Councillors Asma Begum and Sirajul Islam presented the reasons for call-in on behalf of the Call-in members and proposed alternative course of action as set out in the report.

The committee made the following comments and questions:

• Members stated concern that the appropriate Cabinet Member for the decision was not present to provide political context and understanding of the decision. Without the appropriate Cabinet Member, it undermines the call-in process. It should not be left to Senior Officers to justify political decisions of the council.
• Do you think the consultation allowed for residents to give a range of options on Liveable streets and allow for different mitigations? Cllr Begum felt that the two consultations, Bethnal Green and Brick Lane, could have been a real platform for the council to engage with residents in a meaningful way. But instead, the report states that neither consultation engaged with hard-to-reach residents and did not give residents much space to give feedback on the other options than the removal of the Liveable Streets program. Cllr Islam highlighted the consultation could have started a process of uniting the community around a better solution for Bethnal Green, but this was a waste of an opportunity.

Simon Baxter, Interim Director of Public Realm, Raj Mistry, Interim Corporate Director of Communities, Ashraf Ali, Service Head, Highways & Transportation (Interim) set out the context of the Cabinet Decision and reviewed the key elements of the decision.

The committee made the following comments and questions:

• Members asked if the call-in should still go ahead if the Cabinet Member for Environment and the Climate Emergency was not present to answer questions, or another member of Cabinet? The Chair confirmed that the call-in would still go ahead with officers in attendance.
• How did the council aim to reach hard to reach residents for the consultation? Officers confirmed that a highway scheme consultation would not usually go to this level of engagement, but the council needs to learn lessons on how to roll out consultations like this for highways are undertaken in future.
• Many headteachers within the borough have contacted the committee about concerns about the reversal of Liveable Streets and highlighting the safety of children. How will the council respond to these concerns and what does that say for stakeholder engagement during the consultation? Had the council previously engaged with schools when concerns were raised earlier in 2023? Officers confirmed the process around the statutory consultation that happens around any council highways scheme and the report contains the stakeholder responses, which was more transparent than any usual consultation undertaken by the council in a highways scheme. Feedback from schools was considered in the consultation.
• The report states that traffic has been moved off main roads into small residential roads, but where was the evidence of this? Officers confirmed they will respond in writing to the committee on this issue.
• It is concerning that Officers were instructed to spend time and resources devising a 3^rd option, a compromise between the other 2 options, only for the Mayor and Cabinet to decide to go with option 1, the removal of the scheme.
• This has proven to be a divisive issue across 12 months for residents around Bethnal green, can officers reflect on how this process has affected residents but also what can be done to build towards community cohesion? Officers confirmed that it was a challenging project and a lot of data analysis was done to understand the issue fully, more than any previous highways scheme. Officers are always looking for new sustainable transport initiatives. But more should have been done to reach out to the different communities.
• Do officers see anything in the alternatives suggested call-in that would be beneficial for residents?
• Why do officers feel that the evidence provided by stakeholders like the emergency services were not provided in full? Officers stated that the report had comprehensive evidence from these services. Further data is contained within the report appendix.

The Chair confirmed that a letter from Head teachers within the borough outlining concerns with the decision was circulated to the committee before the meeting.

After hearing from the Call-in Members and Officers, the Committee considered the reasons for the Call-in and discussed if the committee should take further action.

DECISION

The Committee RESOLVED that no further action would be taken on the call in.