Minutes:
Question 1
From Councillor McCarthy
“I have received many enquiries regarding dropped kerbs. Can the relevant Cabinet Member please advise how many enforcement letters have been sent ward by ward since June 2014 requesting residents to pay for a dropped kerb?”
Response from Councillor Butt, Cabinet Member for Crime and Enforcement
“469 letters have been sent to residents where no permissions were in place for driving or parking across the footpath.”
Supplementary question from Councillor McCarthy
“I do not feel the Cabinet Member’s response addresses my question. I asked for a ward by ward breakdown.”
Response from Councillor Butt
“Councillor McCarthy was previously responsible for this area and I know he was keen to enforce parking regulations, especially where regulations were not being followed.
We have to balance the need to enforce parking regulations at the same time as making it easier for people to pay for installing dropped kerb. We want an affordable parking policy. That is why we are introducing a scheme to allow residents to pay for a dropped kerb in instalments through a payment plan which they can set up with the Council.
I would be happy to come back to him after tonight’s meeting with the additional information he has requested.”
Question 2
From Councillor McCarthy
“Can the Cabinet Member of Housing state a numerical definition for the term “substantial” in respect of the number of council properties lost to estate renewal, as contained in the Cabinet report dated 16th February 2015?”
Response from Councillor Ashraf, Cabinet Member for Housing
“796 properties that have been subject to estate renewal initiatives.”
Supplementary question from Councillor McCarthy
“What impact will that have on the HRA and staffing numbers in the Housing service going forward?”
Response from Councillor Ashraf
“There will be no impact in staffing levels as we will be looking to provide services in the private housing sector.”
Question 3
From Councillor Mullane
“John Smith House as the current location for the Boroughs' homeless is closing in approximately two years time and Council Officers have been tasked to find new premises. As elected Councillors we have been advised by the Leader that there is a shortlist for a new site. Can the Cabinet Member for Housing please advise what sites have been short-listed?”
Response from Councillor Ashraf, Cabinet Member for Housing
“Property Services are conducting a feasibility study about accommodating the Housing Advice Service. This has identified the Pondfield House site as a possible location.”
Supplementary question from Councillor Mullane
“Is this the only site that has been identified?”
Response from Councillor Ashraf
“Yes. The move would place the Housing Service in one location. This would give us the opportunity to improve the way we provide our service, which has to be our main aim for residents. A full impact assessment will be undertaken before any decision is taken.”
Question 4
From Councillor P Waker
“As well as Westminster, a number of boroughs in London have either rented temporary accommodation or bought houses and flats in the borough for rental purposes. Newham, indeed, has long been the biggest single leaseholder in Barking and Dagenham. These actions have often led to the most difficult families being placed in that accommodation and a subsequent increased demand for public services.
As this has been raised for a number of years would the relevant Cabinet Member present the full figures so that we can obtain an understanding of the overall picture of the problem as it currently stands?”
Response from Councillor Ashraf, Cabinet Member for Housing
“Can I thank Councillor Waker for his question. I know he has a long standing interest in housing in the borough and has had responsibility for housing, so he will appreciate the challenges we face from councils like Westminster who have a history of placing homeless families here.
From April 2014 temporary accommodation placements started to be monitored through the Inter Borough Accommodation Agreement (IBAA). However, it is difficult to verify the figures. Councillor Waker will know it is in the 100s if not the 1,000s. He will know this is only part of the picture. Homeless families are also placed in the borough in many different ways.
Supplementary question from Councillor Waker
“I appreciate the point being made by the Cabinet Member in terms of assessing the numbers however we need to establish a picture of the overall borough position and use the information to lobby a future Government.”
Response from Councillor Ashraf
“We are not going to sit still and do nothing. That is why the Leader has taken the initiative this month by naming and shaming Westminster Council for buying up properties for their homeless families.
So I welcome Councillor Waker’s commitment and would urge him to support the Leader’s campaign.”
Question 5
From Councillor Gill
“Redbridge Council has recently introduced up to 30 minutes of free parking at on-street and Display bays at shopping locations in the borough to encourage short term parking at local shopping parades.
Can the relevant Cabinet Member please commit to introducing a similar free parking initiative for on-street and display bays at shopping locations in Barking and Dagenham to support local residents and businesses especially in difficult economic times?”
Response from Councillor Butt, Cabinet Member for Crime and Enforcement
“Councillor Gill will be aware that allowing a 30 minute free period for parking at some shopping locations was raised at the Living and Working Select Committee’s review of parking related savings.
He will recall a commitment was made at that time to look at this option as part of a wider review at how we can deliver savings through cashless and paperless parking arrangements. I remain committed to this review and to finding ways we can deliver practical parking solutions which benefit local shopping parades and businesses.”
Supplementary question from Councillor Gill
“We need a commitment to implement short stay car parking for shoppers as opposed to undertakings to review the situation seeing the neighbouring Tory Borough of Redbridge have introduced it?”
Response from Councillor Butt
“I agree in principle with Councillor Gill about the importance of such short stay parking provision. The issue is implementing the policy in a way which is practical and sensible to do so.
I have asked Officers to look at ways of modernising the parking service and bringing costs down, for example by moving to paperless and cash free parking. This will provide us with an opportunity to look at whether and how we could introduce a short free parking period.
I would remind Members that we have installed parking friendly schemes for shops across all of our main secondary shopping locations and this includes free parking in many locations where there is not abused by long stay parking.”
Question 6
From Councillor Gill
“Does the Leader believe that it is correct to increase the cost of managers at a time when frontline staff are having their terms and conditions reduced?”
Response from Councillor Rodwell, Leader of the Council
“The overall cost of management is not going up, nor do we have any intention of increasing it. The Chief Executive has been made well aware of this. I have set him a challenging agenda of creating a management team who will deliver our ambitions for the borough. We need to appoint people with the skills we need to help us fulfil our ambitions for the borough.”
Supplementary question from Councillor Gill
“Does the Leader think it is fair to reduce the terms and conditions for staff whilst at the same time paying an additional £100,000 to employ a dedicated Chief Executive, recruiting an office manager for his office, a political assistant, paying honorariums to JNC officers and continuing to employ highly paid management interims?
Response from Councillor Rodwell
“I repeat my previous answer. We have excellent staff at all levels in the organisation and we recognise our lowest paid workers by paying them in excess of the London Living Wage hourly rate. As for senior staff it is important to have the right staff in place to take the borough forward so we can realise our ambitions for the Borough.”
Question 7
From Councillor Miles
“Can the Lead Member for Regeneration clarify whether the new Sainsbury’s due to be built in the Dagenham East area is progressing or have the plans been withdrawn?”
Response from Councillor Geddes, Cabinet Member for Regeneration
“My understanding is that Sainsbury’s are pursuing the completion of the sale from Sanofi.”
Supplementary question from Councillor Miles
“Do you know when that sale might complete and works start?”
Response from Councillor Geddes
“To the best of our knowledge Sanofi’s advisers envisage the sale being completed before the end of March. In terms of the works starting, we have not been given that date.”
Question 8
From Councillor Miles
“Can the Leader of the Council please explain why the Council is seeking to community transfer the Fanshawe Community Centre as opposed to disposing of the site, which could potentially produce a significant capital sum as well as new housing and a community facility for the Council?”
Response from Councillor Rodwell, Leader of the Council
“I thank Councillor Miles for his question although I am a little surprised by it, seeing the answer is well documented and in the public domain having formed part of a previous Cabinet report and had also appeared in the Barking & Dagenham Post.”
Supplementary question from Councillor Miles
“I do not read the Barking & Dagenham Post.”
Response from Councillor Rodwell
“I will provide Councillor Miles with the relevant Cabinet report and minute where the decision was taken on the future of the Fanshawe Community Centre.”
Question 9
From Councillor Chand
“Can the relevant Cabinet Member please comment on recent national publicity concerning high burglary rates in Barking and Dagenham?”
Response from Councillor Butt, Cabinet Member for Crime and Enforcement
“I am glad to have the opportunity to speak about this. In fact, Barking and Dagenham has seen a sustained reduction of over 500 less victims per year in burglary over the past three years. More recently, within the last twelve months to the end of December 2014 there were 301 fewer residential burglaries than in the previous year. This is a reduction of 18% compared with a 13% reduction across all London Boroughs. The reports that have appeared in the press recently are based on claims made to one insurance company which represents around 10% of the 25.6 million households in the UK.”
Supplementary question from Councillor Chand
“What are we doing to eradicate this crime and what work are we doing with the police to ensure our residents feel safe?”
Response from Councillor Butt
“One of the reasons Community Safety Partnerships were set up is that tackling burglary cannot be done by the Police on their own. The Council works closely with the Police to address this and other issues.
Members will recall campaigns for example those encouraging people to check their doors and windows are locked. We also jointly fund the Victim Support Safer Homes Van which secures homes, sometimes free of charge. We work with the Police on crime prevention campaigns and also with agencies like Neighbourhood Watch and the Ward Panels to make sure people are warned when there are burglaries in their area. Even though burglary is on the decline, every burglary is one too many, with victims targeted at home where they should feel most safe.
Together we are tackling offenders and we have joint police, probation and Council teams targeting our prolific offenders and getting them into services to help change their behaviour.”