Agenda item
TO RECEIVE WRITTEN QUESTIONS FROM MEMBERS OF THE COUNCIL
The questions which have been received from Councillors to be put at this Council meeting are set out in the attached report.
Note: A maximum period of 30 minutes is allocated to this agenda item.
Decision:
8.1 Question from Councillor Judith Gardner regarding questions to the Mayor at Council meetings.
8.2 Question from Councillor Zara Davis on the legacy from the 2012 Games.
8.3 Question from Councillor Sirajul Islam on resistance to the EDL march.
8.4 Question from Councillor Fozol Miah congratulating teachers, pupils and parents for their recent exam success.
8.5 Question from Councillor John Pierce on the review of Tower Hamlets Homes leaseholder charges.
8.6 Question from Councillor Gloria Thienel on the use of Millwall Park for a proposed Oktoberfest event.
8.7 Question from Councillor M. A. Mukit, MBE, on a recent street clean up exercise.
8.8 Question from Councillor Kabir Ahmed on efforts to galvanise the community against the EDL.
8.9 Question from Councillor Helal Uddin on the Watts Grove project.
The above questions and (except where indicated) a supplementary question arising from each were put at the meeting and were responded to by the relevant Executive Members.
The remaining questions 8.10 to 8.28 were not put due to a lack of time. Written responses would be provided to the questions.
(Action by: John S. Williams, Service Head, Democratic Services – to arrange written responses)
Procedural Motion
After Question 8.8 above Councillor Oliur Rahman proposed, and Councillor Alibor Choudhury seconded a procedural motion – “That under Procedure Rule 14.1.3 the order of business be altered such that motion 12.4 - Motion against the English Defence League - be considered immediately”.
The procedural motion was put to the vote and was agreed.
12.4 Motion against the English Defence League
Councillor Alibor Choudhury moved, and Councillor Ohid Ahmed seconded, the motion as printed on the agenda.
Councillor Sirajul Islam moved, and Councillor Rachel Saunders seconded, an amendment as follows:-
“Under ‘This Council Resolves’ add a line to read:-
- That the Council and officers should continue to do all they can to support the banning of EDL marches through our borough.”
Councillors Alibor Choudhury and Ohid Ahmed indicated that they accepted the amendment and altered their motion accordingly.
Following debate, Councillor Alibor Choudhury moved abd Councillor Ohid Ahmed seconded a further amendment as follows:-
“To add two further bullet points under ‘This Council Resolves’:-
- Work together to counter right wing stories that aim to divide us and instil fear; and
- Accept Islamic Forum of Europe (IFE) as a progressive organisation we will aim to engage.”
Following debate the amendment was put to the vote and was defeated,
Councillor Rachael Saunders then moved and Councillor Sirajul Islam seconded a further amendment as follows:-
“To add a further bullet point under ‘This Council Resolves’:-
- To support the work of all organisations that made a contribution to preventing the EDL attack on Tower Hamlets.”
Following debate the amendment was put to the vote and was agreed.
The substantive motion as amended was then put to the vote and was unanimously agreed.
DECISION
This Council notes:
That since the murder of Lee Rigby in May 2013, the EDL has sought to stir up racial tensions in communities across the UK, including in Tower Hamlets on 7 September.
This Council believes:
That all those in the community who worked to counter the EDL’s divisive, hateful message and protect community cohesion in the borough, are to be congratulated.
This Council resolves:
To condemn the attempts by the English Defence League to bring their message of hate to our borough on September 7.
To strengthen the Council’s commitment to our No Place for Hate policies, eradicating hate crime in Tower Hamlets and creating an environment where everyone can enjoy living, working and visiting Tower Hamlets - free from fear, intimidation and attack.
That the Council and officers should continue to do all they can to support the banning of EDL marches through our borough.
To support the work of all organisations that made a contribution to preventing the EDL attack on Tower Hamlets.
Procedural Motion
After Question 8.9 above Councillor Carlo Gibbs proposed, and Councillor Bill Turner seconded a procedural motion – “That under Procedure Rule 14.1.3 the order of business be altered such that the motion 12.3 - Motion regarding the Watts Grove Depot redevelopment - be considered immediately”.
