The questions which have been received from Councillors to be put at this Council meeting are set out in the attached report.  A maximum period of 30 minutes is allocated to this agenda item.

 

 

The following questions and in each case supplementary questions were put (except where indicated) and were responded to by the Mayor or relevant Executive Member-

 

10.1 Question from Councillor Dan Tomlinson

 

Can the Mayor or Cabinet Member please update Council on the Grafton House fire?

 

Response of Councillor Sirajul Islam, Statutory Deputy Mayor and Cabinet Member for Housing.

 

A fire broke out on the 12th floor of Grafton House, in Mile End on the 29 June. The fire was effectively contained and extinguished by the London Fire Brigade. No residents were injured during the incident.

 

Grafton House was fully refurbished by Eastend Homes approximately ten years ago. This included a rendered cladding refit.

 

The Fire Brigade reported that the fire started in the kitchen, there is extensive damage in the flat where the fire occurred. The fire brigade is satisfied the fire doors did their job effectively in containing the fire and were happy with the established fire procedures. The fire did not move beyond the flat where it started.

 

We would like to thank the Fire Brigade for their speed in resolving this issue and will continue to work in partnership with them over their full fire assessment of Grafton House.

 

Eastend Homes have been advised by the fire brigade in the briefing immediately after the fire that the cause originated in the kitchen and was accidental.

 

Supplementary question from Councillor Tomlinson:

 

What has happened to the residents that have had to be moved out of their properties. Have they been rehoused yet?

 

Councillor Islam’s response to the supplementary question:

 

Yes, I am pleased to say the family where the fire occurred were offered permanent accommodation and they have accepted that offer.

 

10.2 Question from Councillor Peter Golds:

 

Will the Mayor confirm what discussions the administration and council have had with the Royal Borough of Greenwich with regard to proposed changes in the bye laws of the Greenwich Foot Tunnel and the clean air concerns arising from cruise ships moored close to residential areas of the Isle of Dogs.

 

Response of Mayor John Biggs:

 

I met with Denise Hyland who was then Leader of Greenwich in the autumn of 2017 to discuss with officers Enderby Wharf and one or two other issues.  We then wrote to her. Present at that meeting was Councillor Danny Thorpe, who is now the Leader of Greenwich Council. It is fair to say that Councillor Denise Hyland was relatively more positive about the cruise island terminal than Councillor Thorpe and I welcome his change on that. We have written to him again as the new Leader encouraging progress on that.

 

You asked a second question about the foot tunnel. My personal view is that I am not supportive of changing the bye laws of the foot tunnel. I know that Greenwich Council are. But because it’s a bye law change it does not come to me, but to Full Council who will debate this issue and will decide when it does come, whether they want to support a change in the bye laws.

 

Supplementary question from Councillor Golds:

 

I am delighted to know that at last we are actually speaking to Greenwich, because under the previous administration, I went  several times to licensing and planning committee meetings and was very well received by Greenwich Council but the situation was that our Officers and the previous administration took no interest what’s so ever.

 

I understand that the decision on the cycling and the foot tunnel, will be  a decision for this Council, but could you perhaps give an indication as to what your views would be and whether you have made your views clear to Greenwich and have had any input into the submission that would come to us? They have certainly had my views on it as I attended the Cabinet meeting.

 

Mayor Biggs’ response to the supplementary question:

 

On the foot tunnel, I think I have made my views clear but it is for the Council to decide. I think it is a tripartite decision, because it is a bye law eaffecting both the Woolwich Foot Tunnel and the Greenwich Foot Tunnel, so we will see what happens when it arrives. With regards to the discussions with Greenwich, it is interesting to note that since I was first elected and since the beginning of time, Docklands and the Borough were referred to as having three neighbours in Tower Hamlets. These were: Hackney, City of London and Newham. I have introduced the novel concept that we are also neighbours with Southwark, Lewisham and Greenwich. I think as the world has changed, it was perhaps a forbidding barrier, but they are now very much our neighbours and we work closely with them on issues where we need to.

 

 

 

 

 

 

10.3 Question from Councillor Asma Islam:

 

How many members of staff at Greenwich Leisure Limited will benefit from the Mayor’s negotiations with GLL to bring forward the London Living Wage for 18-21 year olds?

 

Response of Councillor Amina Ali, Cabinet Member for Culture, Arts and Brexit:

 

I am very pleased that Greenwich Leisure Limited staff aged 18-21 would now be paid the London Living Wage (LLW), effective immediately. We are very proud that Tower Hamlets Council is a Living Wage employer.

 

As part of the process of securing LLW accreditation, it was agreed with the Living Wage Foundation, that the Council could not retrospectively impose LLW on existing contracts. The GLL contract was one of these contracts, which was up for renewal in 2019.

 

While we could not legally force GLL to increase their pay levels, after negotiations we have secured an agreement with them to pay their 18-21 year old staff London Living Wage from this September. As a result, 34 GLL employees will benefit.

 

Supplementary question from Councillor Islam:

 

As part of the negotiations, is any part of that payment going to be backdated?

 

Councillor Ali’s response to the supplementary question:

 

Although the Council cannot subsidise private employers to pay fair wages, because GLL is providing a frontline council service and in the interests of fairness, the Mayor instructed in this exceptional case, that the council provides the funding to allow GLL to backdate this pay increase to April this year so it matches the date that LLW was introduced for GLL’s 21 plus staff.

 

10.4 Question from Councillor Andrew Wood

 

When the Sea Scouts arrived on the Isle of Dogs they had 13.4 hectares of water to sail in, currently they have 4.7 ha. In the event of the proposed South Dock Bridge being built this will be reduced to 3.15 ha. The existing space is already negatively affected by wind-flow off the new Wood Wharf buildings. What steps will the Council undertake to ensure that the community does not lose this valuable organisation?

 

Response of Councillor Rachel Blake, Deputy Mayor and Cabinet Member for Regeneration and Air Quality:

 

Council Officers are already meeting with the Sea Scouts to discuss this matter.

 

Supplementary question from Councillor Wood:

 

The reason why I asked this question is that I have discovered that the Council had not bothered to consult the Sea Scouts before the public consultation for the new South Dock Bridge and I know that they feel very unloved now by the Council. They don’t get any s106 and they don’t get any grants. They have been negatively impacted by wind flow and the loss of water space. So I think if we can show them some love this would be very much appreciated.  Would you be doing that?

 

Councillor Blake’s response to the supplementary question:

 

We will continue to meet and liaise with them. I have already started looking into the issue to understand exactly which parts of their activities they are most concerned about. There was a public consultation and they were part of that consultation. We are more than happy to continue that engagement.

 

10.5 Question from Councillor Mufeedah Bustin

 

Following recent incidents, what is the council doing to tackle ASB and crime in Island Gardens?

 

Response of Councillor Asma Begum, Deputy Mayor and Cabinet Member for Community Safety and Equalities:

 

The Council ASB Team received two reports of anti-social behaviour in Island Garden Ward, around Blasker Walk and Thames Pathway.  The ASB is primarily caused by young people congregating around the benches, drinking, using nitrous oxide and being noisy. To address the issues, my team have taken a number of steps:

 

•           An ASB Caseworker has been allocated to investigate this issue and identify possible resolutions.

 

•           The Metropolitan Police Safer Neighbourhood Team have been made aware of this issue and have been asked to patrol the area.

 

•           The ASB Team have also established a Joint Action Group (JAG) for the Isle of Dogs which enables the Council to develop actions in partnership with local RSL’s

 

Supplementary question from Councillor Bustin:

 

Do you know anything about the opening of the St Andrew’s Youth Service?

 

Councillor Begum’s response to the supplementary question:

 

Yes I have been meeting up with the youth providers last week and I am aware of it.

 

10.6 Question from Councillor Marc Francis:

 

Will the Lead Member for Finance update me on the progress of the review of the changes to the local Council Tax Reduction Scheme?

 

Response of Councillor Candida Ronald, Cabinet Member for Resources and the Voluntary Sector:

 

The Mayor and Cabinet have been looking in detail at the current local Council Tax reduction scheme and possible changes and hopefully improvements.  We have developed potential options to refine elements of the scheme, particularly in relation to the disabled, non - dependents and the self- employed. Any potential changes would be subject to a full public consultation and a report has just been published and would be considered by Cabinet next week and would go out to consultation. The feedback from the consultation would be incorporated into another report, to be considered by Cabinet probably in October. Any proposed changes would come to this Council for agreement.

 

Supplementary question from Councillor Marc Francis:

 

Can I thank the Lead Member for that very positive response and can I thank the former Lead Member, Councillor Edgar for his work on this issue and taking on board the concerns that I have raised, particularly in relation to disabled non -dependants, whose head of the household are being hit as a result of the inclusion of disability living allowance or personal independence payments in the income assessment. Looking at the report that’s going to Cabinet next week, I am not entirely clear what proposal is going to be agreed, but I look forward to that.

 

I also think that it is very important to bear in mind that there are continuing concerns about the self -employed claimants and the impact that they are experiencing due to the use of the minimum income floor. I also have to raise concerns about the continuing use of Section 13A for relief from Council tax bills as opposed to the establishment of a proper hardship fund.

 

Can the Lead Member take all of these concerns on board and continue with all the good work she is doing to minimise some of the unfortunate impacts that arise as a result of previous changes? 

 

Councillor Ronald’s response to the supplementary question:

 

Thank you for your comments.

 

10.7 Question from Councillor Sabina Akhtar:

 

Can the Mayor or Lead Member please provide an update on the recent drug raids and how successful these raids have been?

 

Response of Councillor Asma Begum, Deputy Mayor and Cabinet Member for Community Safety and Equalities:

 

Under Operation Continuum, four areas of the borough have been targeted so far – Shadwell, Stepney, Bow and Whitechapel. Their work has resulted in dawn raids leading to:

 

•           150 arrests.

•           34 properties being raided.

•           £58,000 seized in cash under the Proceeds of Crime Act.

•           Recovered 2 handguns.

•           4 weapons sweeps.

•           93 ASB warnings.

•           41 Section 59 warnings

•           Seized drugs including crack cocaine and 200 ecstasy pills

•           Seized over £10,000 in cash in one raid alone

 

The council and THH then provide a wrap-around support. THEOs patrol the area. Graffiti is removed and overgrown areas where weapons or drugs might be hidden are cut back. 

 

Meetings with residents are arranged to provide updates of the outcomes from the joint operation.

 

Supplementary question from Councillor Akhtar:

 

Since they have been successful, are we planning to continue?

 

Councillor Begum’s response to the supplementary question:

 

Absolutely.

 

10.8 Question from Councillor Ehtasham Haque:

 

Can the Cabinet Member provide an update on the latest Ofsted monitoring visit?

 

Response of Councillor Danny Hassell, Cabinet Member for Children, Schools and Young People:

 

Ofsted visited the Council at the beginning of May and the focus of the inspection was around vulnerable adolescents, so they were looking at children at risk of criminal exploitation, sexual exploitation and going missing. They looked at a range of areas -  that they also looked at in December 2017.

 

I am pleased to say that Ofsted reported that there had been a substantial improvement in the quality of practice with this group of exploited children and their families.

 

They looked at the co – location of a multi - agency team. Our new exploitation hub, which included Police and staff tackling some of these issues. They reported a renewed focus on children as victims of exploitation, rather than criminalising their behaviour and they stated that this is leading to an enhanced understanding of the circumstances and the analysis of risk. They said that social workers, and this is very important, have a proper understanding of children’s lived experience.

 

We are not complacent and we know that there are challenges that remain. We will continue to work with various agencies to continue to improve our services for our most vulnerable young people.

 

No supplementary question was asked.

 

10.9 Question from Councillor Kevin Brady:

 

How many children and families are using our children’s services following the recent changes?

 

Response of Councillor Danny Hassell, Cabinet Member for Children, Schools and Young People:

 

I’m pleased to say that our children’s centres are now reaching far more adults and children than previously. Our centres saw a total of over 53,000 contacts in quarter 1 of this year alone. In that first quarter, we reached over 5,000 children under five living in the Borough which is a fantastic achievement. In 2017, we had 10,000 children who were reached and 76% of those were from the 25 most deprived areas in the Borough.

 

Supplementary question from Councillor Brady:

 

Can the Lead Member update us on the number of sessions that children are attending or are available?

 

Councillor Danny Hassell’s response to the supplementary question:

 

I know there were some concerns about the number of sessions being delivered in our children centres.  If we look at comparing our sessions to 2015/16, before the changes we made recently, there were around 2800 sessions in our children’s centres. I am pleased to report that in this first quarter of this financial year, there hasve been 3741 sessions delivered in our children’s centres. That is an important improvement that will help us to reach our families including our most deprived families.

 

10.10 Question from Councillor John Pierce:

 

Will the Mayor consult residents on the parking times for the Council’s A5 parking zone in Weavers Wards, to mirror those in Shoreditch, to stop our residential streets being used as a car park for Hackney’s visitors?

 

Response of Mayor John Biggs:

 

This is a major priority area for the administration to look at reviewing our range of parking policies and parking hours and the way in which it works. I know that this is going to be a bit like negotiating a crocodile filled swamp.

 

In answer to your question, the controlled parking zone times in this area has hours of 08:30 – 19:00 Mon – Fri, which is 30 minutes longer than Hackney and 08:30 – 14:00 on Sunday, where there are no restrictions in Hackney. The only possible impact could be on a Saturday where they have enforcement and we don’t. But I think that does not really answer your question. The problem we have is that there a massive demand for parking, particularly at weekends in this area and a shortage of parking spaces.

 

The review I would like us to carry out in consultation with residents is about how we should amend our parking policies to make them work better for the people in Tower Hamlets without having untoward knock on effects. In this case, we would need to work with Hackney.

 

Supplementary question from Councillor Pierce:

 

I think the figures the Mayor has is in regard to the wider Hackney parking order rather the specific area of Shoreditch. I am sure it goes up until midnight and this is what the residents have asked for. There will be a petition coming to this Council and I hope the Mayor can support that.

 

Mayor Biggs’ response to the supplementary question:

 

I am very happy to look at that. We have commenced a number of further consultations. It has taken a while to get them started in the Fish Island Area. If there are local reasons for changing the hours I would very happy to do that. For every change although, you will find there are objections and we need to get that balance right and manage the convenience of life including economic life in the area.

 

10.11 Question from Councillor Puru Miah:

 

Would the lead member support calls for the bus stop in front of Altab Ali Park, called Adler Street, to be renamed as Altab Ali Park?

 

Response of Councillor David Edgar, Cabinet Member for Environment:

 

The legacy of Altab Ali is a really important one.  It really matters that we  never forget the tragic loss of his life and that we maintain the fight against racism. It is fitting to have the park named after Altab Ali and that we pay tribute each year.  Renaming that bus stop will be another way we could remember him and pay tribute to him. As we all know, the naming of bus stops is a responsibility of the Transport for London (TFL), but I would be happy to write to TFL and to the Assembly Member for the area, to add my support and the Councils support to this campaign. It would be really good if we could make that change and I am very happy to support it and do what I can to make it happen.

 

No supplementary question was asked.

 

10.12 Question from Councillor Muhammad Harun:

 

I understand that due to non-attendance of members during the previous Mayors administration, Poplar HARCA discontinued our membership from their boardroom. Will the Mayor explain whether it is still possible to include our members on the Poplar HARCA board to represent LBTH – if so could the Mayor take appropriate steps?

 

Response of Councillor Sirajul Islam, Statutory Deputy Mayor and Cabinet Member for Housing:

 

It is shameful that members of the previous administration failed to turn up to meetings. Poplar HARCA confirmed that one of a number of the considerations in making changes in 2014 was the attendance record of Council nominees.

 

In 2014 Poplar HARCA amended its Articles of Association to change the make-up of its Board.  This resulted in the London Borough of Tower Hamlets no longer having a nominee place on the Board.

 

The anticipated de-regulatory changes recently implemented through the Housing and Planning Act 2016, are designed to prevent local authorities having significant influence over RP Board decision-making process. Poplar HARCA is required to comply with the Regulator of Social Housing’s Governance Standard.  The Regulator recently re-confirmed Poplar HARCA had the highest governance grade. 

 

Poplar HARCA openly advertises Board vacancies.  It welcomes applications from Councillors, and anyone else, interested in, and qualified. I am very happy to take up this matter with Poplar HARCA

 

No supplementary question was asked.

 

Question 10.13 was not put due to lack of time. A Written response would be provided to the question. (Note the written response is included in Appendix A to these minutes.)