Agenda and minutes

The minutes of the meeting held on 17 September 2014 were confirmed as correct.

The Assembly noted with deep regret that Freeman Vera Reynolds had passed away on Monday, 29 September 2014.

Councillors spoke in tribute to Vera, noting the work that she did supporting all members of the community, from young children at the Noah’s Ark Centre to the Girls Brigade and the over 50s Breakaway Club.

The Assembly stood for a minute’s silence as a mark of respect.

The Assembly agreed the following appointments:

·  Councillor Freeborn to the Children’s Services Select Committee;

·  Councillor Ahammad to the Licensing and Regulatory Board following Councillor Butt’s resignation;

·  Councillor Rai to the Personnel Board following Councillor Quadri’s resignation;

·  Councillor Young to the Public Accounts and Audit Select Committee, following Councillor Ahammad’s resignation;

·  Councillors Freeborn and McCarthy to the Safer and Stronger Select Committee;

And noted the appointment by Councillor Geddes, Cabinet Member for Regeneration, of Councillor L Rice as deputy on the London Councils Transport and Environment Committee.

The Assembly received this report introduced by Fiona Taylor, Monitoring Officer, which related to a request made at Annual Assembly in June 2014 for a legal view regarding the decision to cease making a payment to the position of Chief Whip as part of the Members’ Allowances Scheme that had been adopted at that meeting.  Clarification was also requested on why the position had changed since the local scheme had been adopted in 2010 and whether the payment made at that time had been illegal or unlawful.

The Chair invited Councillor Rodwell, the Leader of the Council, to speak, who said:

“Members, as the report states, this was requested at our Assembly meeting in June when we took the decision to stop paying an allowance to the Chief Whip. It clarifies the legal position at the same time as providing a wider background to the payment of Chief Whips.

At the time, I was given clear advice by officers that the payment of an allowance to the Chief Whip was not a legal payment. As the report clearly says, and I am pleased to clarify, this is not the case. I do accept that the advice on which I was speaking was wrong. So, I welcome the opportunity to put the record straight.

However, the report also throws new light on the regulations surrounding payments to Chief Whips where they are members of a majority group with an unassailable majority on a Council – just like here in B&D. I refer to the position of the Independent Remuneration Panel for London Councils, highlighted in the advice before you, which says local authority whips should only receive an allowance if they help get business through the Council. They should not simply receive a payment just for helping keep party political discipline. That is the sole remit of political parties. On this basis, justifying an allowance for the Chief Whip where there is a single party only, or where that party holds the vast majority of seats on the Council, becomes very vague. It becomes very problematic and, I believe, open to question. It is for this reason that I believe we have set off in the right direction by deciding not to make a payment to the Chief Whip from May.

It is vital we heed that advice very closely. Councillor Gill in his question to me later in the meeting refers to the Nolan principles. I think this is a good example where this administration is holding dear to those principles.”

The Assembly agreed to note the report.

The Assembly received this report introduced by Councillor Ogungbose, Cabinet Member for Central Services. 

In presenting the report the Cabinet Member thanked the members of the Public Accounts and Audit Select Committee for the work they had carried out in their consideration of the Constitution.

(i)  The Assembly considered the proposed main changes to the new Constitution detailed in section 2 of the report, taking into account the views of PAASC both in relation to the main changes and other aspects put forward by that Committee as detailed;

(ii)  The Assembly agreed In the light of (i) above,to adopt the new Constitution as presented to the last meeting subject to the following amendments:

(a)  That the merger of the ‘Leader’s Questions’ and ‘General Questions’ processes into a single ‘Questions With Notice’ process also make provision for supplementary questions to be asked in the following terms: “After the initial answer, the Councillor who submitted the question may ask one supplementary question arising directly out of the initial question or answer, without notice, and the person who answered the initial question shall respond to the supplementary question wherever possible.  There shall be no further debate on the issue.”

(b)  To confirm the creation of a Licensing Sub-Committee to determine applications, with a membership of three to be made up of Members of the Board, while noting the overriding provision within the Licensing and Regulatory Board’s terms of reference which enable the full Board to consider any matter delegated to the Sub-Committee or officers.

(c)  That the appointment of non-Cabinet Councillors to the various JNC Panels should be the responsibility of the Assembly as part of its general responsibilities in respect of Member appointments, and that the appointment arrangements be amended so that a pool of four non-Cabinet Councillors are appointed for the respective Panels and the Chief Executive, in consultation with the Leader of the Council, is authorised to appoint the two non-Cabinet Councillors from the pool to sit on each panel. 

