12.1    Motion regarding the Mayor’s statements on the “March against alcohol”

 

Councillor Peter Golds moved, and Councillor Tim Archer seconded the motion as printed in the agenda.

 

Following debate, the motion was put to the vote and was agreed.

 

RESOLVED

 

This Council notes:

 

•      The possibility of an increase in community tensions arising from the well-publicised “March against alcohol” in Brick Lane on December 13th.

 

•      That Brick Lane is known worldwide for its vibrant restaurant offer, and that the beginning of the Christmas period is a highpoint for the local economy.

 

This Council believes:

 

•      This event would intimidate restaurants and their customers, and attract other extremist groups to the area

 

•      Policing the event was a waste of valuable police resources, with a reduction in the availability of officers across the borough at a particularly busy time.

 

This Council also notes:

 

•      That the initial statement issued in the name of the Mayor was “We strongly believe in the right to free speech and association, and I am pleased that, with the Police’s support, this group were able to exercise that right whilst upholding respect for our communities, which is the hallmark of our ‘No Place for Hate’ pledge.”

 

This Council also believes:

 

•      That this was an extraordinary response in view of the threats to legitimate local businesses and their customers who were intent on enjoying a pre-Christmas lunch completely within the law.

 

This Council further notes:

 

•      That following hostile publicity after the release of this statement an amended statement was published, stating “As part of our pledge to ‘No Place for Hate’, we oppose all groups that seek to impose their views on and bring division to our communities. Council staff worked with the Police to ensure that the businesses, residents and visitors on Brick Lane were protected during the demonstration.”

 

This Council further believes:

 

•      That the confusion around the Mayor’s position on this important issue shames the Council, reflecting poorly on his office.

 

•      That there are a number of unanswered questions as to how the original inappropriate statement came to be released, including:-

 

1.         Why, with a multi-million pound publicity budget he makes such different statements?

 

2.         Who authorised the initial statement in his name?

 

3.         What particular event or events the following week encouraged him to change the statement?

 

This Council resolves:

 

•      To condemn the Mayor’s original statement, and the confusion around its subsequent retraction.

 

•      To instruct officers to present a report to the next Council meeting, outlining the procedural failures that led to this debacle; and the steps to be taken to prevent a repeat. 

 

 

12.3    Motion regarding Cost of Living

 

Councillor Rachael Saunders moved,and Councillor Sirajul Islam seconded the motion as printed in the agenda.

 

Following debate, the motion was put to the vote and was agreed.

 

RESOLVED

 

This Council believes:

 

• That families in Tower Hamlets are feeling the pinch, with prices rising faster than wages, and too many local people finding it difficult to access decent work.

 

• That the Conservative-led Government is complacent about the difficulties people are facing, as demonstrated by Ian Duncan Smith’s refusal to even speak to representatives from the Trussell Trust who run many of the country’s food banks. 

 

• That it is shameful that people in the UK are dependent on food banks

 

• That Lutfur Rahman is weak and out of touch with the real needs of local people – whilst his administration has plenty of short term gimmicks, he has done little to tackle to real issues that local people face. 

 

This Council notes:

 

• That despite much fanfare at launch, Tower Hamlets Power has so far only helped 237 residents with their electricity bills despite spending over £12,000 on publicity for the scheme and plans to spend a further £37,351 promoting it this month. 

 

• That Lutfur Rahman’s cuts to funding for already overstretched advice services have left many families with no access to support.  Whilst other London boroughs such as Labour controlled Camden and Islington are increasing their funding for these kind of advice services in light of increasing demand.

 

• That CAB applied for funding from the events grants funds, but was refused yet the Mayor instead decided to fund events by commercial media organisations. 

 

• That the weak, insular approach of the current administration means that opportunities to support local people in tough times are being missed. 

 

• That most high streets in Tower Hamlets feature at least one pay day loan shop. 