The procedural motion was put to the vote and was agreed.
12.3 Motion regarding the Mayor’s Decision to Scrap the Watts Grove Depot redevelopment
Councillor Carlo Gibbs moved, and Councillor Khales Uddin Ahmed seconded, the motion as printed on the agenda.
Following debate, the motion was put to the vote and was agreed.
DECISION
This Council notes:
-
The Mayor’s decision on the 29th
July to scrap the Council’s redevelopment of the Watts Grove
Depot site.
-
That this decision was taken in secret behind closed
doors and without any opportunity for scrutiny from residents of
councillors as would have been the case were it made at Cabinet two
days later.
-
Scrapping the development of Watts Grove will mean
the 149 planned social homes will now not be built.
-
In the report the Chief Finance Officer wrote that
“It is estimated that as a
result of the project the net deficit in the HRA will increase by
between £200k and £900k from 2015/16
onwards” making the
development unaffordable.
- The motion proposed by Cllrs Gibbs and Peck at this year’s Budget which stated:
o That between the Chancellor’s Emergency Budget in 2010 and 2017/18, the Council’s General Fund budget will have been cut by 50%;
o The Council’s Medium Term Financial Plan is showing a black hole of £39m in 2015/16, £24m of which is unfunded, and a deficit of at least £55m is anticipated in 2016/17;
o In facing these cuts the residents of this borough deserve openness and honesty about how those elected to represent them will deal with this issue;
o The Mayor has lost control of the Council’s finances and has no proposals - such as an invest to save strategy, star chamber programme or review of service - to deal with this black hole;
-
There are over 20,000 people on the housing waiting
list
-
The Mayor wrote in his decision that he would
“reconsider the decision to declare the Watts
Grove Depot surplus to requirements” meaning the site would
not be available for development.”
-
The Mayor wrote in the ELA on the 14th August that
“scheme has not been scrapped and it will be
going ahead”
This Council believes:
-
That the Mayor was warned about the impact of his
mismanagement of Council finances and did nothing.
-
The cancellation of Watts Grove could have been
avoided had the Mayor listened to Labour councillors and got a grip
on the Council’s finances.
-
20,000 residents on the housing waiting list have
been thoroughly let down by the Mayor who has failed to deliver the
much needed council housing he promised, and that it is residents
who are paying the price for the Mayor’s financial
incompetence.
-
The Chief Finance Officer’s report raises
serious concerns about the mechanism used by the Mayor to fund the
redevelopments of Dame Colet House and Poplar Baths.
-
By taking the decision in secret, behind closed
doors, the Mayor further demonstrated his contempt for any kind of
scrutiny of his actions and that this is a further insult to
residents who are concerned about the housing shortages in the
borough and whom he is supposed to represent.
-
The Mayor’s contradictory and inaccurate
statements to the media are misleading and unacceptable.
This Council resolves:
-
To instruct the Overview and Scrutiny Committee to
investigate the reasons for the collapse of the Watts Grove Depot
project, and the sustainability and suitability of the financial
mechanisms used to fund Dame Colet House and Poplar Baths and to
report back to Council in November on its findings.
- To call upon the Mayor to come clean about the state of the Council’s finances and to put in place a plan to balance the Council’s books.
- To require the Section 151 officer to report to councillors within the week how much money including an estimate of officer time has been spent to date on the Watts Grove Project.
(Action by: John S. Williams, Service Head, Democratic Services (reference
to O&S Committee);
Chris Holme, Acting Corporate Director, Resources (report to
councillors as above))
Procedural Motion
Councillor Carlo Gibbs moved, and Councillor Rachel Saunders seconded, a
procedural motion – “That under Procedure Rule 14.1.13 the meeting be
extended for up to half an hour to allow for the consideration of Agenda Items 9 and 11 and then the following Motions:- 12.7, 12.9, 12.5 and 12.11”.
