Agenda item
TO RECEIVE QUESTIONS FROM MEMBERS OF THE COUNCIL
(Maximum of 30 minutes allowed)
The questions which have been received are set out in agenda item 7.
Decision:
7.1 Question from Councillor Ann Jackson to the Lead Member for Housing and Development, Councillor Mark Francis, re: the number of social rented homes built in Tower Hamlets in 2007/08.
7.2 Question from Councillor Peter Golds to the Lead Member for Culture and Leisure, Councillor Rofique Ahmed, re: the Borough’s archive collection.
7.3 Question from Councillor Abjol Miah to the Lead Member for Regeneration, Localisation and Community Partnerships, Councillor Ohid Ahmed, re: the London Olympic Games and Paralympic Games Act 2006 trademarks.
7.4 Question from Councillor Stephanie Eaton to the Lead Member for Housing and Development, Councillor Marc Francis, re: reducing levels of overcrowding in the Borough’s residential accommodation.
7.5 Question from Councillor Lutfa Begum to the Lead Member for Housing and Development, Councillor Marc Francis, re: leaseholder service charges.
7.6 Question from Councillor Fazlul Haque to the Lead Member for Children’s Services, Councillor Clair Hawkins, re: how the London Youth Offer will be invested to improve youth services in the Borough.
7.7 Question from Councillor Tim Archer to the Lead Member for Housing and Development, Councillor Marc Francis, re: the establishment of Tower Hamlets Homes.
The above questions, and oral supplementary questions where put, were responded to by the relevant lead members.
Due to the lack of time, questions 7.8 to 7.26 were not put. Written responses will be forwarded to the questioners.
(Action by John Williams, Service Head, Democratic Services)
Minutes:
Twenty six questions were submitted by Councillors for response by members of the Cabinet as listed in agenda item 7. The questions, together in each case with the response of the relevant Lead Member and a summary of any supplementary question and response, are set out below.
7.1 Question from Councillor Ann Jackson to the Lead Member for Housing and Development, Councillor Marc Francis:
How many social rented homes were built in Tower Hamlets in 2007/8?
Response of the Lead Member:
704 social rented homes were built in 2007/08, broken down as follows:
1 Bed |
2 Bed |
3 Bed |
4 Bed |
5 Bed |
6Bed |
Total |
179 |
310 |
163 |
36 |
10 |
6 |
704 |
Therefore 21% of these homes are family sized.
That is in addition to the 662 social rented homes built in 2006/07 and 667 built in 2005/06 – a total of over 2,000 social rented homes built here in just three years.
I can also say that last year, there were around 1,600 lettings to families and single people on the housing waiting list.
Summary of supplementary question from Cllr Jackson:
What plans does the Council have in place to ensure that our residents’ interest is considered and firmly promoted by Councillors and officers as their top priority for all housing, planning and development decisions, both in terms of social and key worker/affordable housing provision?
Summary of Lead Member’s response:
I agree that it is crucial that we build on this success and we intend to further increase the number of family-sized and other social rented homes built in future years up to 1,400. The new Community Plan, Local Development Framework and Housing Strategy provide the framework and focus to achieve this.
7.2 Question from Councillor Peter Golds to the Lead Member for Culture and Leisure, Councillor Rofique Ahmed:
Despite promises to the contrary over a long period, it would appear that the council is planning to split up and disperse the Borough's archive which is acknowledged as being one of the finest collections in the country. This proposal has been opposed by academics, residents, all political parties and east enders in general. Why is the Labour Council doing this in the face of such opposition?
Response of the Lead Member:
A Council decision has not yet been made in relation to the future of Bancroft library which houses the Local History Study Service and Archive. Members are scheduled to consider this matter in the near future alongside options for the future location of Local History Study service and archives. Public consultation relating to the Local History study and archive service took place in June 2007 and the views of more than 50 consultees will be considered by Members in determining the future location of these services.
Summary of supplementary question from Cllr Golds:
Can I have an assurance that the archives will be preserved on one site for future generations to use?
Summary of Lead Member’s response:
I can give an assurance that this will be the case.
7.3 Question from Councillor Abjol Miah to the Lead Member for Regeneration, Localisation and Community Partnerships, Councillor Ohid Ahmed:
The Olympic Delivery Authority have protected, under The London Olympic Games and
Paralympic Games Act 2006, the
following as trademarks:
· The Olympic symbol
· The Paralympic symbol
· The London 2012 Olympic and Paralympic emblems
· The words ‘London 2012’ and ‘2012’
· The words ‘Olympic’, ‘Olympiad’, ‘Olympian’
· The words ‘Paralympic’, ‘Paralympiad’, ‘Paralympian’ and their plurals and things very similar to them – e.g. ‘Paralympix’
· The Olympic motto: ‘Citius Altius Fortius’
· The Paralympic motto: ‘Spirit in Motion’
· The Team GB logo
· The Paralympics GB logo
· The British Olympic Association logo
· The British Paralympic Association logo
· London2012.com (and various derivatives)
This will preclude almost any commercial, social, charitable venture in Tower Hamlets utilising the Olympics to promote activities despite it taking place in our borough.
Can the Leader of the Council explain what provisions is the council seeking to negotiate with the ODA for exemptions to this punitive exercise in order to ensure our local community is able to secure the maximum benefit of hosting the games?
Response of the Lead Member:
The London Organising Committee of the Olympic Games (LOCOG) is a private company responsible for staging the 2012 Games and is funded privately through the exploitation of Marks relating to the 2012 Games including by the licensing of the Games Marks to sponsor organisations. This is why the Marks referred to in the question are protected.
However a non commercial brand has been proposed for use by all London Boroughs by LOCOG for certain specific non – commercial purposes which are given as
· Use on a single flag to be displayed outside the Licensee’s Town Hall (and or other locations with written consent)
· Use on the Licensee’s website home page and other pages dedicated to the 2012 Games
· Use on signs to be displayed at main entry points to the Borough
· Use on Licensee publications and newsletters relevant to the 2012 Games
The LOCOG licence proposal is that all London Boroughs are able to use the designation Host Borough. The 5 Host Boroughs have responded to the LOCOG proposal objecting to the lack of differentiation between the 5 East London Boroughs which accommodate most of the Olympic Venues and the Olympic Park and have made reference to the fundamental principle in the bid to host the Games that a London games would regenerate some of the most deprived areas of London i.e. East London and that part of the regeneration process is around raising the profile and perception of east London as a place in which to live and work. The use of the Olympic Games branding to support this aspirations is a key issue for the Boroughs.
In response the 5 Boroughs have suggested a hierarchy giving appropriate designation, greater 2012 image association and more extensive application rights for the 5 Boroughs i.e. placing the 5 Boroughs at the top of the hierarchy with most rights and benefits. The 5 Borough response was made in May and discussions are ongoing.
A non commercial 2012 Mark know as the Inspire Mark has been developed for community and not for profit organisations delivering projects and events genuinely inspired by the London 2012 Games. Non commercial organisations can apply to have their project or event (as opposed to the organisation) recognised through the Inspire programme. The Inspire mark will be awarded to specific projects and events which are:
· Genuinely inspired by the London 2012 Olympic and Paralympic Games.
· Well planned and managed.
· Fully funded from non-commercial sources and with no commercial association.
· Innovative and inspiring.
· Likely to achieve at least one of LOCOG’s key outcomes.
It is also worth noting that Tower Hamlets has also developed its own Games brand for which a Trade Mark application has been made which will help to engage and support the community in benefiting from the Olympic Games.
Summary of supplementary question from Cllr A. Miah:
The team of officers in Tower Hamlets is smaller than in other boroughs. Tower Hamlets does not currently give the appearance of a Host Borough. Is there evidence-based research showing evidence of a legacy?
Summary of Lead Member’s response:
Your points are noted. In fact Tower Hamlets is ahead of a number of other boroughs. Additional staff are being recruited and the benefits for Tower Hamlets will be visible very shortly.
7.4 Question from Councillor Stephanie Eaton to the Lead Member for Housing and Development, Councillor Marc Francis:
What does he plan to do to reduce the level of overcrowding in the Borough's residential accommodation?
Response of the Lead Member:
This Council is acutely conscious of the impact of overcrowding on the health, well-being and educational attainment of young children. We are determined to take the decisive action necessary to deal more with this problem.
Already more than 700 family sized social rented homes have been built in the past three years. But we must do more.
We are developing a new overcrowding strategy building on previous good practice and recent Government guidance on overcrowding reduction. This will be published in the autumn and will include both short-term proposals to free up more existing family-sized homes, more knockthroughs.
It will also details ambitious plans for a big increase in the construction of new social housing with three or more bedrooms.
Summary of supplementary question from Cllr Eaton:
You mentioned additional resources. As the budget is set and a three-year budget strategy in place, could we have details as to where this money will come from and whether this will result in cuts elsewhere?
Summary of Lead Members’ response:
There will be no cuts to front line services. Additional funding will be made available in this area and next week we will be bringing forward a short-term action plan which will include an incentive scheme, a knock-through programme and other elements. However, this is only the start of a substantial programme and the provision of more family sized and other social rented homes is a top priority for the Leader of the Council and myself.
7.5 Question from Councillor Lutfa Begum to the Lead Member for Housing and Development, Councillor Marc Francis:
Can the Leader please tell me the basis on which service charges for leaseholders are calculated? Is this based on geographical area, social housing, leaseholder etc? Some of the residents in social housing in Tower Hamlets are paying service charges of £600-700 per year. Why are Malting, Brewster, Barleycorn, Oast Court and Kiln Court paying services charges of £2000 per year? Most of these residents are leaseholders and pensioners who bought flats by the right to buy scheme. Presently they are having serious financial burdens placed on them. Can you explain why there is this huge difference in service charges in the same borough? Can you find out if they are being mistakenly over charged? If not, the service charges need to reduce to the level that other Tower Hamlets residents are paying.
Response of the Lead Member:
Service charges are required to be recovered from leaseholders in accordance with the terms of individual leases and in compliance with statutory obligations placed on social landlords. Service Charge Estimates are issued at the start of each financial year which sets out the costs we estimate will be incurred over the year ahead.
Actual costs are based on invoices received for externally supplied services (such as responsive maintenance to communal areas) and an apportionment of costs incurred for services supplied by Council staff (such as block cleaning). Actual costs may vary considerably between properties located in different blocks and estates depending on the services received. For example, blocks receiving a communal heating service have boiler fuel and maintenance costs while others have lift and door entry costs.
I hope Councillor Begum would agree with me that neither tenants nor Council Tax payers should be forced to pay more to cover costs of leaseholders?
Summary of supplementary question from Cllr Begum:
Many people including older residents are suffering hardship and I would ask you to carry out a proper investigation into the service charges and how they are calculated?
Summary of Lead Member’s reply:
The average charges in each of these blocks based on the 2006/07 actual charges are:
Malting £1,868
Brewster £1,156
Oast £1,383
Kiln £1,520
Barleycorn £ 938
Only Malting is close to the figure of £2,000 quoted in the question and a concierge charge of an average of £850 makes up a considerable proportion of this charge.
Brewster House also has a concierge charge - but as this is provided remotely from Malting the charge is lower at an average of £191.
Oast and Kiln have communal heating and therefore a significant element of their charge is made up of this (Oast has an average of £498 and Kiln has an average of £579).
In Barleycorn way, where there are no lifts, no concierge or communal heating, the charge is substantially lower.
If Cllr Begum wishes to discuss individual bills I am happy to do so.
7.6 Question from Councillor Fazlul Haque to the Lead Member for Children’s Services, Councillor Clair Hawkins:
How will the £3.8 million London Youth Offer granted to Tower Hamlets by the Labour Government and Ken Livingston be invested in improving youth services for the Borough’s young people?
Response of the Lead Member:
The £3.8 million is the total funding for two years (2008/09 and 2009/10) and includes existing funding within the Area Based Grant and other ring-fenced grants from the Department for Children, Schools and Families (DCSF) and the London Development Agency (LDA).
The funding is specifically for the continuation on two existing successful initiatives:
· The Positive Activities for Young People (PAYP) programme, aimed at 8-19-year-olds who are at risk of social exclusion and community crime; and
· The Youth Opportunity and Capital Funds (YOF/YCF), which puts buying power directly in the hands of young people by providing funding for them to run their own projects to improve things to do and places to go in their area.
A breakdown of the total figure across the two years, full objectives of these initiatives and the details of schemes to be funded will be included in a more detailed written response.
Under the PAYP programme, the funding will be for used for holiday activities, crime reduction and NEET reduction activities to address the key priorities agreed in our Strategic Children and Young People’s Plan to: “improve early intervention and preventative work pre-16, particularly for those identified as being at risk”, “extend engagement in constructive and law abiding activities” and “increase numbers in education, employment and training, including from specific targeted groups”.
In relation to the Youth Opportunity Fund, young people from our existing Youth Opportunity Fund grants panel have been involved in developing the ideas for this funding. The funding will be for used for young people-led grants (last year over 127 groups benefited from grants typically between £1500 and £5000, with over 5000 young people benefiting); Tower Hamlets Youth Partnership (the funding will enable the four Local Youth Partnerships to deliver three projects per year in each of our four localities); and the Young Mayor’s Project. These activities address the key priorities agreed in our Strategic Children and Young People’s Plan to “increase the participation of children and young people in decision making and community life” and “provide high quality places to go and things to do that meet the needs of young people”.
We expect that over two-thirds of all funding will go into activities delivered by or in partnership with the Third Sector.
Summary of supplementary question from Cllr F. Haque:
Weavers Ward has issues relating to young people. What additional money will be invested locally?
Summary of Lead Member’s response:
I am aware of the issues in Weavers Ward and can assure you that funding will be distributed so that every area of the borough has adequate provision. I would also hope that through the Youth Opportunity Fund, local young people will put forward their ideas for positive activities.
7.7 Question from Councillor Tim Archer to the Lead Member for Housing and Development, Councillor Marc Francis:
Can the lead member for housing outline what the delays have been in setting up Tower Hamlets Homes, why these have occurred and what he will do differently to ensure that the ALMO is actually successful?
Response of the Lead Member:
We anticipate that ministerial consent to the establishment of Tower Hamlets Homes will be received in the near future.
We have carried out the necessary preparation work so that we are ready to ‘go live’ as soon as possible after that consent is received.
In some important aspects there will be no difference for residents. The council will still own the stock, tenants will still be council tenants and leaseholders will still be council leaseholders. Residents’ rights and responsibilities will not change. The council will still be responsible for housing policy and for setting rents.
The work to establish the ALMO has already focused minds in Housing Services and among Board members much more closely on how to drive up performance management of this service and we will work closely in partnership with the Board to ensure that the Management Agreement is fulfilled and those improvements are delivered.
Five of the 15 seats on the Board are taken by residents - tenants and leaseholders. Having worked with them, I can assure all members that none of them are shy of challenging officers around the weaknesses that they perceive in the service.
However, Tower Hamlets Homes will bring some important benefits for residents:
· the opportunity to bring in millions of pounds of additional funding – money that would not otherwise be available
· an absolute focus on housing management and on improving the service to reach the two-star or ‘good’ standard from the Audit Commission in order to be eligible for that funding.
· new opportunities for residents to have a say on their housing service
Summary of supplementary question from Cllr Archer:
The ALMO should have been up and running by April 2008 and it is now nearly July. We have an example of a failing ALMO in a neighbouring borough. What will you do differently in this borough to make sure that the ALMO is successful?
Summary of Lead Member’s response:
The Council was originally working to a date that would have enabled ‘go live’ in April 2008, but that was always a little ambitious, particularly in terms of finalizing the detailed management agreement, the protocols, recruitment of a Senior Management Team and allowing the Board to bed in.
The Shadow Board, the Council and the Government agreed a more realistic date. This extra month or so has allowed all that work to be completed and will enable the Board and its Senior Management Team to focus on improving frontline services right from the outset. The leader of the Council and Majority Group Members are fully committed to the success of the ALMO.
In accordance with Rule 12.10 (expiry of time limit) questions 7.8 to 7.26 were not put. Written responses would be forwarded to the questioners.
Supporting documents: