Agenda item
TO RECEIVE WRITTEN QUESTIONS FROM MEMBERS OF THE COUNCIL
The questions which have been received from Councillors to be put at the meeting are set out in agenda item 8 attached. A maximum of 30 minutes is allowed for this agenda item.
The order of questions is as printed in the agenda item and provides for members of the majority and minority groups to put questions in turn. However as agreed by the Council on 27th October 2010, the Chair of Council has discretion, within the 30 minutes allocated for this item, to vary the printed order of questions in order to invite an ‘ungrouped’ Councillor to put his/her questions.
Decision:
8.1 Question from Councillor Carlo Gibbs to the Deputy Mayor, Councillor Ohid Ahmed, re: Tower Hamlets Enforcement Officers and the Whitechapel Drinking Control Zone
8.2 Question from Councillor Tim Archer to the Cabinet Member for Resources, Councillor Alibor Choudhury, re: the Council’s Senior Management Team and prudent and effective cost control
8.3 Question from Councillor Amy Whitelock to the Mayor, Lutfur Rahman, re: funding and eligibility criteria for Decent Homes funding
8.4 Question from Councillor Peter Golds to the Mayor, Lutfur Rahman, re: staffing proposals in the Mayor’s Office
8.5 Question from Councillor Rachael Saunders to the Mayor, Lutfur Rahman, re: the Mayor’s correspondence and meetings with the PCT
8.6 Question from Councillor Zara Davis to the Deputy Mayor, Councillor Ohid Ahmed, re: East End Life
8.7 Question from Councillor Anna Lynch to the Mayor, Lutfur Rahman, re: the costs of setting up the Mayor’s Office
Motion: Referral to Overview and Scrutiny Committee
At this point, Cllr Bill Turner moved and Councillor Tim Archer seconded that under Procedure Rule 14.1.4 the matters raised in Councillor Lynch’s question be referred to the Overview & Scrutiny Committee at their next meeting.
The motion was put to the vote and was agreed.
DECISION
That the matters raised in Councillor Lynch’s question be referred to the next meeting of the Overview and Scrutiny Committee.
(Action by: John S. Williams, Service Head, Democratic Services)
8.9 Question from Councillor Khales Uddin Ahmed to the Mayor, Lutfur Rahman, re: representation of local councillors on the board of Swan Housing Association. (No supplementary question was asked).
8.10 Question from Councillor Dr. Emma Jones to the Mayor, Lutfur Rahman, re: resources to deal with snow this winter
8.11 Question from Councillor Bill Turner to the Cabinet Member for Children’s Services, Councillor Oliur Rahman, re: Personal Care Contract for disabled children in the borough
The above questions and in each case (except where indicated) a supplementary question, were put and responded to by the Mayor or relevant Cabinet Member.
Question 8.8 was not put as the questioner was not present.
Questions 8.12 to 8.22 were not put as the time allowed for this agenda item had expired. Written responses will be provided to each question.
Motion: Referral to Overview and Scrutiny Committee
In response to a question from a Member, the Chief Executive confirmed that Members’ Enquiries are confidential communications between the Member raising an enquiry and the relevant Council directorate. In view of concerns expressed by some Councillors regarding a possible breach of this confidentiality, the Chief Executive undertook to look into the matters raised and report back to Councillors.
At this point, Cllr Peter Golds moved and Councillor Joshua Peck seconded under Procedure Rule 14.1.4 that following the Chief Executive’s report, the issue of confidentiality of Members’ Enquiries be referred to the Overview & Scrutiny Committee.
The motion was put to the vote and was agreed.
DECISION
That following the Chief Executive’s investigation and report on the matter, the issue of confidentiality of Members’ Enquiries be referred to the Overview and Scrutiny Committee.
(Action by: Kevan Collins, Chief Executive and John S. Williams, Service Head, Democratic Services)
Minutes:
8.1 Question from Councillor Carlo Gibbs
“Can the Deputy Mayor give me an update on the effectiveness of the Tower Hamlets Enforcement Officers since the pilot programme began, particularly with regard to their policing of the Drinking Control Zone in Whitechapel, and whether the Mayor has considered extending the control zone to cover the whole borough?”
Response of the Deputy Mayor, Councillor Ohid Ahmed:
As you will know, Community Safety is one of my top priorities and I take the security of residents very seriously. The Tower Hamlets Enforcement Officers (THEOs) were launched in November 2009 and have been in operation for about a year. They were originally accredited by the Metropolitan Police for a probationary period of 1 year and that has now been extended by a further 3 due to their performance. The Home Office has also singled out THEOs for praise in a recent case study.
With specific reference to Drinking Control Zones, there have been 768 alcohol seizures and 5 persistent problem drinkers have been issued with ASBOs. More importantly, the presence of THEOs has freed Police resources to deal with other problems.
The idea of extending Drinking Control Zones has been considered by previous administrations and feedback from officers indicates that persistent street drinkers are now aware of where they can stand without being able to be moved on with the existing legislation. I am more than happy to meet with Councillors to discuss the pros and cons of this approach.
Summary of supplementary question from Councillor Carlo Gibbs:
We disagree on the general effectiveness of the THEOs but they are effective in Drinking Control Zones. However, displacement occurs in the Whitechapel area and also as a result of neighbouring boroughs’ initiatives. Would the Deputy Mayor look carefully at extending the Drinking Control Zones and giving the THEOs more scope to tackle street drinkers?
Summary of the Deputy Mayor’s response:
I will be very happy to meet with you to discuss this issue. I am sure that the THEO service provides good value for money.
8.2 Question from Councillor Tim Archer
“Will the Lead Member for Resources outline what the council's Senior Management Team is doing in these times of austerity to lead by example when it comes to prudent spending and effective cost control?”
Response of the Cabinet Member, Resources, Councillor Alibor Choudhury
The Mayor intends to drive the savings process to protect frontline services. Corporate Management Team is completely focused on managing our savings agenda so that our key priorities of protecting service outcomes and protecting frontline service jobs are delivered through these testing weeks and months.
As I reported to Cabinet last week, Management team have focused their attention first on delivering savings within the management and administration functions of the Council itself. Over the next three years we will deliver £20 million of savings from reducing management layers in the council, deleting vacant posts, reducing our reliance agency staff and consolidating functions and removing duplication. Last week I also announced our intention to vacate Anchorage House in 2013. This will deliver a huge saving to Council but will require a significant change to the way in which our staff work including the most senior managers in the Council.
Corporate Management team recognise, however, that it is vital that we work hard with our workforce so that they are treated with fairness during this difficult time, that they are kept informed of developments and have the opportunity to contribute to the identification of saving and efficiencies. Maintaining the morale of our workforce is paramount. I'm pleased, therefore, to announce that not withstanding these turbulent times the Council, following a review and inspection in September this year retained its Investors in People status, and all key areas received improved feedback from when the council was inspected three years ago.
Summary of supplementary question from Councillor Tim Archer:
Could you confirm that you are aware of the costs of the recent Senior Management Conference? Do you feel that the cost of £16k for a small group of managers to go to a Canary Wharf conference centre is a good use of our money at this time? That is a school dinner lady or a classroom assistant’s salary.
Summary of the Councillor Alibor Choudhury’s response:
200 top managers from Tower Hamlets attended the conference to speak about how we can work better together in this time of uncertainty that has been created by your party’s Government and to make sure this Council functions most effectively. If you feel you have genuine evidence of waste I will look into it but I support our officers and the work they do.
8.3 Question from Councillor Amy Whitelock
“What assessment has the Lead Member made of the likely impact of the Conservative-Liberal Democrat Government's significant changes to the available funding and eligibility criteria for Decent Homes funding on regenerating housing stock in the borough, and how does she plan to respond?”
Response of the Mayor:
Giving our residents better access to housing and improving the borough’s housing stock has always been close to my heart. Over the last two and a half years I have worked tirelessly with colleagues from all parties to achieve this.
The Comprehensive Spending Review allocated £2.1bn for Decent Home backlog funding for the period 2011-2015. £1.6bn of this will be available to Local authorities and the rest to RSLs.
The funding will be particularly tight in the first year, with only £260m in the pot, but this will increase to £352m in 2012/13, £389m in 2013/14 and £594m in 2015/15.
The Council is working closely with THH to put together a bid for funding which is due next week. I am confident that the officers will put together a strong proposal, but in the current climate it is difficult to say what the outcome will be. I can however assure Cllr Whitelock that this administration will do everything it can do ensure that vital decent homes work in the borough goes ahead.
Summary of supplementary question from Councillor Amy Whitelock:
Thank you for your reply. As a member of Tower Hamlets Homes Board and a councillor with a big chunk of THH housing in my ward, I was dismayed to learn – right in the midst of THH’s recent inspection by the Audit Commission – that the coalition Government is not only reducing the pot for Decent Homes funding, but completely moving the goalposts, opening up the floodgates for organisations with no track record of high quality delivery or indeed no ALMO to compete for a share of the reduced pot, meaning money that was provisionally allocated to our borough is now in jeopardy. The Con-Dem Government argue the new framework is about fairness, but does the Mayor think it is fair that Tower Hamlets residents who suffered such chronic underinvestment in housing stock under Thatcher now face, yet again, not getting the Decent Homes they deserve? Given 55% of our housing stock is non-decent, does he agree that it is shameful for the Con-Dems to break this promise to Tower Hamlets and what can the Mayor do to ensure people still get the desperately-needed improvements to their homes that I observe in my ward and across the borough?
Summary of the Mayor’s response:
Thank you to fellow members on the Board for their hard work especially during the inspection period. Yes, I agree it is a disgrace and it is unacceptable to move the goal posts to redirect resources as the Council was expecting to receive £20M. I will work with you all, other colleagues and the two MPs to lobby the Government and to ensure that we get a fair share.
8.4 Question from Councillor Peter Golds
“Will the Mayor please comment on why he feels the need to employ a town hall staff comprising the newly created role of Head of Office (salary up to £59,982), an Executive Assistant, a Personal Assistant, a Political Advisor, a Policy Advisor, an Administrative Officer, and also splash cash on new iPhone 4 when Tower Hamlets Council has just issued a Section 188 notice to unions giving notice of over 100 possible redundancies?”
Response of the Mayor:
I am amazed that Councillor Golds has the front to ask this question when it is his party and their reckless cuts that have made redundancies necessary in the first place. I would also like to point out that the Executive Assistant and Personal Assistant are merely different names for the same post.
The introduction of a Directly Elected Mayor is a significant change to the Council’s governance arrangements and it is essential that the staffing and other resources provided for Members adapt to reflect the new arrangements. While doing so we are mindful of the overall climate of austerity. Indeed, even a local blogger, who I believe is well known to Cllr Golds, has described the salary for the Head of Office as “relatively low.”
The detailed proposals for other posts within the office will be developed and subject to consultation as part of the overall review of the Members Support services. I’m sure Councillor Golds will be aware that some Tory Councils, like West Oxfordshire and Tunbridge wells are actually getting funding increases. Perhaps he will work with me to lobby for these funds to be redirected to areas of real need.
Summary of supplementary question from Councillor Peter Golds:
Thank you for your reply. We will be responding about West Oxfordshire and Tunbridge Wells, but those councils do not have these posts. If you oppose the deficit reductions and cuts should you not merely have the same staff as you had when you were Leader of the Council?
Summary of the Mayor’s response:
Let us wait until the office is up and running and then you can scrutinise the position properly.
8.5 Question from Councillor Rachael Saunders
“What meetings or correspondence has the Mayor had with Tower Hamlets PCT since his election in October?”
Response of the Mayor:
The Council has an excellent working relationship with the PCT and we’ve been working hard to make sure that our residents are looked after in these tough times.
As Chair of the partnership, I regularly meet with high-ranking members of the PCT and only a couple of weeks ago, saw an excellent presentation by Tower Hamlets NHS at the budget congress.
I will also be having one-to-one meetings with key PCT members in the coming period.
Summary of supplementary question from Councillor Rachael Saunders:
I am glad that you attended the congress but my concern is that you have not appointed a Cabinet Member for Health. The PCT is being abolished and public health problems will come over to the local authority. I hope you soon make time to meet with PCT officers.
Summary of the Mayor’s response:
I have met with them as I mentioned. I am currently doing 2 or 3 jobs and the invitation is there for you and your colleagues to join my Cabinet. I would hope that all in this chamber will stop any political pettiness and start working with me to serve local people.
8.6 Question from Councillor Zara Davis
“In the light of the proposal from the Department for Communities and Local Government to limit the publication of Council newspapers to once a quarter, how quickly will this council follow best practice and reduce the frequency of East End Life or abolish it?”
Response of the Deputy Mayor, Councillor Ohid Ahmed:
As the final consultation hasn’t been published yet, I don’t think it would be right to make a decision on something that hasn’t been finalised.
That said I have already instructed officers to draw up detailed and costed proposals for possible changes to the way we communicate with residents.
We know from research conducted by ICM in June 2009 that 60% of residents regularly read East End Life and this is three times the readership levels of the Standard, the Metro and other local papers.
But in these tough times we are looking at every option to reduce costs.
Summary of supplementary question from Councillor Zara Davis:
Thank you for that response. I will be interested to see what proposals are drawn up in these difficult times. Do you want the best part of £½M spent on newspapers or frontline services? Can you confirm that you will put frontline services before the East End Life newspaper?
Summary of the Deputy Mayor’s response:
We are committed to our borough’s residents and despite the Coalition’s unnecessary cuts we will protect front line services.
8.7 Question from Councillor Anna Lynch
“Can the Mayor tell me what is the estimated additional full year cost to the Council's budget of setting up and staffing his office?”
Response of the Mayor:
In May, our residents voted overwhelmingly for a Mayoral system. We are still drawing up detailed proposals, but I can tell you that already the number of calls and inquiries to the Mayor’s office has gone through the roof.
It is hugely important that the Mayor’s office can respond quickly and effectively to meet the aspirations of residents. I am determined to ensure that they get a good service and good value as well.
Summary of supplementary question from Councillor Anna Lynch:
I asked you for a figure or an estimated figure. Given the notice of redundancies, can you commit to reducing the extra staff growth that has sprung up and if not, why not?
Summary of the Mayor’s response:
There is no secrecy. The figure that you have asked for will be provided but I do not walk around with it in my pocket.
Motion: Referral to Overview and Scrutiny Committee
At this point, Cllr Bill Turner MOVED and Councillor Tim Archer SECONDED – “That under Procedure Rule 14.1.4 the matters raised in Councillor Lynch’s question be referred to the Overview & Scrutiny Committee at their next meeting.”
This motion was put to the vote and was agreed. Accordingly it was:-
RESOLVED
That the matters raised in Councillor Lynch’s question be referred to the next meeting of the Overview and Scrutiny Committee.
8.8. Question from Councillor Craig Aston
Councillor Aston was not present at the meeting, so the question was not put. A written answer would be provided.
8.9 Question from Councillor Khales Uddin Ahmed
“What action will this administration take to ensure that there is representation of local councillors on the board of Swan Housing Association, in particular their London branch?”
Response of the Mayor:
I am very keen to see the needs of local residents represented, but Swan Housing Association is an Industrial and Provident Society and is not required to have Members on its board.
Swan currently has a Board of 12 which includes resident representatives. The Board is supported by resident majority Regional Committees in both London and Essex. The London Regional Committee also has a membership of 12, 8 of which are residents, including the Chair.
Swan works in more than one Local Authority area and therefore does not have places for Council Members on its Board or Regional Committees. Members are welcome to put themselves forward for the board when vacancies arise.
No supplementary question asked.
8.10 Question from Councillor Dr. Emma Jones
Response of the Mayor:
The Council has 1500 tonnes of grit in stock which is more than double the quantity used during the whole of last year. There is a further 500 tonnes on order for delivery before Christmas. This will be sufficient for gritting everyday for 3 months. A Sub-Regional back-up supply depot for grit has been created at Thurrock which is stocked with 25,000 tonnes for emergency use in prolonged severe weather should any boroughs run short
The Council's Winter Maintenance Plan sets out the footway and carriageway networks which will be gritted during normal winter operations as well as a resilience network which will be a fall back for prolonged severe weather. An instruction to move to resilience operations would be issued by the Regional Lead if necessary.
Manual footway spreaders have been purchased to enable footways to be gritted quickly, providing grip for pedestrians to move reasonably safely.
The Emergency Call Out team and the Contractor have reviewed policies and practice and are now familiar with new procedures and ready to implement the Winter Maintenance Plan whenever necessary. Gritting has taken place to plan on icy roads during the cold spell.
Summary of supplementary question from Councillor Dr. Emma Jones:
Thank you. Will you ask the City Airport to make sure that whenever possible their runway stays open so that people know this is the best place to travel from, to benefit the area?
Summary of the Mayor’s response:
Yes, I will do so.
8.11 Question from Councillor Bill Turner
“Can the Cabinet Member tell me what steps he has taken to ensure that families, quality of service and local providers are not adversely affected by changes to the Personal Care Contract for disabled children in the Borough in light of the decision to transfer the contract away from local service providers with their roots in Tower Hamlets to multinational private companies?”
Response of the Cabinet Member, Children’s Services, Councillor Oliur Rahman
A very important question and an important issue and something that people sitting on this bench with the Mayor take seriously. You have done a Member’s Enquiry on this so you will already have some of the information. In 2008 we undertook a consultation with children, young people and families who were in receipt of personal care provision. They informed us that they would like to see a number of changes to the care packages they received which included personal carers doing more with children and young people through the delivery of a service that was more flexible to individual families’ needs.
The consultation was used to inform the service specification so that the new services will provide more than the general care that is currently provided. In particular, it will allow for greater opportunities for interaction with young people including support with participation in leisure activities.
The services will be more flexible and tailored to the needs of families which will include an increase in the frequency and length of visits and provision of support during the holidays and weekends.
We have also made a commitment to assist all families who wish to remain with their existing carer with accessing direct payments and will ensure there is a smooth transition into services for families transferring to the new providers.
Our monitoring arrangements will be strengthened as we are moving to block contracts so we will be better able to monitor the effectiveness of the service and ensure the quality of the service is not compromised as a result of the new arrangements.
The proposed contracts consolidate activity with 6 providers currently used for personal care and one for nursing care into 2 providers for a fixed contract cost over three years. The contracts will prevent the escalation of costs we have seen in recent years, as the funding amounts are fixed. The costs of the new contracts indicate a saving in the region of £0.229m in a full financial year.
There are only two local providers who will be affected by the change and they currently have a turnover of £1.5m and £2m per annum respectively with only a small proportion coming from Children, Schools and Families. We also envisage that they will continue to receive some income directly from families who access services through direct payments.
We are committed to working with local third sector providers and value their contribution to delivering services to children, young people and families. However, following a robust and transparent tendering exercise that was undertaken in accordance with the Council’s procurement procedures the organisations selected as the preferred providers offered the best value for money and quality of care which is consistent with our duties under Section 3 of the Local Government Act 1999 which requires best value authorities, including the Council, to “make arrangements to secure continuous improvement in the way in which its functions are exercised, having regard to a combination of economy, efficiency and effectiveness.
Summary of supplementary question from Councillor Bill Turner:
Thank you for the acknowledgement that you know about my Member’s Enquiry. I am concerned as Members’ Enquiries are supposed to be confidential. I am also concerned abiout the impact of this change on local providers, who in most cases will provide a better service. Have you done an Impact Assessment and have you investigated whether for example BUPA pay their staff the London Living Wage?
Summary of the Cabinet Member’s response:
I did not say that I had seen a copy of your Member’s Enquiry. In terms of the questions you have raised about wages and services, the Living Wage will be paid by BUPA and if you feel that a service is not being provided, I would like to hear from you. I have instructed officers that whoever provides the services they have to be of the highest quality. This is important to myself and to the Mayor.
Motion: Referral to Overview and Scrutiny Committee
In response to a question from a Member, the Chief Executive confirmed that Members’ Enquiries are confidential communications between the Member raising an enquiry and the relevant Council directorate. In view of concerns expressed by some Councillors regarding a possible breach of this confidentiality, the Chief Executive undertook to look into the matters raised and report back to Councillors.
At this point, Cllr Peter Golds MOVED and Councillor Joshua Peck SECONDED – “That under Procedure Rule 14.1.4 that following the Chief Executive’s report, the issue of confidentiality of Members’ Enquiries be referred to the Overview & Scrutiny Committee.”
The motion was put to the vote and was agreed.
RESOLVED
That following the Chief Executive’s investigation and report on the matter, the issue of confidentiality of Members’ Enquiries be referred to the Overview and Scrutiny Committee.
In accordance with Rule 12.10 (expiry of the time limit), questions 12 to 22 were not put. Written responses would be forwarded to the questioners.
Supporting documents: