Agenda item
TO RECEIVE QUESTIONS FROM MEMBERS OF THE COUNCIL
(Maximum of 30 minutes allowed)
The questions which have been received from Members of the Council are set out in agenda item 7.
Decision:
7.1 Question from Councillor Shiria Khatun to the Lead Member for Regeneration, Localisation and Community Partnerships, Councillor Ohid Ahmed re: the Council’s participatory budget process.
7.2 Question from Councillor Tim Archer to the Lead Member for Housing and Development, Councillor Marc Francis re: the current performance of Tower Hamlets Homes and RSLs in managing voids.
7.3 Question from Councillor Abjol Miah to the Lead Member for Cleaner, Safer, Greener, Councillor Abdal Ullah re: policy and enforcement strategy with regard to businesses in Brick Lane and the adjacent area.
7.4 Question from Councillor Tim O’Flaherty to the Lead Member for Cleaner, Safer, Greener, Councillor Abdal Ullah re: safety of residents in Bethnal Green.
7.5 Question from Councillor Rajib Ahmed to the Lead Member for Children’s Services, Councillor Clair Hawkins re: looked-after children.
7.6 Question from Councillor Rupert Eckhardt to the Lead Member for Children’s Services, Councillor Clair Hawkins re: fast food outlets in the vicinity of schools.
The above questions, and oral supplementary questions where put, were responded to by the relevant Lead Members.
Due to lack of time, questions 7 – 24 were not put. Written responses will be forwarded to the questioners.
(Action by: John S. Williams, Service Head, Democratic Services)
Minutes:
7.1 Question from Councillor Shiria Khatun to the Lead Member for Regeneration, Localisation and Community Partnerships, Councillor Ohid Ahmed
Can the Lead Member please tell us how many people took part in the Council’s participatory budget process?
Response of the Lead Member:
Below are a number of tables with the initial breakdown from all the events combined. Further detail is available upon request.
It should be noted that many of the people we registered did not provide equalities information either because they did not want to or because they registered themselves via e-mail or through an organisation. Despite our best efforts this makes some of the information incomplete.
Attendees: 815
Pre-registered: 540
Non pre-registered: 275
Note: A total of over 1,200 people registered to attend… What is captured above is those who both registered and attended.
Note 2: Some people who attended left before the voting. This was especially apparent at the event in LAP 2.
Per LAP
LAP 1 |
91 |
LAP 2 |
105 |
LAP 3 |
95 |
LAP 4 |
100 |
LAP 5 |
83 |
LAP 6 |
99 |
LAP 7 |
137 |
LAP 8 |
105 |
Ethnicity
Argentinian |
1 |
Asian Bangladeshi |
171 |
Asian Pakistani |
2 |
Asian Vietnamese |
1 |
Black Carribeean |
1 |
Somali |
15 |
White European |
8 |
Irish |
5 |
British White |
70 |
North African |
2 |
Other |
2 |
No Comment |
66 |
No response/not asked |
470 |
Religion
Agnostic |
2 |
Atheist |
2 |
Buddhist |
2 |
Christian |
57 |
Jewish |
3 |
Muslim |
187 |
None |
21 |
Prefer not to say |
43 |
Other |
3 |
No response/not asked |
495 |
Gender
Female |
134 |
Male |
206 |
No reponse/not asked |
475 |
Sexuality
Bisexual |
3 |
Gay man/woman |
6 |
Heterosexual |
257 |
Prefer not to say |
64 |
Disabled?
Disabled |
19 |
Not Disabled |
227 |
Prefer not to say |
22 |
No response/not asked |
547 |
Age
12-19 |
84 |
20-25 |
26 |
26-34 |
58 |
35-43 |
61 |
44-52 |
46 |
53-59 |
22 |
60-64 |
13 |
65+ |
36 |
No response/Not asked |
469 |
At this point, Councillor Tim Archer under Rule 15.13 made a personal explanation about attendance at his LAP meeting.
Summary of supplementary question from Councillor Shiria Khatun:
I am glad that Councillor Ahmed has pointed out that LAP 7 had the highest number of people that attended the finance session. Sometimes LAP meetings lack attendance by young people and women. Could he tell me how many young people and women attended this session?
Summary of Lead Members’ response:
Overall at least 171 Bengali residents attended the sessions along with 70 white British residents and 75 Somalians. I do not have the full figures with me for the LAP 7 session or how many young people and women attended but I will provide these.
7.2 Question from Councillor Tim Archer to the Lead Member for Housing and Development, Councillor Marc Francis
Can the Lead Member provide details of the current performance of Tower Hamlets Homes and the RSLs in plural in the Borough at managing void periods?
Response of the Lead Member:
Void periods are measured through internal performance indicators such as BVPI 68 - Average time taken to re-let property.
This forms part of Tower Hamlets Homes (THH) monthly PI report to the council.
A table sent to the Member shows the current target and direction of travel.
THH have not met their target, reporting some disruption brought about by their going live mid 2008, July results were 44.06 days and August 40.36 days.
There was also a further lengthy period in January 2009 40.45 days.
However, THH have introduced a new void management process that is already showing improvement in the service.
The figure in February was 20 days and that in March was 23 days.
Clearly, the direction of travel is positive.
Across the year, the average was around 32 days against a target of 28 days.
I am confident that THH will meet its target on Void turnarounds for 2009/10.
At the moment, local RSLs generally perform better than THH on Void turnarounds.
In my written response to this question I will table a full breakdown of RSL performance against this indicator in the past 12 months.
But for information, Tower Hamlets Community Housing, East End Homes, Poplar HARCA and Swan Housing all tend to turn around voids within three weeks.
We pay tribute to those organisations on this success in this respect and recognise that this is as a result of both their strong leadership and a culture of consistent and effective performance management - something that THH is now beginning to emulate.
Summary of supplementary question from Councillor Tim Archer:
Can I draw the Lead Member’s attention to a 3 bedroom family property under East End Homes that has been vacant since 2006. There are many more examples. Does the Lead Member consider that this is evidence of success?
Summary of Lead Members’ reply:
If this had been drawn to my attention before this evening, East End Homes could have been contacted and asked about the case. Of more general concern is the fact that the Mayor of London is sitting on hundreds of millions of pounds of funding that should be released to Tower Hamlets and other boroughs for social housing.
Councillor Tim Archer, under Rule 15.13, gave a personal explanation about the vacant properties and the action he had taken.
7.3 Question from Councillor Abjol Miah to the Lead Member for Cleaner, Safer, Greener, Councillor Abdal Ullah
Would the Lead Member confirm that there has been a change of policy and enforcement strategy with regard to businesses operating in Brick Lane and the area adjacent to Brick Lane on the Bethnal Green Road, and would he confirm what these changes involve and would he agree with me that the Brick Lane area is a vibrant and economically vital part of Tower Hamlets and that the attempts to shut businesses earlier than they have been licensed to open, under planning laws, is likely to have a disastrous effect on businesses and may lead to closures and would he agree that the decision to require restaurants, bars and pubs to remove street furniture either completely or unless they pay exorbitant charges is again adversely affecting the atmosphere and business prospects in the area and would he agree that, although residents concerns must be taken into account, residents moving into Brick Lane and its immediate vicinity ought to be made aware that this area has a vibrant late night-life and would he also agree with me that it is a matter of concern that council officers, apparently seeking to clamp down on technical breaches of planning law, etc, have taken what business people in the area regard as an overly aggressive attitude that has caused considerable anger in the business community?
Response of the Lead Member:
The reason it has been necessary to take planning enforcement action is because a number of businesses within the Brick Lane and Bethnal Green Road area are in breach of their planning permissions and in particular in relation to conditions concerning their operating hours. In order to stay within the constraints of their planning permission, businesses need to adhere to the conditions set out in their permission.
1. Planning and Enforcement Policies in Brick Lane
I can confirm that there have been no changes to the Council’s Planning and Enforcement policies in this area. The Council has set planning policies regarding operating hours of bars and restaurants in Brick Lane. These policies are in place to safeguard resident’s amenity. I note in particular the Council’s Supplementary Planning Guidance (SPG) on Brick Lane Restaurant and Retail uses. One of the principle objectives of the SPG is to achieve a balance between protecting local residents from noise and disturbance from restaurants and associated uses, whilst encouraging regeneration.
The Council planning policy does not permit the bars and restaurant on Brick Lane to open beyond 1:00am as the area is of a mixed use with a large adjacent residential population. Night time activities need to be balanced with the needs of residents to have a period of piece and quiet and hence the 1:00am restriction. The Council has received several complaints going back a number of years from residents in the Brick Lane area regarding noise and disturbance, and this is part of a concerted effort to ensure that many of the bars and restaurants operate within their approved hours. The Council has taken enforcement action as a result of these complaints against a number of businesses within Brick Lane.
We accept that Brick Lane performs an important function in supporting a thriving night time economy. However, this should not be at the expense of the local residents’ right to reasonable living conditions. The breaches of opening hours are serious, and are more than just “technical breaches”, as unregulated late night uses have a significant detrimental impact on the quality of life of the local residents. There has to be a balance struck between the needs of residents who reasonably expect a level of “quiet” late into the evening and businesses operating late into the night. Many of the residents are long standing and have not moved into the area. Also, failure to take action recently where such action is a statutory duty would leave the Council exposed to an Ombudsman complaint and possible legal action. The Council's position on this has been supported by the Secretary of State on a number of appeals in and around the Brick Lane area against the Council's decision to refuse later opening hours.
2. Street Furniture
In order for businesses to place furniture on the public highway they are required by law to apply for street licensing and planning permission. Charges for street licensing and planning permission are in accordance with neighbouring boroughs and national legislation.
3. Council Officers
I would like to stress that the Council’s Enforcement Officers adhere to Tower Hamlets Council’s customer service promises and always act in a professional and courteous manner at all times. We have recently improved our enforcement team growing it by 50% and are now able to tackle problem areas such as illegal hoardings and unauthorised clubs. This is beginning to have an effect on the ground in ensuring that planning decisions are adhered to and this is considered to be a proactive approach rather than an “aggressive” stance.
Summary of supplementary question from Councillor Abjol Miah:
Would you agree with me that the local business representatives are very upset with this and would you come down to Brick Lane and provide the information you have just given to them face to face?
Summary of Lead Members’ response:
I regularly visit Brick Lane and know the area well. The Council has taken many measures to help local businesses including introducing free parking at Brick Lane to assist shop owners and market traders with attracting custom.
7.4 Question from Councillor Tim O’Flaherty to the Lead Member for
Cleaner, Safer, Greener, Councillor
Abdal Ullah
Can the Lead Member confirm that Bethnal Green is a safe place to walk, after the incident involving a Councillor in Derbyshire St, because Elected Members have the obligation of representing Ward matters whenever they occur, regardless of the time of day?
Response of the Lead
Member:
As Lead Member for Cleaner Safer Greener I would like to express my sincere regret over this appalling incident. I visited the member the next day and Councillor Eaton had made contact with me to ask that I did all that I could. I understand that the police are currently investigating this case and therefore they cannot divulge any details of the investigation at this time.
To ensure the safety of all people walking through Bethnal Green the local SNT have increased their patrols of the area and the CCTV control centre are vigilantly monitoring the area through the local cameras. The community safety services are keeping close contact with the police throughout the investigation and are endeavouring to assist with the identification of the perpetrators to bring them to justice.
Summary of supplementary question from Councillor Tim O’Flaherty:
Bethnal Green is not the only place where people do not feel safe. Residents do not believe what the Lead Member has said about reducing crime in the borough as they do not feel safe in their homes and on the street. What actions have you taken on the high turnover of Safer Neighbourhood Officers in Bethnal Green?
Summary of Lead Members’ response:
Enhanced safety and the confidence of local residents in this regard is a key priority for the Council. Indeed, we have secured twenty new police officers to address these issues. Figures released yesterday showed an 18% reduction in London crime overall with 17% of this from within Tower Hamlets. The Council will however not become complacent and more will be done such as THEOs and extended CCTV and wifi. I will be happy to show Members where the new cameras will be located.
7.5 Question from Councillor Rajib Ahmed to the Lead Member for Children’s Services, Councillor Clair Hawkins
Could the Lead Member provide us with figures that show how much it would cost to send looked-after children to boarding school rather than having the Council care for them?
Response
In arranging placements and schooling for our looked-after children their individual needs must come first. Whenever possible, children are placed with families and in schools within the borough. Where however there is a need for a specialist school placement fees can range from approximately £90,000 to £200,000 a year depending on the needs of the child. The placements are all carefully considered to ensure the needs of the children, which can be extremely complex, are met and are agreed following presentation to the Joint Commissioning Panel, which is made up from representatives from, Children's Social Care, Special Educational Needs (SEN) section, Children Adolescent Mental Health Service (CAMHS), the Primary Care Trust (PCT) and child psychology service.
No supplementary question was asked.
7.6 Question from Councillor Rupert Eckhardt to the Lead Member for Children’s Services, Councillor Clair Hawkins
In light of the recent planning meeting to allow a fried chicken outlet to be set up within 500m of 6 schools, a mixture of primary and secondary, can the Lead Member clarify the Council position on healthy eating and show how this is being translated into policies that are being implemented to improve the health of children of the Borough?
Response of the Lead Member:
Planning has a limited control in restricting particular types of hot foodtake-way (A5) uses in any particular location. However, there are a number of controls currently in place, such as protecting amenity and limiting nuisance. These controls ensure that these types of uses limit the impact on the wider environment.
In addition there are a number of other initiatives in place to improve the health of children in the borough. These include:
1) promoting health eating for children through a comprehensive education programme lead by Children’s Services;
The Health through Education team work with schools in the authority to address issues of school policy and practice around the promotion of healthy eating and physical activity amongst children and young people. All schools are involved in the Healthy Schools programme, which includes Healthy Eating and Physical Activity as one of its four strands, and 72% (62) of our schools have achieved National Healthy School Status (NHSS). A further 5 schools will be accredited for their work in this area within this next month leaving us well placed to exceed the national target of 75% (69) of schools with NHSS by December 2009.
To support schools with this work, the Health through Education team is currently drafting local authority guidance on both Healthy Eating and Physical Activity which is due to be launched by July 2009. The guidance will cover school policy issues as well as practical help with resources and best practice ideas.
Schools also access specialist children’s public health support from the Community Dietitian team within Barts and the London NHS Trust.
Extended Services work closely with the Primary Care Trust on the promotion of healthy eating through the Healthy Weight Healthy Lives strategy. Through this partnership 35 schools have received funding and advisory support to extend and quality assure breakfast club and out of school hour learning provision which promotes healthy eating and physical activity. To date in the current school year some 1288 children and young people and 53 parents and carers have benefited from this additional provision. Schools have also been encouraged to actively involve their children and young people in the promotion of healthy eating within their school community through student-led projects. Through this scheme, pupils from 24 schools will be championing a range of projects, from healthy tuck shops to a photography/sculpture project utilising fruits and vegetable.
2) considering possible restrictions on this type of activity within within Council owned premises in proximity to schools.
3) Tackling childhood obesity is one of the priorities in our Local Area Agreement and new three year Children and Young People’s Plan. We have also attracted significant additional funding to implement our ‘Healthy Borough’ programme with the PCT. The additional government funding of £4.68 million is matched by local funding of over £5 million for the period December 2008 to March 2011.
The ‘Healthy Borough’ programme includes actions to improve healthy eating amongst our children, young people and families such as:
· Encouraging fast-food outlets to offer healthier choices through a Food for Health Award scheme
· Improving education and information for children and their families on healthy eating through schools, children’s centres and parenting programmes
· Working with schools and pupils to increase the take up of school meals
· Exploring what regulatory levers are available that could be used to limit locations at which fast food outlets can open
· Expanding and building on our targeted and specialist provision to support children and families with identified weight management needs, including a new early intervention service for families where one or both parents is overweight or obese
· Increased opportunities for children, young people and their families for regular physical activity through Healthy Schools and community initiatives.
Summary of supplementary question from Councillor Ruper Eckhardt:
Will the Council continue to approve fast food outlets despite having the fifth highest obesity levels among reception class children in London?
Summary of Lead Members’ response:
The Council will continue to use its planning powers to the benefit of local people and the environment but a much wider range of levers are available, and will be used, to address this priority issue as I have described.
In accordance with Rule 12.10 (expiry of time limit), questions 7 – 24 were not put. Written responses would be forwarded to the questioners.
Supporting documents: