Councillor Wade proposed her submitted motion, accepting the submitted amendment proposed by Councillor Sinclair.

Councillor Landell Mills seconded the amended motion.

After debate and on being put to the vote, the motion as amended was declared carried.

Council resolved to agree the following motion:

This Council welcomes the work done by the Board member and City Council officers in consulting with the boating community, riparian owners, the Canal and River Trust and others on the draft waterways PSPO.  This Council notes that on 6 April the CEB approved the following recommendations which were supported by the Scrutiny Committee.

These were as follows:

1. Not to progress the proposal for a Public Spaces Protection Order for the generality of the waterways of Oxford;

2. Commission officers to develop localised solutions to public safety concerns for four identified priority areas;

3. Commission officers to further develop policy proposals that will address public safety and antisocial behaviour problems and improve public enjoyment of the city’s waterways resources.

This Council will now continue to develop the solutions on the identified areas with local stakeholders and particularly welcomes the investment and commitment to improving the city’s waterways. This Council now asks the Board member to request officers to continue working with the Canal and River Trust to explore a range of possible measures, which could, if practical, include the following:

a)     a sanitary facility on the Thames in Oxford - currently there is no disposal point for sewage between Abingdon and Eynsham (there is one on the canal at St Edward's but this is difficult to reach from the Thames). The disposal point could also include a waste disposal facility to save rubbish piling up.

b)     a caretaker boater with a boat moored at a city site, to manage over-staying, inappropriate behaviour etc. The City Council would provide a free mooring in Oxford (worth perhaps £300 – £500 p.m.) with the boater performing caretaking duties in exchange, initially perhaps 12 hours p.w. This proposal would involve no cost to the Council beyond the use of a mooring.