(d)  That the business at ordinary meetings of the Assembly be amended to include “Receive the minutes of the meetings of JNC committees, sub-committees and panels”.

(e)  That the terms of reference of the JNC Salaries and Conditions Panel be amended to include “… to consider and make final decisions in relation to senior management (JNC) structures / reorganisations” and that the corresponding amendments be made to the Officer Scheme of Delegation; and

(iii)  to authorise the Monitoring Officer to make any consequential amendments prior to the publication of the document, the provisions of which will come into effect at 12 noon on Wednesday, 26 November 2014.

The Assembly received this report introduced by Councillor Geddes, Cabinet Member for Regeneration, providing background on the implementation of a Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL), which would largely take over from Section 106 planning agreements as the primary means of obtaining a contribution from developers towards new infrastructure requirements.

The Cabinet Member referred to the areas that would be funded by CIL contributions in the future and those that would continue to be funded via Section 106 monies. He also advised that the Planning Inspector responsible for examining the Council’s proposals had recommended that the charging schedule was appropriate and should be approved in its published form.

In debating and supporting the report Members raised the following points:

·  very little funding appeared to be going into infrastructure, community space and park improvements in Dagenham;

·  the £70 psm for Zone 1 be reviewed;

·  that the CIL be examined through the Living and Working Select Committee and PAASC.

The Assembly agreed to:

(i)  Adopt the LBBD Community Infrastructure Levy Charging Schedule as set out at Appendix 1 to the report;

(ii)  Approve the introduction of the Community Infrastructure Levy rates from 2 March 2015;

(iii)  Approve that how residents and businesses are consulted on the neighbourhood CIL allocation be agreed on a case by case basis, in agreement with the Cabinet Member for Regeneration;

(iv)  Agree to allow the payment in kind of CIL by land or infrastructure payments;

(v)  Approve the S106 / Planning Obligations Planning Advice Note as set out at Appendix 4 to the report; and

(vi)  Delegate authority to the Divisional Director for Regeneration, in consultation with the Cabinet Member for Regeneration, to make any final amendments permitted by the Examiner’s Report.

The Assembly received this report introduced by Councillor Butt, Cabinet Member for Crime and Enforcement, relating to a petition co-ordinated by the Barking Labour Party containing over 2000 valid signatures from borough residents requesting that the Council seek Secretary of State approval to the making of local byelaw(s) prohibiting spitting and urinating in public places.

In response to Members’ questions, the Cabinet Member went on to say that other boroughs including Enfield have already applied for such a byelaw.  The issue of enforcement was important and initially work would be undertaken in areas where this is happening, such as the Heathway and the Town Centre.  She emphasised the importance of building respect and civic pride in our borough through our schools to stop this dirty habit.

Members further proposed a campaign to eradicate spitting, suggesting that our local football teams might join us, thereby setting a marker within the football environment.

The Chair thanked Councillor Alexander for the work she had done in highlighting this unacceptable behaviour.

The Assembly agreed to:

(i)  Seek the Secretary of State’s approval to the making of a byelaw prohibiting spitting in public spaces and imposing a fine for non compliance; and

(ii)  noted that as urinating in a public placeis currently enforced by the Police under Section 5 of the Public Order Act 1986, there was no need to impose a separate byelaw.

The Assembly received this report introduced by Councillor Butt, Cabinet Member for Crime and Enforcement, relating to a byelaw to prohibit skateboarding in Arboretum Place and the Town Square.

Members raised concerns as to the criminalising of young people.

Councillor Alexander made the following points:

·  There is a park at Castle Green that the young people do not want to use as they say the surface in the Town Centre is better.

·  The skaters frighten residents by riding towards them and then swerving at the last minute.

·  They stay in the town centre until 11/11.30 at night.

The Leader of the Council, in agreeing with Councillor Alexander’s points, said this was a matter of social responsibility; that the young people had been given ample opportunity to work with the community but had chosen not to. 

In responding to Members’ questions, the Cabinet Member thanked Councillor Alexander and emphasised that it was the surface that attracted the skateboarders and that many were teenagers coming from outside the borough.

Officers further advised that whilst enforcement would be as a matter of course, someone would have to have seen the offence taking place, so generally it would come to the Council as the result of a complaint.  Initially, though, the skateboarders would be asked to move on.

The Assembly agreed to approve the byelaw agreed by the Department for Communities and Local Government set out at Appendix 2 to the report, authorise its sealing and proceed with the necessary steps to complete its making as a byelaw of the Council.

The Assembly received this report introduced by Councillor Twomey, the Cabinet Member for Finance, which provided details of the mid-year position for treasury activities and highlighted compliance with the Council’s policies previously approved by the Assembly.

In response to Members’ questions, the Chief Finance Officer advised that:

·  LOBO (lend option/borrow option) were structured loans whereby the Council borrowed at a certain rate.  The bank had an option to change that rate, following which the Council would have an option of repaying the loan without penalty;

·  The Council’s exposure was £40m with four commercial banks, which were considered to be good value loans at the time they had been taken out.

The Assembly agreed to:

(i)  Note the Treasury Management Strategy Statement Mid-Year Review 2014/15;

(ii)  Note that in the first half of the 2014/15 financial year the Council complied with all 2014/15 treasury management indicators;

(iii)  Note the borrowing of £89m through a loan facility from the European Investment Bank (EIB) to support an urban regeneration and economic growth programme agreed by the Assembly on 17 September 2014; and

(iv)  Delegate authority to the Chief Finance Officer, in consultation with the Cabinet Member for Finance, to proportionally amend the counterparty lending limits agreed within the Treasury Management Strategy Statement for the duration of the 2014/15 financial year, subject to a review of this authority in the February 2015 Treasury Management Strategy report to take into account of any potential additional borrowing from the EIB which has been agreed previously by Cabinet.

(The Chair agreed that this matter could be considered at the meeting as a matter of urgency under the provisions of Section 100B (4)(b) of the Local Government Act 1972 to meet the statutory requirements of the Electoral Registration and Administrative Act 2013 in respect of the completion of a review of Borough polling districts and associated polling places by 31 January 2015.)

The Assembly received this report introduced by the Chief Executive, Graham Farrant, in his capacity as Acting Returning Officer, on the outcome of a statutory review of polling districts (areas within ward boundaries) and associated polling places (stations), which was carried out between 19 August and 19 September 2014.

In response to questions from Members, the Democratic Services’ Group Manager (DSGM) stated that the location of polling stations within polling districts FD (Longbridge) and JE (Thames) were still under consideration.  If it is not possible to identify permanent buildings in the lead up to the Parliamentary elections in May 2015, then portacabins would be used.  Consultation as to the precise locations would be undertaken with the appropriate ward members.

The DSGM also advised that the registration system had changed with effect from 10 June this year from household to individual registration.  This had resulted in comparing individuals’ electoral data with that held by the Department for Work and Pensions and those that successfully matched were automatically transferred on to the new register, which will be published on 1 December 2014.  A considerable amount of work was now being undertaken to ensure that going forward the electoral register captures as many qualifying names as possible in the run up to the Parliamentary election.  This includes door to door canvassing, comparing existing data held by the Council as well as a borough wide mail out confirmation of registration letter.

The DSGM asked all Councillors in their dealings with the community to encourage residents to register in person or on line.

The Assembly agreed to:

(i)  Approve for publication the final proposals arising from the review of polling districts and associated polling places as detailed in Appendix A to the report; and

(ii)  Authorise the Chief Executive in his capacity as the ARO to agree any permanent or temporary arrangements until the commencement of the next review that are deemed appropriate in respect of alternative polling stations and/or reconfiguration of polling districts, subject to consultation with relevant ward councillors.

The Chair announced that no motions had been received.

GQ1 from Councillor Quadri:

“How many £millions for infrastructure works and other developments have been brought into Barking and Dagenham in the last six months?”

Response from Councillor Geddes, Cabinet Member for Regeneration:

“I cannot give an exact figure, but:

Barking Station revamp - £5m

London Overground extension £190m – presuming we get this extension
EIB on new affordable housing £89m – there is scope for £150m
Plus facility for another £61m
Schools funding at Barking Riverside  £30m
Stage 2 road at Barking Riverside £10m
London East - Marstons Pub - Restaurant under construction
London East - SOG acquisition c£5m

London East - junction works

Dagenham Dock - Stolthaven expansion under construction

Dagenham Dock - Chinnook Waste to Energy Plant under construction c£100m

Dagenham Dock –Thames Gateway Park expansion

Dagenham Dock - Provision of Ocado Distribution centre

South Dagenham west - Orion Park Kuehne and Nagel new logistics premises – plus £500,000 S106

Marks Gate Phase2 housing- £3m

Lymington Fields Phase 1B and 2 c£30m

Magistrates’ Court residential conversion and expansion c£3.5m

Additional TfL funding for public realm works

We are talking about a total in excess of £500m.

This will help next year and for some time to come.  Clearly, what we are doing is working extremely hard to ensure that jobs created go to local people.

GQ2 from Councillor Channer:

“Can Councillor Rodwell, Leader of the Council and portfolio holder for Communities, explain what response there had been to this year’s White Ribbon Campaign, and why is this so important for Barking and Dagenham?”

Response from Councillor Rodwell, Leader of the Council:

“It has been a hair-raising experience!

By far the best result so far is Billy Bragg’s pledge post - 37,952 likes and more importantly 13,240 shares – a fantastic response.

I am really proud of all the officers involved.  We are taking the White Ribbon Campaign very seriously.  We are the first Council to have a women’s empowerment campaign.”

9.30 pm

In order to conclude the business of the meeting the Assembly agreed in accordance with the Council Constitution, Article 1, paragraph 5.3 to extend the meeting to 10 pm.

GQ3 from Councillor Ahammad:

“I am delighted to be informed about, and welcome, the innovative approach of the European Investment Bank in Barking and Dagenham. However, I should like to know :

·  the total amount that Barking and Dagenham Council will be receiving.

·  Is this a loan or a grant?

·  Is there any agreement to paying the amount back and, if so, then more details, please?

·  How this investment benefit our residents and will it benefit residents in Longbridge ward, the ward that I represent?”

Response from Councillor Twomey, Cabinet Member for Finance:

“Thank you for the question Councillor Ahammad.

The European Investment Bank (EIB) is very flexible in terms of drawing down and paying off loans.  An initial loan of £89m has been agreed, which will be repaid over 30 years, though there is scope to make early repayment if the opportunity arises.  Following further  ...  view the full minutes text for item 34.

LQ1 proposed by Councillor Mullane:

“Referring to the recent case highlighted by Jon Cruddas MP regarding the unmarked grave of Arthur Bradford, who fought in World War One and is buried in Eastbrook Cemetery, can the Leader confirm the Council will continue in its tradition of honouring our war heroes, and help the family to ensure a Gravestone can be placed on the grave, at no cost to the Council?”

Response from the Leader of the Council:

“As Members will know we have a proud tradition of supporting those who have served our country in the armed forces.  The Council recognise and commemorate the sacrifice through our many war and civilian memorials placed across the borough and our remembrance tributes.

Arthur Bradford enlisted in 1915 and was sent to France and following a gas attack was discharged as unfit for military duty in 1916.  He died aged 42 in 1931 and was buried in Eastbrookend Cemetery.

Arthur Bradford is buried in an un-purchased grave, otherwise known as a” common grave” which is also occupied by another fifteen unrelated people. Given this, despite the undoubted sacrifice made by Mr Bradford, I am not in a position to agree to the request being made to erect a gravestone on this grave.

There is no precedent for commemorating any individual in a common grave from the public purse, and no tradition of marking individual graves of residents who have fought for our country, but who did not die whilst on active service.

As Members will be only too well aware, in previous generations, very large numbers of local people served our country in two world wars and indeed have continued to do so both in later conflicts the 20th Century and in this century. It is not possible therefore for us as a Council to assist this family when we would not be in a position to assist all such families.

However, I am pleased to be able to tell Members that our cemetery management regulations do allow for a stone vase to be placed on a “common grave”. This would be a memorial vase of up to a 25cm square with a name, date of birth to date of passing, plus an inscription of the family’s choice. Such a memorial would cost £154 and our staff would be happy to assist with the arrangements if Councillor Mullane would like to put them in touch with the Divisional Director.”

LQ2 from Councillor Gill:

“Does the Leader of the Council believe that democratically elected Councillors should be able to ask questions and/or make representations on behalf of their constituents’ at all public Council meetings, which would be in line with the 'Seven Nolan Principles of Public Life'?”

Response from the Leader of the Council:

“Can I thank Cllr Gill for his question. The fact that he is asking a question at tonight’s Assembly is testament to this administration’s desire for openness and transparency. I would also refer him to the Council’s Constitution which  ...  view the full minutes text for item 35.