The questions which have been received from members of the public for this Council meeting are set out in the attached report.  A maximum period of 20 minutes is allocated to this agenda item.

 

The following questions and in each case (except where indicated) a supplementary question were put and were responded to by the relevant Executive Members:

 

6.1       Question from Mr Geoff Juden

 

Would full Council agree with the residents of Weavers, Spitalfields and Banglatown that the park atop the arches, within the Bishopsgate Goods Yard development, be a park which, in all circumstances, is able to provide a cleaner air environment. A Forest Garden?

 

Response by Councillor Rabina Khan, Cabinet Member for Housing

 

Thank you for your question.

 

We would absolutely support the creation of a park on top of the arches within the Bishopgate Goods Yard development.

 

Not only are we in need of green space, especially in that part of the borough – but this could be a fantastic feature – similar to the highline in New York.

 

However, I would also like to ensure that the park would be open to all and that residents would be made to feel welcome.

 

Too often we have seen green space gated off or residents and children made to feel unwelcome in green space developed through new developments.

 

This is why when we adopted the Planning Guidance for the development of Bishopsgate Goods Yard in 2010 we included the opportunity for a new park on top of the arches.

 

The developer will have to consider this guidance when developing their proposal as will the Council when assessing a future planning application.

 

Summary of Supplementary Question from Mr Juden

 

Can we have your personal support?

 

Summary of Councillor Khan’s response to the Supplementary Question

 

Yes, we give you our personal support for this campaign.

 

 

6.2      Question from Ms Pawla Cottage

 

Does the Cabinet Member for Culture support the on-line petition, signed by 124 people, calling for the building of a Columbia Market war memorial to commemorate the air raid on Columbia Market, Columbia Rd, E2 on the first night of the Blitz, 7^th September 1940, whereby a German bomb entered the ventilation shaft of the air raid shelter situated under the Great Hall of Columbia Market, which had a glass roof, causing mass devastation and the loss of 51 lives?  The memorial will be dedicated to those who died as a consequence and to those who survived and still survive.

 

Response by Councillor Rania Khan, Cabinet Member for Culture

 

Thanks you for your question – yes we would absolutely support the petition and the memorial to this sad loss of life.

 

I am pleased that you also plan to dedicate the memorial to those who survived and continue to survive – it will be wonderful testament to the strength of the Blitz Spirit – which helped to sustain East Enders despite the heavy damage and loss of life. 

 

I understand from my colleague Councillor Kabir Ahmed, who is the ward councillor and has been working with your campaign, that the preferred location for the memorial is in the Sivill House Rose Garden and I am happy to meet with you and my officers to discuss how we can make this a reality.

 

Summary of Supplementary Question from Ms Cottage

 

Can you confirm whether any active Council support or resources will be forthcoming?

 

Summary of Councillor Rania Khan’s response to the Supplementary Question

 

The Council has a good track record on providing memorials and we are happy to put forward Council resources as necessary.

 

Procedural Motion

 

Councillor John Pierce then moved, and Councillor Carlo Gibbs seconded, a further procedural motion “that under Procedure Rule 14.1.3 the order of business be varied such that Motion 12.3 “Regarding supporting building of the Columbia Market War Memorial” be taken as the next item of business. The motion was put to the vote and was agreed.

 

6.3       Question from Ms Shuliy Akhter 

 

The residents of this Borough are really concerned regarding Sex Establishment and Gambling Issues.  While we understand the Council’s limitation regarding Gambling because of Gambling Act but this Council could have a “NO Sex Establishment Policy” like other councils. I understand it went to Licensing Committee on 8^th October 2013 but the framework was not adopted.  Can the Council inform the public those councillors were in favour and against?  Since the Oct 2013 how many applications this Council received and how many of these given permission?  What other steps Council took to ensure this Council has No SEV policy?

 

Response by Councillor Ohid Ahmed, Deputy Mayor

 

Thank you for your question and like many residents you have already mentioned the real shambles that the opposition members have made of this matter. 

 

The Mayor and I and Cabinet colleagues are committed to limiting the number of sex encounter establishments in the borough.

                                          

In Cabinet last September the Mayor and Cabinet agreed to prevent new sex encounter establishments opening in our borough.  Sadly the law doesn’t give us the power to close those already operating.  

 

In October it went to the Labour–controlled Licensing Committee – where despite all parties previously agreeing with the policy – it was defeated, by 4 votes to 3.

 

I believe Licensing Committee have since stated they were confused by the voting system.  That is shocking and sad for our residents, but I suggest you write to Labour councillors Khales Uddin Ahmed and Rajib Ahmed, and Tory councillors Peter Golds and David Snowdon and ask them their position, why they did not adopt the policy.  

 

But we do have this item tonight and I very much hope all my councillor colleagues will support it.

 

(No supplementary question was put)

 

 

6.4       Question from Mr Mahbub Alam 

 

The existing Town Hall at Mulberry Place has cost residents over £50 million in rent alone.  Can the Lead Member tell us the progress that has been made with the proposed town hall move to Whitechapel and can he tell us why we need to move?

 

Response by Councillor Alibor Choudhury, Cabinet Member for Resources

 

It is correct that we have lost £50 million in renting the Mulberry Town Hall. The Council has had an ongoing programme of relocation which started with moving staff out of Anchorage House. This saves £7m rent and charges per year.

 

The relocation of the Town Hall to Whitechapel is the completion of this programme. This saves £5m in rent and charges per year. The total savings therefore at the completion of relocation will be £12m a year in rent and charges.

 

The Council is unlikely to be able to stay in Mulberry Place beyond expiry of the current lease in 2020. East India Dock is likely to be converted in to a residential scheme.

 

The landlord has already held pre-application discussions with planners and has begun the public consultation process.

 

The Council have secured a commercially advantageous position with NHS Barts on the purchase of the Royal London Hospital Site in Whitechapel. An offer has been made to and accepted by the board of trustees of NHS Barts.

 

The budget for this was agreed by full Council on 6^th March 2014. Contracts for sale are due to be issued imminently and we anticipate completing on the purchase with the next three months.

 

Summary of Supplementary Question from Mr Alam

 

I would hope that Councillors would be deciding this issue on the basis of the benefit to residents?

 

Summary of Councillor Alibor Choudhury’s response to the Supplementary Question

 

The project will be a massive regeneration catalyst delivering thousands of homes and jobs.

 

 

6.5       Question from Mr Brian Nicholson

 

What is the update on Watts Grove?

 

Response by Councillor Rabina Khan, Cabinet Member for Housing

 

Thank you Brian. I’m sure you’ll remember that last year Labour made a huge fuss about Watts Grove.  They claimed the development had been cancelled because of mismanagement.

 

In fact, we simply didn’t think that the scheme offered value for money for residents, so we put it on hold until a better deal could be struck. 

 

And because we took the long view, I’m proud to say we were able to secure a grant of almost £7m from City Hall.  This is money that would otherwise have come from the council so we’re delivering the project at a huge saving while still delivering the same number of affordable homes.

 

It will provide 149 affordable rented homes of which 45% will be larger family homes. 

The development will also generate £240k New Homes Bonus.

 

Work is now underway with a view to a start on site in early 2015. 

 

As you can see the Watts Grove Development is policy compliant with our planning requirements both within the SPD and the LDF both which have been developed under the leadership of the Mayor.

 

A great deal of work goes into developing such housing projects both by officers and the executive Mayor and this administration.

 

So in fact we have a project just like Poplar Baths, Halieybury Centre, Blackwall Reach Regeneration worked on including securing the Section 106 well before they get to SDC to consider.

 

Summary of Supplementary Question from Mr Nicholson

 

Do you understand that in the past the Council made promises on delivering council housing that were not kept?

 

Summary of Councillor Alibor Choudhury’s Response to the Supplementary Question

 

Yes I understand that there were previous promises of 1000 council homes when none were built but this administration has delivered over 4000 all over the borough.

 

 

6.6       Question from Mr Stephen Beckett

 

Does the Lead Member agree with me that Tower Hamlets is one of the most diverse and cohesive communities in the UK?

 

Response by Councillor Alibor Choudhury, Cabinet Member for Resources

 

Thank you for your question.  With over 18 different ethnic groups and 200 nationalities, Tower Hamlets is one of the most diverse boroughs in the country.

 

I also believe it is one of the most unified, but we all know we have had to struggle hard for that unity. 

 

This year is the 20th anniversary of the election of Derek Beacon, the BNP’s first councillor, and of the campaign to stop Beacon and drive the BNP out of the borough.  That campaign was successful and since then community cohesion in Tower Hamlets has gone from strength to strength.

 

One of the reasons for that is the priority given to our One Tower Hamlets strategy and the promotion of community cohesion.   This work is carried out in a number of ways by working closely with our partners. These include:

 

o   supporting for the New Residents and Refugees Forum;

 

o   supporting initiatives such as Black History Month, Chinese New Year, Holocaust Memorial Day, St Patricks Day and Bangladeshi New Year;

 

o   supporting a range of third sector organisations which help us better meet the needs of our diverse community.

 

And this work is making a real difference.

 

I am proud the Local Government Association has rated Tower Hamlets ‘excellent’ for its “high-quality” equality services which are meeting the needs of people from all backgrounds in the borough.

 

I am proud our Annual Residents' Survey found that 81% of residents think people from different backgrounds were getting on well together in Tower Hamlets, up from 75% in 2010.

 

However, strengthening community cohesion is a constant ongoing issue for us because we face constant threats.

 

We face threats in the form of those on the fringes like English Defence League and their friends.  But we also face threats in the form of irresponsible comments from mainstream politicians and the media.  When the media and local politicians make claims that a Muslim Mayor is an extremist they create fear and suspicion.  They undermine community cohesion in our community.

 

When Robin Wales makes disgraceful and outrageous comments about ‘apartheid’ in Tower Hamlets he undermines community cohesion in Tower Hamlets.

 

And when John Biggs makes comments about the Mayor only wanting to represent one community, he undermines community cohesion in our borough.

 

I assure the residents of Tower Hamlets that we are committed to One Tower Hamlets.  I can assure them we want our borough to be a place where all communities prosper and flourish.

 

And I can assure them that we will not let anyone hinder us in building community cohesion in Tower Hamlets, regardless of whether they are the likes of the EDL or whether they are desperate politicians scrambling for votes.

 

Summary of Supplementary Question from Mr Beckett

 

In the interests of community cohesion would you condemn the comments by Mr Biggs on the Sunday Politics Show about the Mayor favouring the Bangladeshi community?

 

Summary of Councillor Alibor Choudhury’s response to the Supplementary Question

 

In the weeks following his comments there were bomb scares and ‘Christian Patrols’ causing trouble. This is not the sort of person we want to see in office.

 

 

Questions 6.7 to 6.15 were not put at the meeting due to lack of time. The Service Head, Democratic Services indicated that written responses would be provided to the questions. [Note: the written responses are attached at Appendix A to these minutes.]