The Committee received and noted a report that contained recommendations in relation to disposals and entering into contracts; provided an update on the status of the acquisition of the site for the new Civic Centre and presented the business case as requested for the new Civic Centre. 

The Committee reviewed and questioned officers on the proposal and programme for procurement of new Civic Centre at Whitechapel, including on implications for One Stop Shop and Idea Stores provision.  The main points of the discussion are summarised as follows:

The Committee:

• Expressed concern that the sale of properties to fund the procurement of new Civic Centre at Whitechapel would have a negative impact on service provision.
• Heard that the Council must commit to a new civic centre, or face occupying a number of disparate and poorly sited buildings that will lead to inefficiencies and increased costs of operation.
• Heard that the justification for the further consolidation of Council administrative buildings into a purpose built mixed use civic hub had been predicated on the disposal of some if not all current administrative sites and additional surplus sites for the capital receipts to cross fund the new development. All these disposals were also intended to deliver significant new housing to the Borough.
• Heard that the East India Dock was considered to be a poor location to best serve the needs of the borough’s residents. East India Dock Estate, whilst reasonably served by public transport is located in the extreme east of the borough in close proximity to Canary Wharf and has perceived problems of customer access and approachability. In addition, development of the complex was being proposed by the landowner and is currently in discussion with Planners.
• Wanted to know if Gladstone Place was sold how the loss of the One Stop Shop and Idea Stores provision would be addressed.  In response it was heard that consideration was to be given as to how services would be re-provided from Whitechapel and other refurbished council offices once a new service model had been developed.
• Heard that the Project Board would be chaired by either a Corporate Director or the Head of Paid Service.
• Wanted assurances that Councillors participating in the proposed scrutiny and governance arrangements for the Civic Centre have full and unrestricted access to all of the paper work and documentation throughout the process.  In response it was heard that the necessary paperwork would be made available to the Committee.
• Heard that the Commissioners would have to agree any disposals and that the new service delivery model had been developed in consultation with the Commissioners.  The Commissioners would also have to be satisfied that the disposals and delivery model had been systematically researched and verified.
• Questioned assumptions on which officers had decided not to recommend rebuilding on the London Electricity Board (LEB) site.  This site the Committee felt should be considered as it was felt to provide a more cost effective solution.
• Expressed concerns about cost, timescales, deliverability, effect on the Borough, and the notice provided to members of the purchase, as well as sequence of events which had seen the Council firstly acquire a building and then seek to build a service delivery model around this.
• Heard that 7 potential civic centre options had been tested in the business case. Having previously identified the practical alternatives and the base case of staying in Mulberry Place the results of these alternatives were outlined in the report e.g. in each case the available disposal receipt and housing delivery from surplus stock had been modelled.

As a result of consideration of this report the Chair Moved and it was:-

RESOLVED that the Committee:

1. Questioned the assumptions on which officers had decided not to recommend rebuilding on the LEB Building site; and

2. Expressed concerns about cost, timescales, deliverability, effect on the Borough, and the notice provided to members, as well as sequence of events which had seen council firstly acquire a building and then seek to build a service delivery model around this.

3. Wanted assurances that Councillors participating in the proposed scrutiny and governance arrangements for the Civic Centre have full and unrestricted access to all of the paper work and documentation throughout the process.

The responses received are set out in Appendix 1