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 followed by a supplementary question were put and were responded to by the Mayor or relevant Executive Member:-

6.1       Question from Ahmed Hussain

1. Argent wants to make the most money out of the regeneration 2. OHG wants to increase its stock as much as it can and wants to borrow money against OUR property 3. The council wants to shift some of its residents from the waiting list to the newly built homes (even though they will not get the preferred 35% out of this regeneration); they also want to increase their receipt on council tax All of the above are supported by the council under the current Mayors Executive Power

But what is the council doing to ensure:

1. The current leasehold and freeholders will get a like for like property; surely the council needs to be fair for all and not just look after itself, housing association and the developer?

Response of Councillor Rachel Blake,Cabinet Member for Strategic Development and Waste:

I fundamentally disagree with the assertion within the question and as far as I know so does the Mayor that all of the above are supported by the Council under the current Mayor’s executive power. Not only does he not have the power on this but also I don't believe it to be our vision for the Island. Of course we will and we have acted fairly on this issue. One of the things I was most concerned about when we first came into administration was the lack of attention provided by the previous administration on this very issue. As far as I could tell they had done nothing to hold One Housing Group to account on some of the plans that they had brought forward. It is interesting that so many of them have left, they don't even want to hear our conversation now about what is to be done about some of these plans that lack consultation and that lack, frankly, common decency in terms of how they have related to residents. I would like to be really clear that I dispute your assertion that parts one, two and three of your question are supported by the Council and I look forward to what you have to say next.

Supplementary question from Ahmed Hussain:

If there was a chance I would probably rewrite my question, but that is not the option here today.

The things that the Mayor and yourself are doing our brilliant and especially what Candida Ronald is doing with the four estates forum, which I attend, but there is more to do. The thing is, that it is our houses. It is our livelihood and you really need to take that in consideration and my supplementary question is, if the last administration could deliver a like-for-like for the Blackwall Reach regeneration on Robin Hood Gardens, then surely you can do that too or at least put some pressure to this regeneration to include like-for-like?

Councillor Rachel Blake’s response to supplementary question:

I am really pleased that you think that what we are doing so far is brilliant. As you know we have set up a working group to hold them to account. We demanded that they were straight with residents when they put forward a bid, that they had no support from residents for additional grants and we have really been really clear with them that they have no understanding of their own stock and they have no vision for the consultation on this scheme and we have made sure, we have held them to account, we have made sure that they bring forward a proper stock condition analysis that the four estates working group, that I think you are probably aware of, they had done none of that work before we started to really probe some of their ideas. We completely understand that these are your homes and that is why some of the ways in which this project has been talked about has appalled us so much. Specifically with your point around Blackwall Reach, that came with millions of pounds of a Labour government investing in new social housing. That's a Labour government that I campaigned for solidly in 2005, in 2010 and 2015 and again in 2017 and it is a Labour government that will bring forward significant amounts of additional money for social housing. That is how they were able to provide that very special deal that leaseholders got in the Blackwall Reach scheme. In terms of like-for-like we have to keep talking about like-for-like and what that actually means to leaseholders. We really are keen to get to the bottom of what like-for-like will mean for people, but we have to acknowledge that that deal, the Blackwall Reach deal, of that significant amount of money and that significant offer for leaseholders was only available because the Labour government chose to put in significant Investments into new affordable housing and the Tory government that we have at the moment is only prepared to put additional money into keeping itself in power rather than getting people into affordable homes that they so desperately need. Thank you for the question I hope we can keep talking.

6.2       Question from Natasha Bolter:

Could the Mayor please highlight his approach to bullying within his workforce and the community at large?

Response of Mayor John Biggs:

The answer is very simple. I am committed to tackling bullying both within the Council and across the Borough and unlike the previous administration I am an open and transparent Mayor and welcome constructive dialogue with everyone in our community whether they agree with me or not, rather than bullying those who disagree with me. More formally, if staff face concerns about bullying then there are proper personnel procedures and similar procedures apply if I think members of the public feel they are being oppressed in some way and I would want to uphold all of people's rights in our Borough to be protected from bullying.

Supplementary question fromNatasha Bolter:

Mayor John Biggs, substantial allegations of islamophobia and bullying has come into the public domain by Councillor Khatun. This is putting politics into disrepute and it would be entirely improper and unprofessional to make such allegations without evidence. Can either you or Councillor Khatun affirm your claims with evidence and without proper evidence, one of you should resign?

Response of Mayor John Biggs:

I am not aware of any formal allegation. I am aware there was a public meeting that was on the Twittersphere and was attended by a number of people, including yourself, at which various assertions were made, but as I have said if personnel face accusations or feel they have been bullied then there are proper procedures within the Council to protect their wellbeing of employees’ well-being within the Council. If other members of a political party have a similar position, then within the rules of that party there will be procedures for those concerns to be pursued within the proper party complaints procedure, which is not really a matter which we would discuss publicly in the first instance. Sadly I can't see where your question is going and I think what we would need to see would be a formal process at the end of which people would form a conclusion.

6.3       Question from Kabir Hussain:

Will the Mayor inform how many empty properties (excluding second homes) were in the Borough for each year between 2010-2016/17, and at the present?

Response of Councillor Rachel Blake,Cabinet Member for Strategic Development and Waste:

The Council Tax records of empty dwellings in the Borough, excluding second homes between April 2010 and April 2017, are:

April 2010 – 5,142

April 2011 – 4,757

April 2012 – 5,383

April 2013 – 4,596

April 2014 – 4,880

April 2015 – 4,233

April 2016 – 5,105

April 2017 – 6,211

Supplementary question from Kabir Hussain:

The Council record shows that there were 4,596 empty properties excluding second homes on 1st of April 2013, but it shot up to more than 6,098 empty properties in February 2017. Whilst huge waiting list, homelessness and housing crisis, do you think you are doing enough to tackle this issue of growing rate of empty properties.

Councillor Rachel Blake’s response to supplementary question:

I think we could always do more on empty homes, I think there is always more to do. You will probably know that the way we tackle empty homes is, we have services that will pursue the people who are allowing their homes to stay empty. There is always a spike in empty homes when they are actually counted, because as soon as they come onto council tax records they are new homes and they might be waiting a short period before they come in. I should add that you heard my response earlier, I think that tackling empty homes is a really important part of solving London's housing crisis. I also think that building genuinely affordable social homes is the key way to solve London's affordability crisis. This administration is doing that. We set ourselves a target of 1,000 Council homes and we will also be looking into the empty homes that you are concerned about, but what we really want to see is some genuinely affordable homes coming forward in the Borough.

Question 6.4 was not put due to the absence of the questioner. A written response would be provided to the question.  (Note:  The written response is included in Appendix ‘A’ to these minutes.)