 

• That with a Mayor that refuses to answer questions in public, Tower Hamlets has little chance of being taken seriously by business or other local stakeholders. 

 

This Council resolves:

 

• To support Ed Miliband’s cost of living pledge, which sets out the real action a Labour government would take:                                                    

 

1.   Stop the Government's raid on pensioners and            block its £40,000 tax cut to       14,000 millionaires

 

2.   End rail rip-offs by capping fares increases on every route

 

3.   Force the energy firms to cut gas and electricity bills for 4 million over-75s

 

4.   Stop excessive fees charged by banks and low cost airlines

 

5.   Defend working families from the raid on their tax credits by reversing the Government's pension tax break for those earning over £150,000

 

• To condemn Boris Johnson’s rip off rises to fares on tubes and buses. 

 

• To campaign for effective benefit take up advice for Tower Hamlets residents and to call upon the Council to use the communications tools at their disposal for the benefit of local people not the ludicrous self-promotion of the Mayor. 

 

• To call on Lutfur Rahman to reconsider the grant funding that goes to his cronies, and to reinstate the previous levels of funding to our advice services. 

 

• To call on the Council to provide logistical support to those organising food banks, including offering the use of Council buildings for collections.

 

• To condemn Lutfur Rahman for his failure to work with business to secure apprenticeships or work experience opportunities in the borough, or to secure Living Wage commitments for Tower Hamlets workers outside the Town Hall.

 

 

12.6    Motion regarding commercialisation of the Borough’s public spaces

 

Councillor Joshua Peck moved, and Councillor Abdal Ullah seconded, the motion as printed on the agenda.

 

During debate, Councillor Peter Golds proposed a minor amendment to the motion, substituting ‘Millwall Park’ for ‘Island Gardens’ in the 3^rd sub-point of bullet point 5 under ‘This Council notes’.  This was accepted by Councillors Joshua Peck and Abdal Ullah who altered their motion accordingly.  Following further debate the substantive motion was put to the vote and was agreed.

 

RESOLVED

 

This Council notes:

 

·         That Tower Hamlets is a densely populated borough where many people don’t have their own gardens

 

·         That an increasing number of Tower Hamlets residents live at or near the poverty line, with all of their disposable income going on housing, heating and food, leaving nothing left over for leisure or entertainment

 

·         That many of our residents rely on free access to our parks, open spaces and community facilities for recreation, physical and mental health and community cohesion

 

·         That parks and open spaces represent important public places for people of all communities to come together strengthening community cohesion and building One East End.

 

·         That the current Mayor has been increasingly using the borough’s parks, open spaces and community facilities to raise money, at the expense of their intended purpose as a community asset and public service, including:

 

o   Letting a four year contract to Lovebox for seven days of festivals each year in Victoria Park, despite significant complaints from residents about disturbance from events, huge damage to the Park and significant spikes in crime when Lovebox takes place each year;

o   allowing a cider company to run a pop-up bar in Victoria Park;

o   renting out Millwall Park for an Oktoberfest event;

o   changing the use of the Mile End Park Arts Pavilion from a community art gallery to a wedding and commercial events venue

o   and a proposal to allow parties on Trinity Square Gardens, adjacent to the war memorial, which attracted national condemnation.

 

·         That whilst many residents accept the need for revenue-raising activities as council funding is severely cut by the Government, the nature and frequency of many of these commercial events is having a disproportionate effect on the ability of residents to use and enjoy them.

 

·         That the proportion of funding raised from these facilities that is reinvested in them is dropping dramatically – for example, falling from 73% of funding raised by Victoria Park in 2010 being reinvested in the Park and free events in it to just 29% in 2012.

 

·         That free events for residents put on by the Council – which also used to be paid for by these funds – is also reducing:

 

o   The popular Paradise Gardens was cancelled by the Mayor in 2012

o   The Victoria Park fireworks were cancelled by the Mayor in 2012, on the pretence that this was to allow three fireworks events to take place across the borough, but in 2013, only one event took place, and that the number of residents attending the fireworks has dropped from 80,000 in 2011 to just 16,000 in 2013  

 

This Council believes:

 

·         The primary and over-riding purpose of our public parks, open spaces and community facilities should be for the free and unfettered use of our residents  

 

·         Some commercial use of these facilities is acceptable as long as it is done in a way that does not unduly impact on users and local residents

                                        

This Council further notes:

 

·         That on 16 May 2012 this Council resolved to amend the Open Spaces Strategy to put reasonable restrictions on the use of parks and open spaces for commercial events, in order to protect their primary purpose

 

·         That as a result of the Council’s process for resolution of disputes between the Council and the Executive, the Open Spaces Strategy was referred back to the Mayor for consideration and should have then been brought back to Council for a final decision, yet 19 months later, it still has not been considered by the Mayor and been brought back to Council.

 

This Council resolves:

 

·         To restate its position that reasonable limits must be put on the use of open spaces and community facilities for commercial events

 

·         To instruct the Head of Paid Service to report in writing to all Councillors as to why a revised Open Spaces Strategy, implementing the decision of Council on 16 May 2012 has not been put forward to the Mayor to consider and then brought to Council.

 

 

12.8    Motion regarding Leasehold Service Charges

 

Councillor Marc Francis moved, and Councillor Carlo Gibbs seconded, the motion as printed in the agenda, incorporating a number of tabled amendments.

 

Councillor Ohid Ahmed moved, and Councillor Kabir Ahmed seconded, an amendment to the motion as follows:-

 

“Under This Council Notes:

 

Under:

·         In Spring 2013, the St Stephen’s Estate Leaseholders Association published a damning scrutiny report, which exposed the failures to implement the recommendations in the original Beevers and Struthers Audit.

 

Insert:

·         On the 16^th October 2012, the Policy Steering Group requested a review of the Beevers and Struthers Report.

 

After this Council Notes:

 

Insert:

 

This Council further notes:

·         The Mayor and Cabinet Member for Housing have raised concerns with Tower Hamlets Homes on service charges and are working with Tower Hamlets Homes and the Project Steering Group to reduce leaseholder service charges in the future.

 

·         That Labour Councillors to date attended 3 out of 22 PSG meetings.

 

Also add after believes section:

 

This Council further believes:

·         The Mayor and Cabinet Member should continue to work with Tower Hamlets Homes and the Project Steering Group to correct any past wrong or unreasonable leaseholder charges.

 

·         The Mayor and Cabinet Member should continue to investigate whether Tower Hamlets Homes are charging in accordance of the Tenant and Landlord Act and the Commonhold and Leasehold Reform Act to secure reasonable leaseholder charges.

 

·         Those Councillors who are nominated to attend the PSG meetings must do so.

 

Delete from This Council resolves to call on the Mayor to:

 

·         Explain  why a 17 per cent ‘overhead’ has been introduced across most Heads of Charge;

 

Replace with:

 

·         Call on Tower Hamlets Homes to stop charging the 17 per cent ‘Overhead’ until a thorough investigation has been undertaken.

 

Add to resolves section:

 

This Council resolves to support the Mayor and Lead Member for Housing to:

 

·         Secure corrections from Tower Hamlets Homes to leaseholders of service charges for 2011/12012 where actuals proved to be unreasonable or wrong.

 

·         Investigate ways in which Tower Hamlets Homes can reduce leaseholder service charges in the future whilst not impacting on front line services.”

 

Following debate the amendment moved by Councillor Rabina Khan was put to the vote and was defeated.

 

The substantive motion was then put to the vote and was agreed.

 

RESOLVED

 

This Council notes:

 

·         In 2008, Full Council agreed a motion authorising the Lead Member for Housing to commission an independent audit of leasehold service charges following concerns about the two-thirds increase in the level of Management & Administration fees, numerous historic disputes over the costs recharged and a Scrutiny Review which called for much greater transparency and accountability in the calculation of service charges;

 

·         In 2009, a Project Steering Group (PSG) involving councillors, Tower Hamlets Homes (THH), Tower Hamlets Leaseholders Association (THLA) and other leaseholders agreed detailed Terms of Reference for that audit, commissioned Beevers & Struthers Ltd to carry it out;

 

·         In spring 2010, THH attempted unilaterally to introduce new methodology for the calculation of management fees and a new policy to charge to ground floor leaseholders for services they did not benefit from, which was blocked by the Lead Member;

 

·         In summer 2010 a draft version was produced for the PSG, identifying a series of very challenging issues for THH around the management of leasehold services, value for money, caretaking, repairs and maintenance, management and administration fees, and several Service Levels Agreements with LBTH;

 

·         However, publication of the final audit report was delayed by the Mayoral Election in October 2010and not finally signed off by the PSG until May 2011, by which time LBTH/THH had already begun consultation on a “Leasehold Policy Review” which was claimed to have been based on its findings;

 

·         The Mayor and Lead Member subsequently established a Leasehold Action Plan Working Group (LAPWG), including representatives of leaseholders to bring together the Beevers & Struthers’ recommendations, those of the Audit Commission and THH’s own Leaseholder Service Improvement Group, and a Statement of Intent was agreed by all those involved to implement the 54 recommendations or agree an alternative remedy;

 

·         Over the next 18 months, just five of the 54 recommendations were implemented and in October 2012, THH sent leaseholders “actuals”, which included significantly increased charges in most areas, particularly block/estate cleaning, a 17 per cent “Overhead” fee and new SLAs with LBTH.  They were told these costs had been calculated on the B&S audit and had actually been “dampened” and so would increase further over the next two years;

 

·         In spring 2013, THH leaseholders published a damning scrutiny report, which exposed the failure to implement the recommendations in the original Beevers & Struthers audit;

 

·         In response, the current Lead Member for Housing &Development, is now proposing an “review” of the implementation of the recommendations of the original B&S audit and the Mayor is commissioning an audit of latest “actuals” at a cost of around a further £15,000.

 

This Council believes:

 

·         The Mayor and THH have not implemented the recommendations contained in the independent audit in accordance with the agreed Statement of Intent and that the original aim of increasing transparency and accountability has been lost;

 

·         Leaseholders should be fully recharged for the costs of the services they receive, but that the 2011/12 “actuals” are not based on the methodology set out in the recommendations in the B&S audit, but are instead opaque and represent very poor value for money;

 

This Council resolves to call on the Mayor to:

 

·         Explain why only 5 out of 54 of the recommendations arising from the B&S audit have so far been implemented;

 

·         Explain why an 17 per cent “Overhead” has been introduced across most Heads of Charge:

 

·         Justify the Service Level Agreements between LBTH and THH and explain what action is being taken to ensure best value;

 

·         Instruct THH to publish a report detailing how the actions it has taken since October 2010 to achieve “savings” have resulted in reduced costs to council leaseholders and tenants.

 

 

12.10  Motion regarding Local Authorities Mental Health Challenge

 

Councillor Amy Whitelock Gibbs moved, and Councillor Rachel Saunders seconded, the motion as printed on the agenda.

 

The motion was put to the vote and was agreed.

 

RESOLVED

 

This Council notes:

 

·         1 in 6 people will experience a mental health problem in any given year.

 

·         The World Health Organisationpredicts that depression will be the second most common health condition worldwide by 2020.

 

·         Mental ill health costs some £105 billion each year in England alone.

 

·         People with a severe mental illness die up to 20 years younger than their peers in the UK.

 

·         There is often a circular relationship between mental health and issues such as housing, overcrowding, employment, family problems or debt.

 

·         The local Mental Health Strategy notes that “Tower Hamlets has amongst the highest levels of mental health need in England.”

 

·         The Overview and Scrutiny Committee has recently investigated the links between mental health and housing, such as how the lettings system does not always appropriately assess and respond to mental health problems as a priority need.

 

This Council further notes:

 

·         Despite signing up to the Time to Change pledge to tackle mental health discrimination, Executive Members continue to use stigmatizing mental health language in public meetings and press releases, which undermines the aims of Time to Change and perpetuates negative attitudes to those with mental health problems.

 

This Council believes:

 

·         As a local authority we have a crucial role to play in improving the mental health of everyone in our community and tackling some of the widest and most entrenched inequalities in health.

 

·         Mental health should be a priority across all the local authority’s functions, from public health, adult social care and children’s services to housing, planning and public realm.

 

·         All Councillors, whether members of the Executive or Scrutiny and in our community and casework roles, can play a positive role in championing mental health on an individual and strategic basis. This includes never using negative mental health language for political purposes, particularly directed as an insult.

 

This Council resolves:

 

To sign the Local Authorities’ Mental Health Challenge run by Centre for Mental Health, Mental Health Foundation, Mind, Rethink Mental Illness, Royal College of Psychiatrists and YoungMinds.

 

We commit to:

 

1. Appoint an elected member as ‘mental health champion’ across the Council – this would be a Full Council appointee

 

2. Identify a ‘lead officer’ for mental health to link in with colleagues across the Council

 

3. Follow the implementation framework for the mental health strategy where it is relevant to the Council’s work and local needs

 

4. Work to reduce inequalities in mental health in our community

 

5. Work with the NHS to integrate health and social care support

 

6. Promote wellbeing and initiate and support action on public mental health

 

7. Tackle discrimination on the grounds of mental health in our community

 

8. Encourage positive mental health in our schools, colleges and workplaces

 

9. Proactively engage and listen to people of all ages and backgrounds about what they need for better mental health

 

10. Restate the commitment to the Time to Change pledge and pledge to never use stigmatizing mental health language for political purposes

 

11. Introduce mental health awareness training for all elected members and promote the local authority challenge guide, to ensure we can support our constituents.

 

12. Introduce training for frontline staff, such as housing and lettings teams, so they can identify and support people with mental health needs appropriately.

 

 

12.11  Motion on Nelson Mandela

 

Councillor Rabina Khan moved, and Councillor Rania Khan seconded, the motion as printed in the agenda.

 

Councillor David Snowdon moved, and Councillor Peter Golds seconded, an amendment to the motion as follows:-

 

“To delete the first bullet point of ‘This Council believes’ and replace it with:

 

‘Nelson Mandela died perceived universally as a courageous and principled politician whose example in resisting oppression and inequality inspires all those struggling for racial equality and social justice’.”

 

Following debate the amendment moved by Councillor David Snowdon was put to the vote and was defeated.

 

Councillor Carlo Gibbs moved, and Councillor Sirajul Islam seconded, a further amendment to the motion as follows:-

 

“Under this Council resolves:

 

Delete the second point and replace with:

 

·         To call on the Mayor to allocate a budget from the recently increased Community Events Fund to run an educational project for the borough's schools in Black History month later this year, focused on Nelson Mandela's legacy.

 

·         To instruct officers to draw up options for a permanent tribute to Nelson Mandela in the borough and to present these to full Council in advance of Black History month.

 

·         To call on the Mayor of London and LLDC to name a street in the new Olympic park after Nelson Mandela in recognition of sports power to unite communities.

 

Following debate the amendment moved by Councillor Carlo Gibbs was put to the vote and was agreed.

 

The substantive motion as amended was then put to the vote and was agreed.

 

RESOLVED

 

The Council notes:

 

• On the 5^th December 2013, South African anti-apartheid revolutionary Nelson Mandela passed away.

 

• Mandela served 27 years in prison after being convicted of attempting to overthrow the state while an international campaign lobbied for his release.

 

• After his release, Mandela joined negotiations with President FW de Klerk to abolish apartheid and establish multiracial elections, lead the ANC into victory where he became South Africa’s first black president and won the Nobel Prize for Peace.

 

The Council believes:

 

• Despite Margaret Thatcher describing Nelson Mandela  as a 'terrorist', and the refusal of the Tory government at the time to unite with the rest of Europe in imposing sanctions on South Africa, Nelson Mandela died perceived universally as a courage and principled politician whose example in resisting oppression and inequality inspires all those struggling for racial equality and social justice.

 

• In a borough where so many different races live side by side, Mandela’s determination to create racial equality and unite the black and white people of South Africa holds a particular importance.

 

The Council resolves:

 

• To remember Nelson Mandela, in particular, to use every relevant occasion to remind the young of the borough of the importance of both fighting for their beliefs and reconciliation.

 

·         To call on the Mayor to allocate a budget from the recently increased Community Events Fund to run an educational project for the borough's schools in Black History month later this year, focused on Nelson Mandela's legacy.

 

·         To instruct officers to draw up options for a permanent tribute to Nelson Mandela in the borough and to present these to full Council in advance of Black History month.

 

·         To call on the Mayor of London and LLDC to name a street in the new Olympic park after Nelson Mandela in recognition of sports power to unite communities.

 

 

12.12  Motion regarding Protecting Community Pubs

 

Councillor Denise Jones moved, and Councillor Amy Whitelock Gibbs seconded, the motion as printed on the agenda.

 

The motion was put to the vote and was agreed.

 

RESOLVED

 

This Council notes:

·         That in addition to the provision of its own services the Council should support through its policies and the exercise of its powers a network of well-run community facilities, including shops, pubs, advice centres, places of worship and other local forums and services which are valued by residents. As an example of these, community pubs provide a valuable community service for those who choose to use them.

·         Twenty-six pubs close every week across the country. In Tower Hamlets many pubs have already been converted to flats or stand empty.

·         Recently local pubs such as The Sun in Bethnal Green and the Britannia pub in Mile End have closed down, to the disappointment of local residents.

·         Pubs inject an average of £80,000 into their local economy each year and support almost one million UK jobs, 46% of whom are 16 – 24 year olds.

·         That whilst some pubs can have anti-social behaviour problems which the Council should challenge, the majority offer a positive contribution to our borough and are part of a balanced and inclusive community offering that helps to define the local quality of life.

 

This Council further notes:

·         The recently adopted Managing Development Document policy DM8 specifies that social and community facilities, such as public houses, will be protected where they meet an identified local need and the buildings are suitable for their use.

·         That while conversion of pubs to residential use would be resisted as contrary to planning policy, this does not automatically mean such applications would be rejected.

·         Residents often feel they have no opportunity to prevent their local pubs from being sold off or converted to flats.

·         The demolition of pubs is classed as “permitted development” means planning permission is not required. Between 2003 and 2012, 414 former pubs were demolished in London alone.

 

This Council believes:

·         Local pubs are a hugely important community hub, bringing local people together and providing social inclusion opportunities.

·         While pubs that cause antisocial behaviour should be subject to enforcement action, well managed community pubs should be protected by the council.

 

This Council resolves:

·         To work with residents to list local pubs as Assets of Community Value under the Localism Act, giving greater protection against pubs being sold off to developers

 

·         To support the Sustainable Communities Act proposal: “That the Secretary of State help protect community pubs in England by ensuring that planning permission and community consultation are required before community pubs are allowed to be converted to betting shops, supermarkets and pay-day loan stores or other uses, or are allowed to be demolished.”

 

·         To work together with Local Works and the Campaign for Real Ale to gain support for the proposal from other councils in the region and across the country.

 

 

Motions 12.2, 12.4, 12.5, 12.7, 12.9, 12.13 and 12.14 were not debated due to lack of time.