Latest news with #SimitaKumar
Edinburgh Live
a day ago
- Business
- Edinburgh Live
Broadcasting of Edinburgh Council committees saved as cost-reduction bid struck back
Our community members are treated to special offers, promotions and adverts from us and our partners. You can check out at any time. More info The online broadcasting of Edinburgh Council meetings will remain unchanged after councillors said the costs required to keep webcasting three committees was worth it. City officers had asked councillors to approve ceasing broadcasting three council committees with low viewership numbers, in a bid to save around £6,000 per year. But councillors agreed that the sum was a 'small price to pay' for transparency, deciding at the Policy and Sustainability Committee on Tuesday to keep webcasting three meetings. Officers had suggested the webcasting of the Pentland Hills Regional Park Joint Committee, the Local Review Body and the Consultative Committee with Parents cease to be webcast. They said the low viewership of each – with all three together making up under 3% of the council's webcast views in the year to June 30 – made them not worth the cost. Edinburgh Council has webcast some meetings since 2012, but the covid lockdown saw almost all public meetings begin to be broadcast online. If approved, the reduction of webcasting would have returned the offering to the pre-pandemic level, with the addition of the Traffic Regulation Orders Sub-Committee and the Edinburgh City Region Joint Deal committee. Councillors also discussed whether some private meetings, and private portions of public meetings, should be recorded. Officers recommended that they not be recorded at all, in order to reduce legal risk, but also put forward options where they could be recorded via Microsoft Teams or the city's webcast system. They suggested that these recordings be deleted as soon as minutes of what was said in each meeting were agreed. Councillors agreed with officers that private council business should not be recorded on a 9-8 vote, with supporters citing security concerns. SNP councillor Kate Campbell said: 'Everyone is in agreement that £6,000 to maintain transparency is a small price to pay for democracy. 'Where I think maybe we don't have support, and maybe I'm making a plea to colleagues – we're happy for private business to be recorded through Teams, but we think it should be retained for two years. 'There are a number of reasons why we think that. There's just a lot of discussions we have on private business where they are nuanced and detailed discussions. 'Sometimes it comes to light much later that the focus of that discussion, or where that report was focused, councillors weren't given information they needed at the time. 'It can then result in decisions having been made much later where you can trace back to a committee that was [in private], and currently we're at a real disadvantage where we just don't have a record of that.' And SNP group leader councillor Simita Kumar remarked that there had been a situation where a decision had been made in private on unlicensed HMOs where councillors did not remember what had been said. Liberal Democrat group leader Edward Thornley said: 'I'm glad that we seem to have come to an agreement about public meetings. 'On the recording, and storing of private meetings – I don't think we've got enough assurance that this can be done fully securely.' The Conservative councillors in the committee agreed with the Liberal Democrat position. Green councillor Alex Staniforth said: 'While I understand some concerns around security, papers can be leaked, and have been leaked. Comments can be leaked, and have been leaked. 'Any one person in this room, were they being unscrupulous, could subtly record the discussion being held. I hope no-one would, but they could do it. 'And having Teams recording of those discussions is more advantageous than it is deleterious to our security. We must face the fact, this place is not leak-proof as it is. 'I don't think [recording the meetings] would make it leakier.' The SNP group also tried to get the committee to agree to begin recording the Pensions Committee, however, the committee did not agree this.
Edinburgh Reporter
a day ago
- Business
- Edinburgh Reporter
Webcasting of three Edinburgh Council meetings saved
The online broadcasting of Edinburgh Council meetings will remain unchanged after councillors said the costs required to keep webcasting three committees was worth it. City officers had asked councillors to approve ceasing broadcasting three council committees with low viewership numbers, in a bid to save around £6,000 per year. But councillors agreed that the sum was a 'small price to pay' for transparency, deciding at the Policy and Sustainability Committee on Tuesday to keep webcasting three meetings. Officers had suggested the webcasting of the Pentland Hills Regional Park Joint Committee, the Local Review Body and the Consultative Committee with Parents cease to be webcast. They said the low viewership of each – with all three together making up under 3% of the council's webcast views in the year to June 30 – made them not worth the cost. Edinburgh Council has webcast some meetings since 2012, but the covid lockdown saw almost all public meetings begin to be broadcast online. If approved, the reduction of webcasting would have returned the offering to the pre-pandemic level, with the addition of the Traffic Regulation Orders Sub-Committee and the Edinburgh City Region Joint Deal committee. Councillors also discussed whether some private meetings, and private portions of public meetings, should be recorded. Officers recommended that they not be recorded at all, in order to reduce legal risk, but also put forward options where they could be recorded via Microsoft Teams or the city's webcast system. They suggested that these recordings be deleted as soon as minutes of what was said in each meeting were agreed. Councillors agreed with officers that private council business should not be recorded on a 9-8 vote, with supporters citing security concerns. SNP councillor Kate Campbell said: 'Everyone is in agreement that £6,000 to maintain transparency is a small price to pay for democracy. 'Where I think maybe we don't have support, and maybe I'm making a plea to colleagues – we're happy for private business to be recorded through Teams, but we think it should be retained for two years. 'There are a number of reasons why we think that. There's just a lot of discussions we have on private business where they are nuanced and detailed discussions. 'Sometimes it comes to light much later that the focus of that discussion, or where that report was focused, councillors weren't given information they needed at the time. 'It can then result in decisions having been made much later where you can trace back to a committee that was [in private], and currently we're at a real disadvantage where we just don't have a record of that.' And SNP group leader councillor Simita Kumar remarked that there had been a situation where a decision had been made in private on unlicensed HMOs where councillors did not remember what had been said. Liberal Democrat group leader Edward Thornley said: 'I'm glad that we seem to have come to an agreement about public meetings. 'On the recording, and storing of private meetings – I don't think we've got enough assurance that this can be done fully securely.' The Conservative councillors in the committee agreed with the Liberal Democrat position. Green councillor Alex Staniforth said: 'While I understand some concerns around security, papers can be leaked, and have been leaked. Comments can be leaked, and have been leaked. 'Any one person in this room, were they being unscrupulous, could subtly record the discussion being held. I hope no-one would, but they could do it. 'And having Teams recordings of those discussions is more advantageous than it is deleterious to our security. We must face the fact, this place is not leak-proof as it is. 'I don't think [recording the meetings] would make it leakier.' The SNP group also tried to get the committee to agree to begin recording the Pensions Committee, however, the committee did not agree this. By Joseph Sullivan Local Democracy Reporter Like this: Like Related
Scotsman
11-08-2025
- Politics
- Scotsman
Simita Kumar: Stop scapegoating – migrants aren't the problem
Councillor Simita Kumar, SNP group leader Raise your hand if you're done with toxic politics and opportunistic blame games. Because I am. Sign up to our daily newsletter Sign up Thank you for signing up! Did you know with a Digital Subscription to Edinburgh News, you can get unlimited access to the website including our premium content, as well as benefiting from fewer ads, loyalty rewards and much more. Learn More Sorry, there seem to be some issues. Please try again later. Submitting... Yet as your resident migrant turned healthcare worker turned councillor, I am, once again, having to wade into the very toxicity that turns so many people off politics. And while I truly wish I didn't have to, I cannot allow Cllr Iain Whyte's latest article to go unchallenged. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad In his 8 August column in the Edinburgh Evening News, Cllr Whyte (Conservative goup leader in Edinburgh Council) astonishingly lays the blame for Edinburgh's housing crisis at the feet of migrants. Yes, he goes there. People crossing the English Channel in small boats make up a tiny fraction of total immigration (Picture: Ben Stansall/AFP via Getty Images) He even admits he doesn't 'have space' to explain it all, but still confidently asserts that immigrants make up a 'large part' of our homelessness problem. The absurdity of that statement is staggering. Cllr Whyte and I will never see eye to eye on policies. That's fine. But here's what's not: knowingly pushing harmful narratives that deflect from the truth. Because Cllr Whyte knows the real facts. He knows migrants are not the cause of our housing emergency. He knows migrants are integral to our communities, our culture, our NHS, the very backbone of our society. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad He knows that the fear of 'small boats' is a manufactured distraction. And he definitely knows that the real political failure in Edinburgh isn't a so-called 'left-wing council' — it's a right-wing alliance. Yes, it's the Tories who are propping up this Labour-led council. Their councillors are handsomely rewarded for doing so. Yet, when Cllr Whyte blames a 'eft-wing majority' for financial mismanagement, that's not just misleading, it's downright dishonest. The truth? The council's failings stem from political choices made by Labour, Tories,and Liberal Democrats working together. And for transparency, Cllr Whyte, remind us, which budget you supported? Ah yes, the Labour one. So, is this public blame game just a warm-up act for a Reform UK audition? Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad Let's not forget: it was the Tories under Thatcher who began selling off council houses, the architects of brutal austerity, who plunged millions into poverty, and rewarded the already- wealthy. And now? Labour seems to outdo the Conservatives at their own game. From abandoning WASPI women and punishing disabled people to failing on housing and energy. And what do they all have in common? Fear. Fear wins votes. They feed the public fear — of migrants, of 'small boats,' of the fabricated enemy 'stealing homes.' But here's what I ask of you: Please - don't buy into it. The Edinburgh and the Scotland I know is built on community, compassion and fairness. We don't need scapegoats. We need real leadership. We need vision, not vilification. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad Let's stop blaming people simply trying to survive. If you want to be angry about housing, be angry at the oligarchs, the bankers and landlords buying up entire streets, not the asylum seeker. This isn't about left or right anymore. It's about right and wrong.