The procedural motion was put to the vote and was agreed.
Minutes:
8.1 Question from Councillor Judith Gardiner
The Mayor was elected to serve and answer to the people of Tower Hamlets. Does he not understand that by refusing to answer residents’ and councillors’ questions he is insulting the people who elected him?
Response by Councillor Ohid Ahmed, Deputy Mayor
The people of the borough voted for the Mayor and will do so again at the next election.
The Mayor holds regular meetings with residents, weekly surgeries and is always out and about in the community answering questions. He had over 6000 items of casework in the last years.
We are the Cabinet members and we have the right to reply. Each public question is answered in full by a Cabinet member.
Summary of Supplementary Question from Councillor Judith Gardiner
None of the Cabinet Members were elected to speak for the Mayor. They were elected as Labour councillors but they have not had the courage to ask their electors if they are happy for them to switch sides. What is the Mayor afraid of?
Summary of Councillor Ohid Ahmed’s response to the Supplementary Question
The Cabinet are members of the executive and we are able, and will continue, to answer questions relevant to our responsibilities, just as happened under the Leadership model. 25,000 people elected the Mayor and we will continue to speak for all residents not just a few councillors.
8.2 Question from Councillor Zara Davis
What is the Mayor doing to ensure that Tower Hamlets benefits from the legacy of the 2012 Games?
Response by Councillor Rania Khan, Cabinet Member for Culture
The Mayor attends the London Legacy Development Corporation to lobby the authority, as well as the GLA and others, to maximise the level of affordable and family housing that is built in the former Olympic Park, and working to ensure that people from Tower Hamlets are able to access this housing.
He also uses his position to ensure Tower Hamlets residents are able to access the job opportunities which arise from the redevelopment of the Olympic Park, building on the 4,000 Olympic jobs secured for local people ahead of Games time.
The Council is also actively assisting local businesses to take advantage of development opportunities, for example through support for the Fit for Legacy project and the ongoing work of East London Business Place.
I do understand that there is more work to be done and we are doing our best to maximise opportunities for local residents.
Summary of Supplementary Question from Councillor Zara Davis
Affordable housing is extremely important. However I’m deeply concerned that Tower Hamlets are only being allocated 27 out of over 1,300 affordable housing units from the athletes village. What have you and the Mayor been doing to take action and secure a better outcome?
Summary of Councillor Rania Khan’s Response to the Supplementary Question
We are fighting this allocation with the East London Housing Partnership and will be taking the issue further.
8.3 Question from Councillor Sirajul Islam
Will the Mayor join me in thanking residents and politicians of all parties for their support in resisting the EDL march and agree with me that issues such as this should not be about political point scoring but uniting to protect our community?
Response by Councillor Alibor Choudhury, Cabinet Member for Resources
I wish we could have such unity, Cllr Islam, but the words and actions of some of your Labour colleagues have made that impossible.
Summary of Supplementary Question from Councillor Sirajul Islam
Councillor Choudhury speaks in a cryptic way. But there are suggestions that the EDL may march again. What is the Mayor doing to stop this happening?
Summary of Councillor Alibor Choudhury’s Response to the Supplementary Question
Let’s go back to basics. Why do the EDL come to Tower Hamlets again and again?
I would like to offer you a couple of quotes from the EDL’s Tommy Robinson:
“Lutfur Rahman, who’s the Mayor of Tower Hamlets, he was kicked out of the Labour for his extremist views.”
Or how about this: “What we’re doing today is sticking two fingers up to the politicians, to Lutfur Rahman, to all the extremist Muslims.”
Where did that come from?
I’m sure you’ll recognise the accusations, Cllr Islam, many of them were first made by members of your party in 2010 and now they are in the mouths of far-right thugs. You know they are untrue, we know they are untrue and I’m sure the people who first made them know they are untrue. But they have been made and they have never been retracted and the EDL have used them as an excuse to come down and terrorise the people of Tower Hamlets.
