Agenda item

Motion 1. Welcoming the Council’s plans for Saint George’s Day

 

Moved by Councillor Jamu and seconded by Councillor Agrawal

 

"The Council welcomes news that this Labour Council plans to hold Saint George’s Day celebrations this year across the borough. The Council acknowledges that the borough should do more to celebrate Saint George’s Day and hopes that the planned events will be popular and well attended."

 

The following amendment was then moved by Councillor Bailey and seconded by Councillor Barnbrook:

 

"This Council welcomes the news that the Labour Group has at long last decided to fund Saint George's Day celebrations. To ensure that future Saint George's Day celebrations are a success, well planned and attended, this Council will set aside £50,000 every year for Saint George's Day celebrations. As a further commitment to recognise the English and Saint George's Day, the Council will, from this day forward, fly the Union flag and the flag of England, the St George's Cross, above the Civic Centre and Barking Town Hall. "

 

There then followed a debate with Members making comments on both the amendment and the original motion.  A summary of the comments in support of the motion is as follows:

 

• councillors have previously tried to generate interest for celebrating St. Georges day with mixed success,

 

• any day which commemorates heritage and brings communities together should be celebrated and embraced, and,

 

• flying flags help celebrate people’s identities and this should be encouraged on special occasions, however flying flags on a daily basis dilutes its meaning,

 

Members that opposed the amendment agreed that it would be unwise to set aside a fixed amount of money to spend marking the occasion as it could be higher or lower than the proposed amount in any year.

 

In making his closing remarks, Councillor Bailey stated his support for the Council’s decision to commemorate St George’s day but also expressed his disappointment that Members would not support his proposal to set aside £50,000 every year for the occasion.

 

Councillor Jamu summarised by encouraging Members to recognise and celebrate the different cultures thriving in Barking and Dagenham.  He called on people to take pride in their identities and for a mutual respect to be shown to people with different ethnic backgrounds and religions.  He spoke of a yearly Sikh festival which celebrated all cultures and ethnicities by flying a myriad of flags.

 

The amendment was put to the vote and was not agreed as follows:

 

For:  Councillors Bailey, Barnbrook, Buckley, Ronald Doncaster, Knight, Rustem and Steed.

 

Against:  Councillors Agrawal, Alexander, Barns, Bramley, Carpenter, Carroll, Collins, Davis, Denyer, Fairbrass, Fani, Flint, Nirmal Gill, Rocky Gill, Hemmett, Hunt, Jamu, Justice, Kallar, Little, McDermott, McKenzie, Patricia Northover, Warren Northover, Obasohan, Poulton, Rawlinson, Reason, Rush, Liam Smith, Nadine Smith, Twomey, Vincent, Lee Waker, Philip Waker and West.

 

Abstain:  None.

 

The original motion was put to the vote and was agreed as follows:

 

For:  Councillors Agrawal, Alexander, Barns, Bramley, Carpenter, Carroll, Collins, Davis, Denyer, Fairbrass, Fani, Flint, Nirmal Gill, Rocky Gill, Hemmett, Hunt, Jamu, Justice, Kallar, Little, McDermott, McKenzie, Patricia Northover, Warren Northover, Obasohan, Poulton, Rawlinson, Reason, Rush, Liam Smith, Nadine Smith, Twomey, Vincent, Lee Waker, Philip Waker and West.

 

Against:  Councillors Bailey, Barnbrook, Knight and Steed.

 

Abstain:  Councillor Buckley, Ronald Doncaster and Rustem.

 

 

Motion 2. Homes not caravans

 

Moved by Councillor Liam Smith and seconded by Councillor Fairbrass.

 

"This Council believes that families and communities are stronger when people have houses or flats of their own to call home. This Council will do everything possible to make sure all our tenants are housed in decent homes and we do not believe that caravans are an acceptable substitute for a decent home. Therefore, this Council condemns the BNP’s policy of wanting to round up 500 local families and move them into cheap second hand caravans."

 

The following amendment was then moved by Councillor Bailey and seconded by Councillor Barnbrook:

 

"This Council believes that families and communities are stronger when people have houses or flats of their own to call home. This Council recognises the right of the British people and longstanding residents of the borough to have a priority in housing. It will, in future, recognise these people's rights and do all it can to ensure they have the priority in housing, and not foreigners."

 

Councillor Bailey in moving his amendment, claimed he had been misquoted by Councillor Liam Smith in the original motion.

 

Councillors Bramley, Carpenter, Fairbrass, Liam Smith, Lee Waker and Phil Waker contributed to the debate, indicating their support for the original motion and opposition of the amendment. Comments supporting their points of view are summarised as follows:

 

• not a misquote, the proposal to house people in caravans was quite clear in the amended budget, the minutes of that debate had just been agreed by the Assembly which included Councillor Bailey and when questioned during the debate he stated that the caravans would be located in Barking Riverside and that people often holidayed in caravans,

 

• believe in housing people in need, London Borough of Barking and Dagenham has been commended by Iain Wright, the Housing Minister for leading the way in social housing provision,

 

• the Council continued to take ownership and invest in social housing when other local authorities gave away the responsibility,

 

• proposal to house people in caravans was cruel and unfeeling,

 

• it is untrue that foreigners are housed before local people, Councillor Bailey’s suggestions demonstrate a lack of knowledge in housing policy,

 

• the Council continues to provide housing for local residents in need as well as people referred from other local authorities such as Havering and Westminster,

 

• the Council can not ignore its duties under the Housing Act which instructs local authorities to house people on a needs basis, therefore housing people on an emergency basis becomes necessary and expensive, and,

 

• confusing proposals by the BNP, especially when they had originally opposed the Barking Riverside scheme on grounds of flooding risks.

 

Councillor Justice declared his opposition to both the original motion and the amendment, claiming that the original motion was political applauding and that the term “foreigner”, as stated in the amendment, was objectionable.

 

Councillor Barnbrook declared his support for the amendment claiming that the BNP proposal to accommodate people in need of short-term emergency housing was not solely based on caravans.  Alternative housing such as units made of prefabricated materials might be used or other cheaper alternatives to save costs.  He also alleged that the Right-to-Buy scheme, introduced by a Conservative Government, had contributed to the shortage in housing supply.

 

In making his closing remarks, Councillor Bailey alleged that the Labour Government was failing in its responsibility to look after the needs of people in the country.  The Government had not been elected to house the entire world.  He claimed that EU nationals would be housed more quickly than local people provided they met lenient criteria, thus causing resentment among local residents.  He claimed that he had meant to say static units and not caravans and that if the local people’s needs continued to be ignored then the voters would have their say.

 

In making his closing remarks, Councillor Liam Smith sated that page 6 of the minutes of the last Assembly records Councillor Bailey as using the term, “previously used caravans.” Councillor Liam Smith highlighted the difference between the political parties, stating that BNP want caravans for people and that Labour want to build homes.

 

The amendment was put to the vote and not agreed as follows:

 

For:  Councillors Bailey, Ronald Doncaster, Knight,

 

Against:  Councillors Agrawal, Alexander, Barns, Bramley, Carpenter, Carroll, Collins, Davis, Denyer, Fairbrass, Flint, Nirmal Gill, Rocky Gill, Hemmett, Hunt, Jamu, Kallar, Little, McDermott, McKenzie, Patricia Northover, Warren Northover, Obasohan, Poulton, Rawlinson, Reason, Rush, Liam Smith, Nadine Smith, Twomey, Vincent, Lee Waker, Philip Waker and West.

 

Abstain:  Barnbrook, Buckley, Justice, Rustem and Steed.

 

The original motion was put to the vote and was agreed as follows:

 

For:  Councillors Agrawal, Alexander, Barns, Bramley, Carpenter, Carroll, Collins, Davis, Denyer, Fairbrass, Flint, Nirmal Gill, Rocky Gill, Hemmett, Hunt, Jamu, Kallar, Little, McDermott, McKenzie, Patricia Northover, Warren Northover, Obasohan, Poulton, Rawlinson, Reason, Rush, Liam Smith, Nadine Smith, Twomey, Vincent, Lee Waker, Philip Waker and West.

 

Against:  Councillors Bailey, Barnbrook, Buckley, Ronald Doncaster, Knight, Rustem and Steed.

 

Abstain:  Councillor Justice.

 

 

Motion 3. Thanking residents for voting for Mayesbrook Park

 

Moved by Councillor Hunt and seconded by Councillor Carpenter

 

"The Council offers its thanks to every local person who voted for Mayesbrook Park in the Help A London Park competition. Thanks to their votes, Mayesbrook Park came in the top ten of London parks and was awarded a massive £400,000 grant.

 

The Council congratulates local people on their success and looks forward to seeing the money spent on making Mayesbrook Park one of London's finest."

 

Councillors Agrawal, Buckley, Carpenter and Little spoke in support of the motion, a summary of their comments follows:

 

• special thanks to residents and elected Members in Becontree ward for working and campaigning for the grant,

 

• proud of the park and of the achievement in securing funding to make it even more attractive for local people,

 

• thanks to Lorraine Pulham and her team of council officers for their effort and support throughout the campaign, and,

 

• thanks and congratulations to the parks team, safer neighbourhood teams and neighbourhood management teams for their contributions and hard work.

 

In making her closing remarks, Councillor Hunt gave special thanks and congratulations to the team of councillors and officers who had worked tirelessly in the final three days of campaigning.  She reserved particular thanks to Lorraine Pulham and her team of officers who she felt were vital in securing the crucial votes and were especially helpful at directing members of the public to a website where they were able to vote on-line.

 

The motion was put to the vote and unanimously agreed as follows:

 

For:  Councillors Agrawal, Alexander, Bailey, Barnbrook, Barns, Bramley, Buckley, Carpenter, Carroll, Collins, Davis, Denyer, Ronald Doncaster, Fairbrass, Fani, Flint, Nirmal Gill, Rocky Gill, Hemmett, Hunt, Jamu, Justice, Kallar, Knight, Little, McDermott, McKenzie, Patricia Northover, Warren Northover, Obasohan, Poulton, Rawlinson, Reason, Rush, Rustem, Liam Smith, Nadine Smith, Steed, Twomey, Vincent, Lee Waker, Philip Waker and West.

 

Against:  None

 

Abstain:  None

 

 

Motion 4. Supporting vulnerable children

 

The Chair asked the Assembly to note the typographical error in the agenda pack and stated that the final word in the motion be amended to read Boarding Schools and not Borstals.

 

Moved by Councillor Alexander and seconded by Councillor Rush

 

"It is one of the greatest tragedies in life to hear about children whose parents are unable to look after them. This Council believes these young and vulnerable children are given the best chance in life by being raised within a strong and caring foster family. Therefore, this Council condemns the BNP’s policy of wanting to take these children from their safe family homes and put them in Boarding Schools."

 

The following amendment was then moved by Councillor Bailey and seconded by Councillor Barnbrook:

 

"It is one of the greatest tragedies in life to hear about children whose parents are unable to look after them. This Council recognises that its Children's Services Department has failed in the past to ensure families receive proper support and will take steps to improve its service so families can remain together. "

 

There then followed a lengthy debate on both the motion and the amendment.  Councillors Alexander, Bramley, Carpenter, Fairbrass, Justice, McDermott, Lee Waker and Phil Waker offered statements supporting the motion and condemning the amendment, their comments are summarised as follows:

 

• The council’s achievements in childcare services are well documented, they include an outstanding rating given by the audit commission for foster care.

 

• It is a nonsense to suggest that the Council has failed in its duty to provide support and care to children and families, it continues to be awarded for well run, pioneering schemes for children and families in need.

 

• The proposal to put vulnerable children in boarding schools is unfeeling and heartless. It ignores the wide ranging needs of children who have suffered through abuse, neglect or disabilities.

 

• Supporting strong stable families is a key component in helping to raise good grounded children.  Officers working with looked after children are very committed, hard-working and caring and their efforts should therefore be applauded.

 

• Everyone in the Council has a responsibility to protect the children of the borough, Members and officers therefore, have a duty to report any suspicious activities to the appropriate services.

 

• Not feasible to build an establishment large enough to accommodate all of the vulnerable children of the borough.

 

• Evidence has shown institutionalised children suffering terrible abuse, the Council must continue to provide loving stable homes for vulnerable children if immediate families are unable or unwilling to care for them.  34 children who were previously cared for by foster parents in the borough have gone on to receive higher education.

 

In summarising, Councillor Bailey alleged that the Labour Council had destroyed families and created an industry serving asylum seeking children.  He claimed that the party continued to promote spin and lies.  He claimed that the Council was not confident enough to source UK base social workers it had to recruit specialists from the U.S.A to handle child social care cases.  Councillor Bailey claimed that the Labour party had created a demon it could now not control.

 

In making her closing remarks Councillor Alexander condemned Councillor Bailey for referring to foster carers as demons.  She appealed to her colleagues to have regard to the needs of children of the borough and urged Members to protect the borough’s children by reporting any suspicions immediately to the Children’s Services Department. 

 

The amendment was put to the vote and was not agreed as follows:

 

For:  Councillors Bailey, Barnbrook, Buckley, Ronald Doncaster, Knight and Rustem.

 

Against:  Councillors Agrawal, Alexander, Barns, Bramley, Carpenter, Carroll, Collins, Davis, Denyer, Fairbrass, Fani, Flint, Nirmal Gill, Rocky Gill, Hemmett, Hunt, Jamu, Justice, Kallar, Little, McDermott, McKenzie, Patricia Northover, Warren Northover, Obasohan, Poulton, Rawlinson, Reason, Rush, Liam Smith, Nadine Smith, Twomey, Vincent, Lee Waker, Philip Waker and West.

 

Abstain:  Councillor Steed.

 

The original motion was put to the vote and was agreed as follows:

 

For:  Councillors Agrawal, Alexander, Barns, Bramley, Carpenter, Carroll, Collins, Davis, Denyer, Fairbrass, Fani, Flint, Nirmal Gill, Rocky Gill, Hemmett, Hunt, Jamu, Justice, Kallar, Little, McDermott, McKenzie, Patricia Northover, Warren Northover, Obasohan, Poulton, Rawlinson, Reason, Rush, Liam Smith, Nadine Smith, Twomey, Vincent, Lee Waker, Philip Waker and West.

 

Against:  Councillors Bailey, Barnbrook, Knight and Steed.

 

Abstain:  Councillor Buckley, Ronald Doncaster and Rustem.

 

 

Motion 5. Condemning an alleged murder and calling on the portfolio Member to consider stepping down

 

Moved by Councillor Barnbrook and seconded by Councillor Bailey.

 

"This Council condemns the murder at knifepoint of Mr David Trott on his property earlier this month and requests that if Councillor Rush is unable to keep control of the spiralling knife problem that affects both the youth and elderly, she should step down from her position relating to law and order and get somebody more fitting to do the job."

 

Councillor Fairbrass moved that the Assembly proceed to the next item of business in line with paragraph 16, Article 2 of the Constitution, this was seconded by Councillor Liam Smith.

 

Agreed by a majority that the Assembly move to the next item of business.