Edinburgh Reporter
19-06-2025
- Politics
- Edinburgh Reporter
£1.7m Tour de France backlash
Edinburgh Councillors need to 'take back control' from officials, one has claimed, amid a row over calls to spend of £1.7 million of council reserves on the Tour de France. In a report published before Thursday's full council meeting, officers had asked councillors to sign off on £1.7 for the Tour de France, saying council political group leaders had agreed to it. However, at the full council meeting, several group leaders spoke out to say that they had not approved the spend, and that the last they'd heard of Tour de France planning was in October. One councillor said the move was 'unacceptable', while another admitted they did not yet know how the spend would benefit the city. The decision on approving the £1.7m Tour de France spend – and £2m in other reserve use for other issues – has now been pushed back to a committee meeting next week. Conservative group leader, councillor Iain Whyte, said: 'We were given some information. We were not given all the information. 'We agreed that officers should keep working on it, but I would have expected that to come to committee.' SNP group leader, Councillor Simita Kumar, expressed the same sentiment. The report for councillors said that they intended for the £1.7m spend to be replenished from income from the city's upcoming visitor levy. Former Liberal Democrat leader Kevin Lang shared the confusion of the other group leaders. But, he also clarified that, in October, officers had explained that the use of visitor levy money to backfill the £1.7m was intended to be extra income brought in by the event. It was announced in March that Edinburgh would host the start of the 2027 running of the men's Tour de France race. It will be the first time that the race visits the city, and with the women's race set to start somewhere else in the UK, the first time that both the men's and women's races started in the same country besides France. SNP councillor Kate Campbell said: 'There is very little explanation really of why we're making those allocations. 'Group leaders I've spoken to do not have recollection of making a decision on this. 'We've had no reports to councillors, no notes to committee, about the value we're getting from £1.7m for the Tour de France. 'It's a huge amount of money. We really don't know what the benefit to the city is.' Conservative councillor Phil Doggart said: 'Much as I have respect for my convener, and much as I respect the other conveners, can I just say that group leaders are not a decision making body. 'At the very least, this should have come to F&R last week. We could have discussed it. 'This is unacceptable. We are the council. So let's take back control of the council from the officers. We make decisions.' Councillors agreed with a motion put forward by the city's Labour administration, which saw the matter pushed back to the next meeting of the city's Finance and Resources Committee. By Joseph Sullivan Local Democracy Reporter Like this: Like Related
Scotsman
19-06-2025
- Politics
- Scotsman
Edinburgh Council's £1.7m Tour de France Spend Under Scrutiny
Edinburgh Councillors need to 'take back control' from officials, one has claimed, amid a row over calls to spend of £1.7 million of council reserves on the Tour de France. Sign up to our daily newsletter Sign up Thank you for signing up! Did you know with a Digital Subscription to Edinburgh News, you can get unlimited access to the website including our premium content, as well as benefiting from fewer ads, loyalty rewards and much more. Learn More Sorry, there seem to be some issues. Please try again later. Submitting... In a report published before Thursday's full council meeting, officers had asked councillors to sign off on £1.7 for the Tour de France, saying council political group leaders had agreed to it. However, at the full council meeting, several group leaders spoke out to say that they had not approved the spend, and that the last they'd heard of Tour de France planning was in October. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad One councillor said the move was 'unacceptable', while another admitted they did not yet know how the spend would benefit the city. The report for councillors said that they intended for the £1.7m spend to be replenished from income from the city's upcoming visitor levy. | AFP via Getty Images The decision on approving the £1.7m Tour de France spend – and £2m in other reserve use for other issues – has now been pushed back to a committee meeting next week. Conservative group leader, councillor Iain Whyte, said: 'We were given some information. We were not given all the information. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad 'We agreed that officers should keep working on it, but I would have expected that to come to committee.' SNP group leader, Councillor Simita Kumar, expressed the same sentiment. The report for councillors said that they intended for the £1.7m spend to be replenished from income from the city's upcoming visitor levy. Former Liberal Democrat leader Kevin Lang shared the confusion of the other group leaders. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad But, he also clarified that, in October, officers had explained that the use of visitor levy money to backfill the £1.7m was intended to be extra income brought in by the event. It was announced in March that Edinburgh would host the start of the 2027 running of the men's Tour de France race. It will be the first time that the race visits the city, and with the women's race set to start somewhere else in the UK, the first time that both the men's and women's races started in the same country besides France. SNP councillor Kate Campbell said: 'There is very little explanation really of why we're making those allocations. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad 'Group leaders I've spoken to do not have recollection of making a decision on this. 'We've had no reports to councillors, no notes to committee, about the value we're getting from £1.7m for the Tour de France. 'It's a huge amount of money. We really don't know what the benefit to the city is.' Conservative councillor Phil Doggart said: 'Much as I have respect for my convener, and much as I respect the other conveners, can I just say that group leaders are not a decision making body. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad 'At the very least, this should have come to F&R last week. We could have discussed it. 'This is unacceptable. We are the council. So let's take back control of the council from the officers. We make decisions.' Councillors agreed with a motion put forward by the city's Labour administration, which saw the matter pushed back to the next meeting of the city's Finance and Resources Committee. That meeting is set to take place on Tuesday, 24 June, and can be viewed here.
