Political row breaks out at council budget meeting over bid for ‘City of Sanctuary' referendum

A political row broke out at a major council meeting over proposals from opposition councillors to hold a referendum on Sunderland’s ‘City of Sanctuary’ status.

Sunderland City Council agreed to become a City of Sanctuary at a meeting back in 2022, which set out a commitment to create a “welcoming place of safety for all”, including those fleeing violence or persecution.

The initiative is linked to a charity which has created a network of support for refugees and others needing help, with access to resources, expert support, collaboration opportunities and meetings.

With the support of its city council and community organisations, Sheffield became the UK’s first City of Sanctuary and a number of other local authorities have joined since, including Sunderland, as the movement continues to grow.

At Sunderland City Council’s annual budget meeting on February 28, 2024, at City Hall, the initiative was brought into the spotlight as part of the Conservative Group’s alternative budget.

The Conservative budget amendment, which included a range of proposals to both reduce and re-divert council funding for 2024/25, proposed £380,000 for a ‘city-wide referendum’.

In a speech by Conservative councillor Michael Hartnack, it was revealed that the Conservative Group wanted to fund a referendum on whether Sunderland should remain a City of Sanctuary.

However, the meeting was stalled after protests from councillors and concerns the debate could create tensions in the city.

The proposal sparked criticism from both Labour and Liberal Democrat councillors and eventually, an intervention by the council’s chief executive Patrick Melia and Mayor of Sunderland, councillor Dorothy Trueman.

This followed comments from Liberal Democrat councillor, Niall Hodson, about whether the Conservative budget proposal was potentially “vexatious”, “offensive” and “improper”, as well as concerns about it clashing with the Equality Act (2010).

Cllr Hodson told the meeting: “You will find that, almost without exception, anybody who is a seeker of sanctuary meets at least one of those [protected characteristics under the Equality Act], if not several.

“We had no idea what we were voting on until we were sat here, but I’m so concerned about what councillors are being asked to vote on in this meeting, that I would like to ask that the Conservative amendment is rejected.

“The chief executive I believe has the right to do that under the council procedure rules”.

Following discussions between the chief executive and Mayor of Sunderland, it was announced that the Conservative referendum proposal would be “taken out”, with the remaining Conservative budget proposals being put to the vote.

Cllr Hartnack, who described the referendum bid as “quite controversial” when introducing it earlier in the meeting, said he was a “proud and compassionate Conservative” and “welcomed the concept of diversity”.

However, the councillor said the electorate were telling Conservative councillors that Sunderland’s City of Sanctuary status “spoke on behalf of them, without consulting them”.

The councillor added there were concerns about “the extent to which Sunderland is playing a major role in facilitating the acceptance of asylum seekers at a rate significantly higher than our neighbours in Durham”.

Cllr Hartnack added: “The Conservative Group firmly believe that it is now time for the people to have their say through a referendum which we have costed at £380,000”.

Cllr Hartnack’s speech was cut short following shouting from other councillors across the council chamber, with the Mayor of Sunderland repeatedly telling Cllr Hartnack to “sit down”.

The councillor’s full written speech added Sunderland City Council’s approach to dealing with questions about immigration should be to offer “facts and data”, rather than making accusations of people being “unwelcoming”.

During the council meeting, there was also criticism around the way the budget proposal had been presented to council, and the information around the referendum.

Councillor Antony Mullen, leader of the council’s Conservative Group, said the budget proposal’s narrative did not specify what the referendum was on, but that Conservatives would use it for the City of Sanctuary.

Senior Labour councillors also made reference to a post on the Sunderland Conservatives Facebook page, which was published as the council budget meeting was still taking place.

This included a picture with the text “a public referendum on if Sunderland should be a Sanctuary City”.

Councillor Claire Rowntree, deputy leader of Sunderland City Council, said the social media post was “misleading” as a ‘Sanctuary City’ was a different status entirely.

Councillor Graeme Miller, leader of Sunderland City Council, added the social media post was “inflammatory” and “risked making residents fearful”.

At the end of the budget meeting, Cllr Miller added he would be raising a standards complaint against the entire Conservative Group.

Cllr Miller said: “Councillors here are here to represent the residents of this city and to give them what they need, the best possible way of spending their money effectively and delivering efficient services.

“That’s all that should drive us in this chamber at a budget council, we can disagree about the odd thing.

“But I’m sick to death now of the majority party in opposition and their disgraceful behaviour hiding under the banner of free speech”.

Sunderland City Council agreed unanimously to approve Labour’s City of Sanctuary motion back in June, 2022, with many councillors reflecting on those impacted by the conflict in Ukraine at the time.

The full council decision saw support from the council’s majority Labour Group and opposition Conservative and Liberal Democrats.

Sunderland Labour, in a statement released after this week’s budget meeting, stressed that the Conservative Government decides “how many people come and live here”.

The statement added City of Sanctuary “simply means that we will ensure our city is welcoming to those who do come here”.

Cllr Hartnack, speaking after Wednesday’s council meeting, claimed the way the meeting unfolded was “anti-democratic” and that there was still a “public interest case” for a referendum on the matter.

Since the council budget meeting, the social media post previously complained of appears to have been changed, with a picture displaying text calling for a public referendum related to City of Sanctuary, rather than a Sanctuary City.