role this council is playing alongside London Councils and Central London Forward to ensure a fair settlement for Southwark.

 

4.  Council Assembly resolves to:

 

a.  Ask that the council continues to engage with the government to ensure a fair outcome for Southwark.

 

b.  Ask that the council continues to work with local MPs, London Councils, Central London Forward and others in ensuring a fair outcome for inner London boroughs.

 

At this point, Councillor Richard Livingstone returned to the meeting.

 

Motion 2: Action to divest the Southwark Pension Fund from conflict and genocide

 

The substantive motion was updated via the programme motion.

 

This motion was considered after the guillotine had fallen. 

 

There was one amendment to the motion. 

 

Amendment C was put to the vote and declared to be lost.

 

The substantive motion was put to the vote and declared to be carried.

 

Note: This motion will be referred as a recommendation to the cabinet for consideration.

 

1.  Council Assembly notes:

 

a.  The devastating humanitarian crisis in Gaza, including the suffering, death, and famine that have followed Israel’s military actions in response to the appalling attacks by Hamas in 2023.

 

b.  That Israeli forces have killed more than 65,000 Palestinians in Gaza since 2023, including more than 20,000 children.

 

c.  The UN estimates that approximately 92% of all residential buildings in Gaza – around 436,000 homes – have been damaged or destroyed since the start of the conflict, causing the displacement of 1.9 million Palestinians. Many have been displaced several times.

 

d.  That in April 2025, Save the Children reported that all schools in Gaza had been closed for 625,000 students for 6 months and that 88% of all school buildings in Gaza had been damaged or destroyed. In May 2025 WHO reported that Israeli forces had destroyed or damaged 94% of all hospitals in Gaza.

 

e.  That UN reports confirm the escalating crisis in the West Bank, including mass displacement on a scale not seen since 1967, with more than 40,000 Palestinians uprooted and neighbourhoods destroyed.

 

f.  That on 16 September 2025, the United Nations Independent Commission of Inquiry found a risk of genocide against Palestinians in Gaza and called on all Member States, including the UK, to “employ all means reasonably available to them to prevent the commission of genocide in the Gaza Strip”.

 

g.  That this position is representative of the growing international consensus shared by Amnesty International, Oxfam, leading Israeli human rights organisations B’tselem and Physicians for Human Rights Israel, the International Association of Genocide Scholars, and leading Israeli scholars of genocide such as Raz Segal and Omer Bartov that Israel is committing genocide.

 

h.  The deep concern and distress felt by many Southwark residents, particularly those with personal or familial ties to the region, and the calls from across our borough for action.

 

i.  Southwark Council has a proud record of ethical investment and is one of only four UK local government pension funds with an ambitious 2030 net zero target, showing our commitment to placing our values at the heart of our investment policy.

 

j.  That since December 2023, the Southwark Local Government Pension Scheme has been monitoring its exposure to companies listed by the United Nations Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) as being linked to the occupation of Palestine. The Southwark Local Government Pension Scheme has no direct investments in the companies listed by the United Nations but has £4.9m invested through managed funds.

 

k.  That the council has already begun engaging with fund managers to stress the importance of human rights as a key criterion in responsible investment.

 

2.  Council Assembly welcomes:

 

a.  The tentative ceasefire in Gaza which - at the time of writing - is resulting in the exchange of prisoners and hostages, both living and dead, between Israel and Palestine.

 

b.  The Labour Government’s recognition of the state of Palestine on 21 September 2025, as a significant and historic step in British foreign policy on the path to a two-state solution.

 

c.  The council’s announcement that Southwark will become the first local authority to incorporate the United Nations Genocide Convention into its investment framework, enabling the exclusion of investments in any state found by the International Court of Justice to be in breach of the Convention.

 

3.  Council Assembly resolves to ask that:

 

a.  The Pensions Advisory Panel continues to work with fund managers to disclose and divest pension fund investments in companies listed by the United Nations OHCHR as being linked to the illegal occupation of Palestine, regularly reporting on progress made.

 

b.  The council also recognises that the OHCHR list is not fully comprehensive, including for arms companies supplying countries in breach of international law. Therefore, Council Assembly also calls on the London Collective Investment Vehicle (LCIV) to develop a more robust framework that enables the exclusion of investments linked to conflict, military occupation, or genocide, including the creation of a new fund that allows greater flexibility to divest from specific asset classes within pooled funds.

 

c.  The council use the pension fund’s recently adopted “pass-through voting” mechanism to influence decisions on investments linked to human rights concerns, conflict, or military occupation.

 

d.  The council complete the necessary steps to become the first local authority to incorporate the United Nations Genocide Convention into its investment framework.

 

e.  The council reaffirm Southwark Council’s commitment to ethical investment, transparency, and the protection of human rights, ensuring that our pension fund reflects the values of our diverse and compassionate community.

 

Motion 3: Southwark Council will not water down affordable housing requirements

 

The substantive motion was updated via the programme motion.

 

This motion was considered after the guillotine had fallen.

 

There was one amendment to the motion.

 

Amendment D was put to the vote and declared to be carried.

 

The amended motion was put to the vote and declared to be carried.

 

Note: This motion will be referred as a recommendation to the cabinet for consideration.

 

1.  Council assembly notes:

 

a.  That the prioritisation of genuinely affordable housing, and social rent housing in particular, is a central commitment of this administration

 

b.  That since the establishment of Southwark’s council house-building programme, 3,000 new council homes have either been built or are on site

 

c.  That since January 2025, there have been new council homes completed on the Rennie Estate (South Bermondsey), Salisbury Estate (North Walworth), Sedgmoor Place (St Giles) and Linden Grove (Peckham Rye), with 581 new council homes also now delivered on the Aylesbury Estate (Faraday), and residents on the Tustin Estate (Old Kent Road) about to move into new homes

 

d.  That the council has recently announced the next phase of new council homes delivery

 

e.  That this Labour administration has a strong track record of securing additional homes at social rent from developers, with Southwark responsible for the highest number of GLA-funded social rent completions in London last year

 

f.  That Liberal Democrat controlled councils in London (Sutton, Richmond and Kingston) started a combined total of 0 (zero) social rent homes last year

 

g.  That in Labour-run Southwark there were more social rent homes build last year (581) than in Liberal Democrat controlled councils (Sutton, Richmond and Kingston) over the past 10 years combined

 

h.  The Green Party’s continued and consistent campaigning against new homes in any form, including 100% affordable schemes such as Flaxyards in Peckham

 

i.  That our planning policies have secured over 50% affordable housing delivery in the Old Kent Road Opportunity Area, and 35% affordable housing at the Biscuit Factory – which will on its own deliver 338 new social rent homes for Southwark residents on the waiting list

 

j.  That this Labour administration has a unique policy requiring affordable housing from student accommodation and co-living developers which over the last year has contributed to 892 affordable homes, of which 695 are at social rent, being consented by the Main Planning Committee. The Committee has also secured an additional £22.49m in potential contributions to our New Homes programme

 

k.  That Southwark’s Labour Cabinet have also proposed increasing the CIL rate on speculative student accommodation to generate additional investment for our neighbourhoods, building on the £20m currently being distributed as a result of our planning policies

 

l.  That Southwark council is robustly defending its planning policies at the current Aylesham Centre appeal and inquiry

 

m.  That Southwark remains London’s biggest social landlord, and that across Southwark, approximately 40% of households are socially renting

 

n.  That as Private Rented Sector (PRS) rents continue to escalate, demand for socially rented housing also continues to increase, with over 20,000 households now on the Southwark waiting list

 

o.  That eviction from the PRS is the second highest reason given for homelessness applications in Southwark

 

p.  That demand for new housing in Southwark is overwhelmingly for homes that are genuinely affordable for Southwark residents – for social rent homes, and homes that will enable families to remain the borough.

 

2.  Council Assembly welcomes:

 

a.  The government’s stated commitment to deliver the biggest boost in affordable and social housing in a generation

 

b.  The allocation of £39bn over 10 years to deliver the next Affordable Homes Programme with a greater emphasis on social rent homes

 

c.  The reform of Right to Buy including the reduction in discount, to prevent the loss of council homes

 

d.  The Renters’ Rights Act, including the end to S21 evictions and the introduction of more secure, periodic tenancies

 

e.  The new City Hall Developer Investment Fund to enable the Mayor to unlock and accelerate housing delivery

 

f.  The exclusion of student accommodation and co-living schemes from the measures outlined in the proposed Emergency Package for London.

 

3.  Council Assembly resolves:

 

a.  To continue leading the national campaign on behalf of our residents to save council housing for future generations

 

b.  To work with the government and GLA to focus efforts on scaling up the delivery of social rent homes in London, and especially council homes, as the top priority

 

c.  To join with the Chair of the Housing, Communities and Local Government Select Committee, in calling for a clear numerical target for the delivery of social rent homes nationally and across London

 

d.  To continue defending Southwark’s planning policies and ensure we maximise long-term community benefit from new developments.

 

Motion 4: Cleaner and Safer Streets in Southwark

 

This motion was considered after the guillotine had fallen.

 

The substantive motion was put to the vote and declared to be lost.

 

Motion 5: Make Peckham Rye Station safe and accessible

 

 

This motion was considered after the guillotine had fallen.

 

There was one amendment to the motion.

 

Amendment E was put to the vote and declared to be lost.

 

The substantive motion was put to the vote and declared to be carried.

 

Note: This motion will be referred as a recommendation to the cabinet for consideration.

 

1.  Council Assembly notes:

 

a.  That Peckham Rye Station is the busiest interchange in the country without step-free access, with more than 6 million passengers using the station in 2024.

 

b.  That the lack of step-free access currently excludes many disabled residents, wheelchair users, parents with buggies, and older people from using the station, forcing them onto longer or less convenient routes.

 

c.  That the Treasury has paused funding for the station upgrade, which would have eased overcrowding and installed lift access to all platforms.

 

d.  That the upgrade is shovel-ready, with Network Rail having secured planning permission.

 

e.  That this Council has committed £1 million to supporting this project.

 

f.  That the station upgrade would not only improve accessibility for all but also increase the station’s capacity, removing the risk of dangerous overcrowding at peak times, and unlock economic growth, supporting local housing delivery and high street renewal.

 

g.  That Labour’s plans to create a public square in front of the station on Rye Lane are progressing, with demolition of vacant buildings on the new forecourt set to begin shortly.

 

h.  That Southwark Labour Leader, Councillor Sarah King, has written to the Transport Secretary urging a rethink of the decision to pause the upgrade.

 

i.  That under the Equality Act 2010, public authorities have a duty to remove barriers and advance equality of opportunity. Upgrading Peckham Rye Station is a clear example of that duty in practice.

 

j.  That Rye Lane’s Labour councillors have launched a petition to ensure local voices are heard and to call on the Government to deliver this vital investment.

 

k.  That Nunhead, North Dulwich, South Bermondsey and Elephant & Castle stations also need investment to make them fit for the future.

 

2.  Council Assembly welcomes:

 

a.  The campaign and petition led by Labour councillors in Rye Lane ward.

 

b.  Network Rail’s continued commitment to the upgrade of Peckham Rye Station.

 

3.  This Council resolves to:

 

a.  Support the campaign led by Rye Lane’s Labour councillors to secure full Government funding for the Peckham Rye Station upgrade.

 

b.  Continue to work with Network Rail to progress immediate health and safety improvements at the station.

 

c.  Call on the Treasury to reverse its decision to pause funding and commit to delivering the full upgrade, including lift access to all platforms.

 

d.  Highlight the economic, social, and accessibility benefits of the station upgrade for Peckham, Southwark, and wider south-east London.

 

e.  Ensure that the station upgrade is delivered in tandem with the redevelopment of the station square and public realm improvements along Rye Lane.

 

f.  Reaffirm the Council’s commitment to inclusive transport infrastructure that meets the needs of all residents, including those with disabilities, parents with buggies, and older people.

 

g.  Reaffirm the Council’s commitment to inclusive transport infrastructure that is designed and tested with disabled residents, setting a borough-wide benchmark for equality of access.

 

Motion 6: Our water our way

 

This motion was considered after the guillotine had fallen.

 

There was one amendment to the motion.

 

Amendment F was put to the vote and declared to be lost.

 

The substantive motion was put to the vote and declared to be carried.

 

Note: This motion will be referred as a recommendation to the cabinet for consideration.

 

1.  This council notes:

 

a.  Serious flooding on Gallery Road, Dulwich, in October 2025, resulting in road closures.

 

b.  Serious flooding in Ilderton Road, Bermondsey, in July 2025, caused by a burst water main which flooded 27 homes.

 

c.  A serious burst water main in Dulwich in February 2025 which affected 5,000 households in South London.

 

d.  Repeated failures from Thames Water to communicate with residents about works and fixes taking place, including road closures.

 

e.  Decades of underinvestment from Thames Water alongside huge dividend payouts to shareholders and mounting debt, resulting in crumbling local infrastructure.

 

f.  Ofwat’s findings in 2024 that Thames Water broke dividend payment rules, resulting in an £18 million fine.

 

2.  This council also notes:

 

a.  Thames Water, the UK’s largest water company and provider to thousands of households in Southwark, is on the brink of collapse - saddled with billions in debt, facing unprecedented public outcry over pollution and chronic underinvestment.

 

b.  The consequences of any new ownership or restructure at Thames Water will impact millions of people's bills (including thousands across Southwark), our environment, and our ability to prepare for the tremendous strain our water system is set to face due to climate change.

 

c.  That the Conservatives’ obsession with privatisation prioritises shareholders over people, resulting in little or no investment in services. Our residents are paying the price for this ideology.

 

d.  The model of privatisation is not the norm - 90% of the world runs water in public ownership, with clear benefits for customers, staff and environment.

 

e.  Many experts believe that Thames Water could be nationalised at minimal cost.

 

f.  The Water Special Measures Act 2025 has attempted to rescue the water sector through measures such as blocking bonuses for executives who are polluting waterways.

 

g.  Executives have circumnavigated this ban by renaming executive payouts. Regulation is failing. We must change the ownership model of Thames Water.

 

h.  The Water Industry Act 1991 grants the government authority to place water companies into Special Administration when they face financial distress or significantly breach their licence or statutory duties, rendering their continued operation inappropriate.

 

i.  Both of these conditions have been met by Thames Water, which should be put into special administration with immediate effect.

 

j.  Special Administration is a form of temporary public ownership. It presents the government with a choice. If they choose to re-privatise, taxpayers will bear the financial burden of Thames Water’s reckless financial decision making, while private, international shareholders reap the profits. Alternatively, they can choose to keep Thames Water in permanent public ownership, and provide billpayers with a water service that prioritises people and the environment.

 

k.  Any decisions made about the future of Thames Water should be conducted with full public scrutiny and democratic involvement. Protections for the workers, our environment and for residents’ bills must be honoured.

 

3.  This council resolves to:

 

a.  Write to Emma Reynolds as Secretary of State for Environment, Food, and Rural Affairs, and Rachel Reeves, Chancellor of the Exchequer, urging government to:

 

  i.  Use its powers under the Water Industry Act 1991 to place Thames Water into Special Administration, ensuring that workers’ current terms and conditions on pay and pensions are honoured and public interests are protected.

 

  ii.  Use the provisions of Special Administration to end the failed experiment of privatisation and bring Thames Water back into permanent public ownership.

 

  iii.  Enable accountability and transparency under a publicly owned Thames Water by changing its governance model so that local councils, workers and households are all represented on the Board.

 

b.  Ask that Cabinet communicate the text of this motion to:

 

  i.  Southwark Members of Parliament

 

  ii.  Secretary of State for Environment Food and Rural Affairs, Emma Reynolds

 

  iii.  Rachel Reeves, Chancellor of the Exchequer

 

  iv.  CEO of Thames Water, Chris Weston.