House of Commons
As this motion is using historical data, we may not have the record of the original ordering, in which case signatories are listed alphabetically.
EDM #682A1
Tabled 19 January 2015
2014-15 Session
This is an amendment to an existing motion
Motion originally tabled by Mr Roger Godsiff on 13 January 2015
This is amendment number 1

Suggested Amendment

"leave out 'observes' in line 3 to end and add 'observes that Birmingham City Council's funding from central government has been cut heavily over the course of the current Government and faces further cuts whether Conservatives, Labour or Liberal Democrats are in power; further observes that the Council also faces severe financial problems as a result of the payments required to deal with equal pay; regrets the financial errors of government from 2005 to 2008 in exacerbating the difficulties in the public sector; believes that all parties should review the future of local government finance and ensure that other government spending in either ring-fenced departments or non-ring-fenced departments should be reviewed from a public benefit and value for money comparative basis; supports proposals to ensure that reductions in central support operate on the basis of equivalence in terms of spending power reduction; further supports the Government's efforts to increase the tax take by more effective tax collection; strongly supports the attempt to find alternative ways to keep the library open; and further believes that local libraries are also important facilities not to be ignored.'."

Original Motion Text

That this House notes with great concern the plans to severely cut the funding available to the Library of Birmingham, which would result in the loss of more than half of the library's staff and many of its services, including the loss of archive and research facilities; observes that Birmingham City Council's funding from central Government has been cut heavily over the course of the current Government, and that poorer cities such as Birmingham have received a disproportionately heavy share of spending cuts; condemns the decision to cut Birmingham's funding by an amount equivalent to £147 per household this year, compared to the national average of just £45; does not see why the citizens of Birmingham should have their library services destroyed in an attempt to cut a deficit that was caused by paying for the gambling debts of bankers, not by supporting essential cultural services for UK citizens; encourages the Government to take serious and concerted action to reclaim for the Exchequer the many billions of public funds which are currently lost to corporate tax avoidance; strongly supports the attempt to find alternate ways to keep the library open and maintain it as a centre of excellence, and wishes this campaign every success; believes that the whole of the UK would be the poorer without its world-class libraries, which play a vital role in education and research; and calls on the Government to urgently reconsider its ongoing slashing of local government funding.

Signatures (2)

The first 6 Members who have signed to support the motion are the sponsors. The primary sponsor is generally the person who tabled the motion and has responsibility for it. The date shown is when the Member signed the motion.
There are no withdrawn signatures for this amendment