So, councillor, don’t talk to me about unity, don’t talk to me about rising above politics. Where was the unity when Jim Fitzpatrick claimed Islamists were infiltrating local politics and the Town Hall? Where was the unity when Helal Abbas and Bill Turner penned their infamous dodgy dossiers?
Where was the unity when John Biggs accused this administration of only doing Decent Homes works for our friends - a claim that was gleefully used as propaganda by the EDL and still is?
8.4 Question from Councillor Fozol Miah
Would the lead member join with me in congratulating the teaching staff, parents and pupils who have ensured the extraordinary level of success in Tower Hamlets schools in the context of one of the most deprived communities in Britain and in applauding the Mayor’s education strategy which has helped to facilitate this success and would the lead member say what threats there are to continuing this success from the break-up of Tower Hamlets education community through the government’s iniquitous policy of encouraging schools to become academies and the growth of so-called free schools?
Response by Councillor Oliur Rahman, Cabinet Member for Children’s Services
I do join you in congratulating the head teachers, staff, parents and pupils of Tower Hamlets for achieving such a high standard of results. This kind of result does not happen by accident. It happens through dedication and hard work from education authorities, teachers, parents and children. Indeed parents are often the best teachers. Children learn at home too, so it is also credit to them.
I notice the later question on the Docklands Free Schools which got an OFSTED ‘Outstanding’ review and is supported by the Conservative government. If Michael Gove could he would make all schools free schools and academies.
They are not supporting ordinary people. How many BME and free school meals children attend that school? Last time I checked with the government it was a big fat zero.
Summary of Supplementary Question from Councillor Fozol Miah
How many academies and free schools are there now in Tower Hamlets and how many are in the pipeline?
Summary of Councillor Oliur Rahman’s Response to the Supplementary Question
From the Community schools, one secondary and three primary schools have become academies. However in the interests of our young people I have always said that we will work to ensure our children get the best education they possibly can but we will continue to make clear our opposition to academies and free schools in principle.
8.5 Question from Councillor John Pierce
What is the aim of Cllr Khan's new review of Beever & Struthers recommendations for THH leaseholder charges?
Response by Councillor Rabina Khan, Cabinet Member for Housing
There is no such thing as Cllr Khan’s review. But there is the Leaseholder Policy Steering Group’s review, which will:
- assess progress towards completion of the Action Plan
- provide recommendations to ensure that the remainder of the Action Plan is completed swiftly and to the satisfaction of all involved
- continue to improve the working relationship between THH and Leaseholders.
I’m sure you will agree these are important aims.
Summary of Supplementary Question from Councillor John Pierce
It was news to the group that you brought forward this review. What number review is this? This has been a sorry mess. How many reviews will there be and how many thousands of pounds will you waste before you sort out leaseholder charges? Many people in the borough have been financially crippled by your incompetence and I hope you sort it out soon.
Summary of Councillor Rabina Khan’s Response to the Supplementary Question
I am glad you are asking for transparency and honesty. I would highlight that at 14 PSG meetings since October 2010 there have been only two attendances by Labour Group Members and you have only attended one, for 40 minutes. PSG was set up as a cross-party mechanism to benefit leaseholders. They attend voluntarily and see it as a non-political group. The PSG works for all leaseholders and you should show more respect for the time that they voluntarily put in.
8.6 Question from Councillor Gloria Thienel
Why has the Mayor allowed Millwall Park to be used as a venue for the London Oktoberfest beer festival for four days, including Sunday as a “family day” with ten thousand people? The park is in close proximity to residential areas and the event could result in crime, anti-social behaviour issues and parking problems amongst others. Also the football and rugby clubs won’t be able to use the pitches.
Response by Councillor Rania Khan, Cabinet Member for Culture
I understand that you made representations to last night’s Licensing Sub-Committee meeting and that is the proper forum for your concern. They are a competent committee to make the decision. The decision is not within the purview of the Executive.
Summary of Supplementary Question from Councillor Gloria Thienel
The Mayor has rented out our parks for commercial ventures. It is nothing to do with what residents want. This was lost at Licensing but we will appeal. The Mayor should not be allowing any hiring out in this way. Where does the money go? Because it does not go back into the park.
Summary of Councillor Rania Khan’s Response to the Supplementary Question
You are welcome to appeal but please note that the decision to approve the application was taken by the Labour Party at the Licensing sub-committee, not by the Mayor.
8.7 Question from Councillor M. A. Mukit, MBE
Why did the Mayor use East End Life to take credit for the recent Redchurch Street clean up when it was Labour councillors who were there helping the local community?
Response by Councillor Shahed Ali, Cabinet Member for Environment
East End Life is a wonderful tool to promote the work of all councillors not just the executive.
This event referred to was organised with local residents, volunteers and our wonderful council staff.
The Mayor and I were quoted in the piece simply praising the work done by the volunteers. I’m sure you will agree that we should be praising their work. They play a great role in our community. It is something to be celebrated.
You may have been distracted by a previous incident when Cllr Joshua Peck’s attempted to use his Council timesheet to justify the work he does in trying to keep our streets. Please join us in thanking those volunteers and staff who were helping to clean up our environment.
Summary of Supplementary Question from Councillor M. A. Mukit, MBE
Who were the volunteers? Isn’t it the case that the Mayor’s cuts to street cleaning from three to two days mean that more volunteers are now necessary?
Summary of Councillor Shahed Ali’s Response to the Supplementary Question
Local residents were the volunteers. They were cleaning graffiti - that was the purpose of the exercise, not doing street cleaning work. If anyone helping was not local then they should also be thanked for helping to clean up the area.
8.8 Question from Councillor Kabir Ahmed
Can the Lead Member tell us what was done by the administration to galvanise the community against the EDL?
Response by Councillor Ohid Ahmed, Deputy Mayor
We did so much I’ll have to give it to you as a list:
We wrote to the Home Secretary, the Metropolitan Police Commissioner, the Borough Commander, The Mayor of London and London Assembly Members asking for the march to be banned.
We initiated a 10,000 signature petition and an open letter in the Guardian signed by local community and religious leaders, MP’s and trade union general secretaries.
We worked closely with our partners in United East End and Unite Against Fascism to raise awareness against the EDL.
We initiated a Judicial review of the policing decision on the route of the EDL march and seeking to apply maximum pressure on them to ensure EDL thwarted in their plans to march into Tower Hamlets.
We kept the community briefed via a number of press conferences, public meetings and the use of East End Life.
We worked closely with the police, council officers, UEE & UAF to ensure the anti-racist protest in Altab Ali Park passed off peacefully, and we made immediate representation to the police on hearing of the detention of local youth for infringement on crowd dispersal.
Summary of Supplementary Question from Councillor Kabir Ahmed
I welcome the attendance of many including Councillor Islam, John Biggs and local Labour councillors. However, would the Lead Member share my disappointment that the local MPs and the Conservative Group did not attend? It would have been an opportunity for a united front.
Summary of Councillor Ohid Ahmed’s Response to the Supplementary Question
I am disappointed too. I would at least liked to have seen statements from the local MPs. But you probably need to ask the question to the people concerned.
8.9 Question from Councillor Helal Uddin
Why was it that the Mayor lost control of the Watts Grove project resulting in the cancellation of 149 new council homes?
Response by Councillor Rabina Khan, Cabinet Member for Housing
Clearly you’ve not had much experience in housing and development matters, so let’s set the record straight.
When you’re building more affordable homes than anyone else in the country, due diligence is needed to ensure projects give best value for money. The question the Mayor often asks is whether we could get more social housing on the site so the question could be can we get more than 149 council homes built on the site.
Initial estimates in outline bids from the market indicated that the scheme was affordable. A change in market prices and further cuts from central government meant that this assessment had to be revised and looked into properly to ensure we could get best value for money.
Summary of Supplementary Question from Councillor Helal Uddin
I think I have a better understanding of housing as that is also my area. Can I have a clear assurance from the Lead Member to deliver this project to benefit residents in my ward?
Summary of Councillor Rabina Khan’s Response to the Supplementary Question
Have you looked at the many other regeneration projects going on across the borough including the Ocean Estate, Blackwall Reach, Poplar Baths and many others. These are mechanisms for delivering social housing in the borough. For your information the Watts Grove project will go ahead.
The Mayor has not lost control of Watts Grove. The Labour Party has lost control of itself.
The above questions and (except where indicated) one supplementary question arising from each were put at the meeting and were responded to by the relevant executive member.
The remaining questions 8.10 to 8.28 were not put due to a lack of time. The Service Head, Democratic Services advised that written responses would be provided to the questions [Note: The written answers are included in Appendix A to these minutes].
Procedural Motion
After Question 8.8 above Councillor Oliur Rahman proposed, and Councillor Alibor Choudhury seconded a procedural motion – “That under Procedure Rule 14.1.3 the order of business be altered such that motion 12.4 - Motion against the English Defence League - be considered immediately”.
The procedural motion was put to the vote and was agreed.
12.4 Motion against the English Defence League
Councillor Alibor Choudhury moved, and Councillor Ohid Ahmed seconded, the motion as printed on the agenda.
Councillor Sirajul Islam moved, and Councillor Rachel Saunders seconded, an amendment as follows:-
“Under ‘This Council Resolves’ add a line to read:-
- That the Council and officers should continue to do all they can to support the banning of EDL marches through our borough.”
Councillors Alibor Choudhury and Ohid Ahmed indicated that they accepted the amendment and altered their motion accordingly.
Following debate, Councillor Alibor Choudhury moved abd Councillor Ohid Ahmed seconded a further amendment as follows:-
“To add two further bullet points under ‘This Council Resolves’:-
- Work together to counter right wing stories that aim to divide us and instil fear; and
- Accept Islamic Forum of Europe (IFE) as a progressive organisation we will aim to engage.”
Following debate the amendment was put to the vote and was defeated,
[Note: In accordance with Procedure Rule 17.5, the following Councillors each requested it be recorded that they had voted in favour of the above amendment:- Councillors Kabir Ahmed, Ohid Ahmed, Rofique U Ahmed, Shahed Ali, Abdul Asad, Lutfa Begum, Alibor Choudhury, Shafiqul Haque, Aminur Khan, Rabina Khan, Rania Khan, Fozol Miah, Harun Miah, Maium Miah, Oliur Rahman and Gulam Robbani.]
Councillor Rachael Saunders then moved and Councillor Sirajul Islam seconded a further amendment as follows:-
“To add a further bullet point under ‘This Council Resolves’:-
- To support the work of all organisations that made a contribution to preventing the EDL attack on Tower Hamlets.”
Following debate the amendment was put to the vote and was agreed.
The substantive motion as amended was then put to the vote and was unanimously agreed.
RESOLVED
This Council notes:
That since the murder of Lee Rigby in May 2013, the EDL has sought to stir up racial tensions in communities across the UK, including in Tower Hamlets on 7 September.
This Council believes:
That all those in the community who worked to counter the EDL’s divisive, hateful message and protect community cohesion in the borough, are to be congratulated.
This Council resolves:
To condemn the attempts by the English Defence League to bring their message of hate to our borough on September 7.
To strengthen the Council’s commitment to our No Place for Hate policies, eradicating hate crime in Tower Hamlets and creating an environment where everyone can enjoy living, working and visiting Tower Hamlets - free from fear, intimidation and attack.
That the Council and officers should continue to do all they can to support the banning of EDL marches through our borough.
To support the work of all organisations that made a contribution to preventing the EDL attack on Tower Hamlets.
Procedural Motion
After Question 8.9 above Councillor Carlo Gibbs proposed, and Councillor Bill Turner seconded a procedural motion – “That under Procedure Rule 14.1.3 the order of business be altered such that the motion 12.3 - Motion regarding the Watts Grove Depot redevelopment - be considered immediately”.
The procedural motion was put to the vote and was agreed.
12.3 Motion regarding the Watts Grove Depot redevelopment
Councillor Carlo Gibbs moved, and Councillor Khales Uddin Ahmed seconded, the motion as printed on the agenda.
Following debate, the motion was put to the vote and was agreed.
RESOLVED
This Council notes:
-
The Mayor’s decision on the 29th
July to scrap the Council’s redevelopment of the Watts Grove
Depot site.
-
That this decision was taken in secret behind closed
doors and without any opportunity for scrutiny from residents of
councillors as would have been the case were it made at Cabinet two
days later.
-
Scrapping the development of Watts Grove will mean
the 149 planned social homes will now not be built.
-
In the report the Chief Finance Officer wrote that
“It is estimated that as a
result of the project the net deficit in the HRA will increase by
between £200k and £900k from 2015/16
onwards” making the
development unaffordable.
- The motion proposed by Cllrs Gibbs and Peck at this year’s Budget which stated:
o That between the Chancellor’s Emergency Budget in 2010 and 2017/18, the Council’s General Fund budget will have been cut by 50%;
o The Council’s Medium Term Financial Plan is showing a black hole of £39m in 2015/16, £24m of which is unfunded, and a deficit of at least £55m is anticipated in 2016/17;
o In facing these cuts the residents of this borough deserve openness and honesty about how those elected to represent them will deal with this issue;
o The Mayor has lost control of the Council’s finances and has no proposals - such as an invest to save strategy, star chamber programme or review of service - to deal with this black hole;
-
There are over 20,000 people on the housing waiting
list
-
The Mayor wrote in his decision that he would
“reconsider the decision to declare the Watts
Grove Depot surplus to requirements” meaning the site would
not be available for development.”
-
The Mayor wrote in the ELA on the 14th August that
“scheme has not been scrapped and it will be
going ahead”
This Council believes:
-
That the Mayor was warned about the impact of his
mismanagement of Council finances and did nothing.
-
The cancellation of Watts Grove could have been
avoided had the Mayor listened to Labour councillors and got a grip
on the Council’s finances.
-
20,000 residents on the housing waiting list have
been thoroughly let down by the Mayor who has failed to deliver the
much needed council housing he promised, and that it is residents
who are paying the price for the Mayor’s financial
incompetence.
-
The Chief Finance Officer’s report raises
serious concerns about the mechanism used by the Mayor to fund the
redevelopments of Dame Colet House and Poplar Baths.
-
By taking the decision in secret, behind closed
doors, the Mayor further demonstrated his contempt for any kind of
scrutiny of his actions and that this is a further insult to
residents who are concerned about the housing shortages in the
borough and whom he is supposed to represent.
-
The Mayor’s contradictory and inaccurate
statements to the media are misleading and unacceptable.
This Council resolves:
-
To instruct the Overview and Scrutiny Committee to
investigate the reasons for the collapse of the Watts Grove Depot
project, and the sustainability and suitability of the financial
mechanisms used to fund Dame Colet House and Poplar Baths and to
report back to Council in November on its findings.
- To call upon the Mayor to come clean about the state of the Council’s finances and to put in place a plan to balance the Council’s books.
- To require the Section 151 officer to report to councillors within the week how much money including an estimate of officer time has been spent to date on the Watts Grove Project.
[Note: In accordance with Procedure Rule 17.5, the following Councillors each requested it be recorded that they had voted against the above resolution:- Councillors Kabir Ahmed, Ohid Ahmed, Rofique U Ahmed, Shahed Ali, Abdul Asad, Lutfa Begum, Alibor Choudhury, Shafiqul Haque, Aminur Khan, Rabina Khan, Rania Khan, Maium Miah, Oliur Rahman and Gulam Robbani.]
Procedural Motion
Councillor Carlo Gibbs moved, and Councillor Rachel Saunders seconded, a
procedural motion – “That under Procedure Rule 14.1.14 the meeting be
extended for up to half an hour to allow for the consideration of Agenda Items 9 and 11 and then the following Motions:- 12.7, 12.9, 12.5 and 12.11”.
The procedural motion was put to the vote and was agreed.
Supporting documents: