Speaker of the Council, Councillor Mohammed Ahbab Hossain

in the Chair

The Speaker of the Council provided an update of his activities.

Since the last Council meeting, the Speaker had taken part in virtual events and meetings being held by community organisations and the Bangladesh High Commission. He looked forward to celebrating the anniversary of Bangladesh Independence later in the month in line with restrictions.  Due to the current situation, however,  he had mainly focused his efforts on encouraging the community to stay safe .

With great sadness, he also reflected on the loss of many residents, community leaders, people working to support the community including in our schools and loved ones due to COVID in Tower Hamlets.  Like many in the borough and fellow colleagues, he had personally lost close friends and relatives. The Speaker stated that the  Council’s thoughts and prayers were with their families and that he wished to pass on their deepest condolences.

At the request of the Speaker, the Council observed a minutes silence in memory of those who had been affected.

Apologies for absence were received on behalf of:

·       Councillor Bex White

Members are reminded to consider the categories of interest, identified in the Code of Conduct for Members to determine; whether they have an interest in any agenda item and any action they should take. For further details, see the attached note from the Monitoring Officer.

Members are also reminded to declare the nature of the interest at the earliest opportunity and the agenda item it relates to. Please note that ultimately it is the Members’ responsibility to identify any interests and also update their register of interests form as required by the Code.

If in doubt as to the nature of an interest, you are advised to seek advice prior to the meeting by contacting the Monitoring Officer or Democratic Services.

Regarding Motion 12.1 relating to Care Full Pay, the Speaker noted that a number of Members had recorded membership of the GMB Union in their register of interests. Whilst he noted this declaration, he had been advised that all Members may participate in the debate and vote on this item. (This motion was not debated due to lack of time)

Councillor Kahar Chowdhury declared a Non - Disclosable Pecuniary Interest (Non DPI) in Agenda item, 12.1 Motion regarding Care Full Pay. This was on the basis of his wife’s employment in the care sector (although she was not directly impacted by the motion content). He also declared a  Non DPI in Agenda Item 8, Opposition Motion for debate from the Conservative Group - regarding Houses in Multiple Occupation (HMO). The Councillor declared this on the basis that he might apply for a HMO licence in the future. He indicated that he would leave the meeting for the consideration of this items

Councillor Denise Jones declared a Non - DPI in the following agenda items. This was on the basis that she had a small business in the Borough:

·       Agenda Item 7, Administration Motion for debate - regarding the Government must protect businesses and livelihoods in Tower Hamlets

·       Agenda Item 12.2, Motion regarding Working from Home threat to the finances of Tower Hamlets

Councillor Ayas Miah declared a Non – DPI in Agenda Item 7, Administration Motion for debate - regarding the Government must protect businesses and livelihoods in Tower Hamlets. This was on the basis that his brother had a small business in the Borough. He also declared a Non - DPI in Agenda Item 8, Opposition Motion for Debate from the Conservative Group - regarding Houses in Multiple Occupation (HMO). The Councillor declared this on the basis that he intended to apply for an HMO licence.

Councillor Motin Uz - Zaman declared a Non – DPI in Agenda Item 7, Administration Motion for debate - regarding the Government must protect businesses and livelihoods in Tower Hamlets. This was on the basis that he had a business. He also declared a Non - DPI in Agenda Item 8, Opposition Motion for Debate from the Conservative Group - regarding Houses in Multiple Occupation (HMO). The Councillor declared this on the basis that he held an HMO licence.

Councillor Val Whitehead declared a Non – DPI interest in Agenda Item 7, Administration Motion for Debate - regarding the Government must protect businesses and livelihoods in Tower Hamlets. This was on the basis that she had a small business in the Borough. She indicated that would leave the meeting for the consideration of this item

The following Councillors also declared a Non - DPI interest in Agenda Item 8, Opposition Motion for Debate from the Conservative Group - regarding Houses in Multiple Occupation (HMO) as they or a partner held a HMO licence:

·       Councillor Asma Islam (partner held a HMO licence). Absent from the meeting for the voting on this item.  ...  view the full minutes text for item 2.

To confirm as a correct record of the proceedings the unrestricted minutes of the Ordinary Meeting of the Council held on 18^th November 2020.

RESOLVED:

1.        That the unrestricted minutes of the Meeting of the Council held on Wednesday 18th November 2020 be confirmed as a correct record and the Speaker be authorised to sign them accordingly.

The Speaker reported details of the revised Budget Council meeting date (to be moved to Thursday 4^th March 2021 (from 24^th February 2021), due to the impact of the pandemic and delays in the announcement of the Local Government Finance Settlement. The reserve Budget Council meeting would move to Wednesday 10^th March 2021 (from 4^th March 2021)

The Chief Executive provided an update on the following:

·       Once again, he recognised the work of Council staff during the pandemic  and thanked them for their continuing efforts in keeping the community safe.

·       He reported on the Council’s ongoing work with the NHS to roll out the vaccinee programme as effectively  as possible in Tower Hamlets.

·       Reported that the latest Investors in People assessment, involving staff engagement, took place at the end of last year. The Council had shown signs of significant improvement and gained a strong Silver Award.

·       Turning to staffing issues,  Steve Hill  had retired from the Council. He thanked Steve for all his contributions to the Council’s Benefits service. Christine McInnes, Divisional Director Education & Partnership was due to leave the Council next month and he wished her good luck in her new role at Kent County Council

·       Regarding the Senior Management Review, it was noted that the report (at agenda item 9) covered elements of the review and that progress was underway with recruiting to posts.

·       Turning to a very serious matter, he referred to today’s ruling by the Health and Safety Executive arising from the sad death of Alexia Walenkaki in Mile End park in July 2015.   The Council had received a fine of £330k. He passed on his apologies to the family for this terrible loss and expressed profound regret at the loss of Alexia in a park where she should have been safe.

The Council Procedure Rules provide for a maximum of four petitions to be discussed at an Ordinary Meeting of the Council.

The attached report presents the received petitions to be discussed. Should any additional petitions be received they will be listed to be noted but not discussed.

5.1 Petition regarding Improve the safety and amenity of the Thames Path at the gate to KEMP (King Edward Memorial Park)

Hazel Parker- Brown addressed the meeting on behalf of the petitioners, and responded to questions from Members. Councillor Sabina Akhtar, Cabinet Member for Culture, Arts and Brexit then responded to the petition.

She thanked the Petitioner for attending the meeting and stated that the Council noted the importance of improving the quality of streets and addressing concerns people raised. A number of different agencies managed the Thames Pathway, including the Free Trade Wharf Group and the Port of London Authority. However, the Council’s Project Manager worked closely with these agencies, responsible for the improvement programme.

She undertook to keep the Petitioners up to date on the discussions on the improvements plans, and the availability of Council funding for the works.

RESOLVED:

1.     That the petition be referred to the Corporate Director, Place, for a written response within 28 days.

5.2 Petition regarding Stop the trial of all the time bus lanes

Azad Miah addressed the meeting on behalf of the petitioners and responded to questions from Members. Mayor John Biggs then responded to the matters raised in the petition. The Mayor provided an update on Council’s approach to responding to the changes introduced by TfL, including the work to engage with residents and businesses to understand their concerns and ensure they were not disadvantaged. 

The Mayor expressed an intention to ensure that the Council continued to engage with the community and to make representations to TfL about the changes to ensure the Borough’s views were taken into account.

RESOLVED:

1.     That the petition be referred to the Corporate Director, Place for a written response within 28 days.

5.3 Petition regarding stop the structurally discriminating consultation process on Liveable street programme

Mohammad Rakibaddressed the meeting on behalf of the petitioners, and responded to questions from Members. The Council debated the issues and Mayor John Biggs responded to the matters raised in the Petition. He thanked the Petitioner for his contributions and passed on his best wishes to the representatives who were unable to attend the meeting.

The Mayor reflected on the key issues raised, from his point of view, during the debate regarding: the adequacy of the consultation exercise (in terms of contacting those with protected characteristics), equalities issues and the wider concerns with the proposals. Whilst he was of the view that the issues had already been taken into account, he expressed a commitment to further review these issues and to produce a further written response to the Petition.

During the debate, Councillor Rabina Khan moved and Councillor Andrew Wood seconded a motion (as set out below).

This Council notes:

1.       The petition presented to the full council by residents, which has gathered over 2,100 signatures stating that they have been discriminated against by the Liveable Streets’ Contractor, PCL Consult.

2.       The petition and the residents supporting the petition state that they have been directly and indirectly discriminated  ...  view the full minutes text for item 5.

The Council’s Constitution provides for the Elected Mayor to give a report at each Ordinary Council Meeting.

A maximum of six minutes is allowed for the Elected Mayor’s report, following which the Speaker of the Council will invite the leader of the opposition group to respond for up to two minutes should he so wish.

The Mayor presented his report to the Council. Following which:

•         Councillor Peter Golds, Leader of the Conservative Group, responded briefly to the Mayor’s report.

•         The Mayor responded briefly

To debate a Motion submitted by the Administration in accordance with Rules 11 and 13 of the Council’s Constitution. The debate will last for a maximum of 30 minutes.

Administration Motion for debate regarding the Government must protect businesses and livelihoods in Tower Hamlets

Mayor John Biggs moved and Councillor Motin Uz-Zaman seconded the motion as printed in the agenda.

Councillor Andrew Wood moved and Councillor Peter Golds seconded the following amendment to the motion to be debated.

Additions in Bold and Underlined.

Deletions struckthrough

This Council notes:

1.    A further national lockdown requires additional economic support across all sectors.

2.    The Office for Budget Responsibility does not expect GDP to recover to pre- pandemic levels until late2022.

3.    Universal Credit – a lifeline to around 43,000 26,788 people not in employment and 14,380 in employment for a total of 41,170 Tower Hamlets residents as at October 2020 people in the borough – is due to be cut by £20 inApril.  That the £20 per week increase in Universal Credit which started in March 2020 has not yet been confirmed beyond April 2021 with government Ministers apparently in dispute over whether to end or extend it.

4.    As a Council we’ve stepped up to support our businesses and distributed over a £194.3 million pounds tobusinesses from the government.

5.    The Council has received £62.5 million in additional grants from government in 2020/21 to help combat COVID. That the latest report to the Overview & Scrutiny Committee (calculated just before the 3^rd national lockdown started) that money received by the Council exceeds the cost of COVID by £3.6 million.

6.    That the unemployment rate for Tower Hamlets residents was 8.9% in November 2020 versus 3.4% in November 2019.

This Council believes:

·          That there is a potential catastrophic growth in unemployment and poverty for which we cannot prepare without adequate support from Government. To support families and individuals the Governmentmust:

1.    avoid cliff edges and last-minute announcements and consider extending the furlough scheme beyond the end of April, further extending the bans on evictions and repossessions, and mortgageholidays

2.    maintain the £20 per week uplift to Universal Credit which is currently due to be cut in April whose extension beyond April 2021 has not yet been confirmed and which is a real lifeline to those that receive it and the local businesses where it isspent.

3.    set out additional support for the self-employed and working parents impacted by the closure ofschools.

4.    give councils the resources to properly cover discretionary payments forthe

£500 isolation scheme, as boroughs like Tower Hamlets have seen a high uptake.

·          As well as the impact on families and individuals, the continuing impact on our economy and businesses is deeply concerning. London’s economy will continue to be severely impacted and is at risk from a ‘triple quadruple whammy’ of the pandemic, working from home, Brexit and the Government’s so called ‘levelling up’ agenda to shift resources to the more deprived working class areas of the north of England.

·          Small businesses are the lifeblood of our economy in TowerHamlets.

·          Inner London faces specific challenges of reduced footfall  ...  view the full minutes text for item 7.

To debate a Motion submitted by the Opposition Group in accordance with Rules 11 and 13 of the Council’s Constitution. The debate will last for a maximum of 30 minutes.

Opposition Motion for Debate From the Conservative group - regarding Houses in Multiple Occupation (HMO)

Councillor Peter Golds moved and Councillor Andrew Wood seconded the motion as printed in the agenda.

Councillor Sirajul Islam moved and Councillor Eve McQuillan seconded an amendment to the motion to be debated, as set out in below.

Added text underlined

Deleted text scored out

This council notes that for several decades a house or flat occupied by three or more unrelated persons who do not form a single household and share common amenities is defined as a House of Multiple Occupation (HMO), most recently under Sections 254, 257 and 258 of the Housing Act 2004. With five or more residents sharing common amenities, there is a requirement for the property to be licensed by the local authority.

The council further notes that there are approximately 9,000 such properties in Tower Hamlets with just half of these licensed as HMOs, with two licensing schemes known as Mandatory and Additional Licensing.

HMOs, where of good quality, make an important contribution to the private rented sector (PRS) by catering for different housing needs, including for some key workers, and by contributing to the overall provision of affordable or private rented stock. Meeting these housing needs are essential, not least as vital services including schools and hospitals are clear that the high housing costs in London make recruitment difficult.

While nationally many HMO tenants are students, in areas with high rents such as Tower Hamlets tenants are often young working people living in flatshares in order to meet high rent costs.

The council notes that from 1st January 2021 any person seeking an HMO licence in the borough will need to seek planning permission for this purpose, under what is known as an Article 4 Direction. This change was driven by a number of local authorities led by Newcastle upon Tyne City Council to protect the housing mix in particular areas of the City.

An Article 4 Direction allows local authorities to remove withdraw specified permitted development rights across a defined area. in some circumstances The use of an Article 4 Direction is that any proposed development that is within the scope of the Direction cannot be carried out under permitted development and will require a planning application to be submitted to the Council. This will enable the Council to consider the proposal in terms of its acceptability in planning terms.  Article 4 Directions and must be accompanied by a plan that clearly shows the area that is subject to the direction, and the extent of the area needs to be based upon evidence.

Elsewhere councils are aiming to manage HMOs better by improving residents’ standard of living and maintaining mixed communities. This is due to studies that show that a concentration of HMOs can be associated with the following issues:

• poor standards of accommodation

• loss of local character

• reduction in environmental quality

• increased noise complaints

• increased anti-social behaviour

• loss of single  ...  view the full minutes text for item 8.

To consider the report of the General Purposes Committee into implications in respect of the Statutory Chief Finance Officer and Monitoring Officer posts as a result of a Senior Leadership Review.

Note – this report contains exempt appendices.

The Council considered a report of the General Purposes Committee on the Senior Management Review. Council noted the exempt/restricted appendices.

RESOLVED:

1.       To note the report to the General Purposes Committee including the implications in respect of existing Statutory Officer posts and confirm no objection to the proposed dismissal of the existing statutory officer post holders on the grounds of redundancy.

Nil items.

The following questions and in each case supplementary questions were put (except where indicated) and were responded to by the Mayor or relevant Executive Member.

11.2 Question from Councillor Peter Golds

For years residents of Napier Avenue and Blasker Walk in Island Gardens Ward have provided extensive and detailed evidence of drug dealing and ASB taking place on rarely used resident’s parking bays on Blasker Walk. They have repeatedly asking for the bays to be removed and the pavement extended. Despite numerous meetings, site visits, letters, requests and questions, the situation continues.

Will this simple action be undertaken to improve the quality of life for these residents?

Response of Councillor Dan Tomlinson, Cabinet Member for Environment and Public Realm (Job Share) - Lead on Public Realm:

The Council had held a number of site visits to look into this issue with local Councillors. We hope to progress action to address the issues  in the weeks and months ahead subject to funding and collaboration with ward councillors.

Supplementary question from Councillor Peter Golds:

Last night local residents submitted further evidence showing issues with ASB and drug dealing in the street and the car park. In light of this, when does the Council intend to introduce the measures?

Councillor Dan Tomlinson’s response to supplementary question:

I can confirm that the measures should be introduced soon.

11.3 Question from Councillor Victoria Obaze

What actions have the Covid Ambassadors undertaken to maintain compliance with Covid restrictions?

Response of Councillor Rachel Blake , Deputy Mayor and Cabinet Member for Adults, Health and Wellbeing:

The role of the local volunteers involved: visiting residents, in areas with the highest Covid rates. Whilst they do not have an enforcement role, they can provide valuable feedback on non - compliance to the relevant Council team and they provide a vital role in providing information and keeping people safe.

No supplementary question was asked

11.4 Question from Councillor Andrew Wood:

How does the Council intend to respond to the findings of the Isle of Dogs and South Poplar Integrated Water Management Plan which said “The scale of growth planned for the Isle of Dogs and; South Poplar to 2041 poses a significant challenge for the delivery of water services infrastructure in the area. Much of the existing infrastructure is close to, or already at capacity; and flood risk and water quality are key concerns in many parts of the area.”?

Response of Councillor Eve McQuillan, Cabinet Member for Planning and Social Inclusion (Job Share) - Lead on Planning:

We are aware of the need to address this issue and challenges around this. In view of this, I am pleased to report on the development of the Integrated Water Management Plan for the area with the GLA, Thames Water and the Environment Agency. The plan sought to provide a targeted approach to ensure water needs are met and  recommended a range of other measures. We look forward to implementing the plan and were currently exploring how this can be delivered to  ...  view the full minutes text for item 11.

Time Limit

At this point in the meeting, the Speaker advised that the time limit for the meeting had been reached.  The Speaker therefore drew the meeting to a close under Council Procedure Rule 9.2 regarding the three hour time limit for the meeting.

No motions were considered due to lack of time.