Minutes:
Question 1
From Councillor Mullane
“The Brexit vote for Barking and Dagenham was at 62.8% to leave the EU. Aside from the borrowing that has been undertaken to fund the Gascoigne Estate renewal, what opportunities and discussions has the Leader undertaken to exploit any opportunities this historic vote will give us?”
Response
The Leader corrected the statement insofar as the turnout of the referendum was 63.8% of the proportion of those eligible to vote. Those who actively voted to leave was 39.8%.
The Leader explained that there were no restrictions on opportunities for the Borough and he actively promoted the Borough to countries around the world, not just within Europe.
Supplementary Question
Councillor Mullane asked if the Leader could give some examples of the opportunities within the Borough.
The Leader explained that there were several projects which had global investment, including:
· Ford Stamping Plant redevelopment
· Bean Park development of 3000 homes
· London East development
Future investments included the redevelopment of Barking Town Centre and Vicarage Field Shopping Centre.
Question 2
From Councillor Mullane
“I have been asked by Village constituents to clarify with you is it true that the housing service only has the use of one occupational Therapist as I have been told there are currently backlogs for adaptions?”
Response
The Cabinet Member for Social Care and Health Integration advised that there were six occupational therapists that were based in adult social care and assessed all residents who may need an adaptation. All six would deal with housing cases. There was one designated post within the service which was currently vacant however this had no affect on the backlog.
Question 3
From Councillor McCarthy
“Can the relevant Cabinet Member detail what actions the Council will take to London City Airport who have concentrated their flight paths causing misery for many thousands of Barking and Dagenham residents. The issue is likely to worsen with bigger planes and flights increasing from 70,000 to 110,000 per annum agreed by Government. They are currently breaking the times when they can fly by constantly having flights departing before 5:30 am when they should not be any activity before 6:30am. There is to be a review in 2017 and i am hoping this council will be leading a campaign to improve the lives of those thousands of residents impacted worse by the noise pollution emanating from London City Airport.”
Response
The Cabinet Member for Finance, Growth and Investment advised that the Council would write to City Airport and the London Borough of Newham highlighting concerns regarding the early morning flights and requesting answers to these concerns. The Council would also request access to their noise monitoring data.
Supplementary Question
Councillor McCarthy enquired as to whether specialist noise equipment could be provided to assist with solving the issue.
The Cabinet Member advised that the Council would enquire about their specialist aircraft noise monitoring trailers and if these were available whether one can be sited within the borough on a temporary basis.
Question 4
From Councillor McCarthy
“Can the relevant Cabinet Member let me know how the Council is progressing to reforming a friends of chase group and attaining green flag status at the Eastbrookend Country Park”
Response
The Cabinet Member for Community Leadership and Engagement advised that the Ranger Service were currently speaking to volunteers and community groups to acquire feedback on the appetite for a new friends group.
Supplementary Question
Councillor McCarthy enquired as to whether the park would be awarded green flag status.
The Cabinet Member advised that this would require a management plan and consistency within the park area. An update on progress would be reported to Councillor McCarthy in due course.
Question 5
From Councillor Gill
“Can the relevant Cabinet Member please advise what actions are being taken to ensure the safety of residents following the recent murders & violent attacks in Dagenham?”
Response
The Cabinet Member for Enforcement and Community Safety took the opportunity to offer her condolences to the Hayden family.
The Cabinet Member explained that Barking and Dagenham remained as one of the safest London Boroughs, being in line with the London average for total crime rates. Public confidence figures in the local Police were now at 72%. Further work had been undertaken between the Council and the Police including:
· Maintaining investment in CCTV where others haven’t.
· Joint tasking of our enforcement resources with the Police.
· Council funding of 8 police officers which forms part of the 18 strong Estates Police Team.
· Doubling the number of Designated Ward Officers and this has already started in seven wards.
· Adding extra five schools officers.
· Tackling the root causes of crime through our Council and partnership programmes.
Supplementary Question
Councillor Gill asked what the Police were doing to improve residents confidence and reassure them in the light of the recent attacks.
In her response, the Cabinet Member referred to the positive activities that the Boroughs young people were involved in such as the Youth Parade and commented that one young person involved in youth violence was one too many.
Question 6
From Councillor Gill
“Does the relevant Cabinet Member believe that residents should pay an additional charge for a green waste collection whilst paying an extra 4% in Council Tax per year?”
Response
The Cabinet Member for Finance, Growth and Investment took the opportunity to clarify that the increase in Council Tax was in fact 1.67% seeing that 2% related to the specific surcharge to support adult social care costs along with the cut in the GLA precept
In responding to the question, the Cabinet Member referred to the current pressures on the budget, of which had already been cut by £90m. Adult and children’s social care were facing the brunt of the cuts made by this Tory government which meant the Council was forced to make difficult choices whilst still protecting the most vulnerable. Furthermore, the Cabinet Member reminded Assembly that it was agreed that the collection of green garden waste would deliver savings of £220,000 over two years.
Supplementary Question
Councillor Gill advised that residents were asking him why they had to pay, following the receipt of consultation cards through their doors and sought clarification.
The Cabinet Member advised that consultation on the changes to the green waste service was not statutory, however the Council wished to consult with residents to understand if there was an appetite for the service to be continued as a paid service of up to £1 a week.
Question 7
From Councillor Young
“Can the relevant Cabinet Member please explain what actions are being taken to deal with the £18.9million overpayment of housing benefit?”
Response
The Cabinet Member for Finance, Growth and Investment thanked Councillor Young for brining the issues to the attention of Assembly.
The Cabinet Member advised that the issue had been raised at the last Public Accounts and Audit Select Committee where a robust and challenging discussion took place. The £18.9m stated was the cumulative figure for all years raised and not the amount overpaid in a single year.
The Council was taking several steps to deal with the overpayment which included monitoring of the debt, follow up contact if no payments were made and ensuring repayment were affordable for the claimant.
Supplementary Question
Councillor Young enquired as to where the mistake was made.
The Cabinet Member reiterated that the debt was cumulative and had built up due to a number of reason, one of which was the governments welfare reforms.
Question 8
From Councillor Young
“Does the Cabinet Member for Health still agree with her previous comments that BHR Trust is wrong to have added consultants to A&E in order to assess and redirect residents?”
Response
The Cabinet Member for Social Care and Health Integration advised that she was still concerned about the pilot and in recognising the pressures of Accident and Emergency departments, was concerned that the problem was being shifted to another area of the NHS. Approximately a third of people who attended Accident and Emergency did so as they could not get an appointment with their GP. When referred back to their GP, they did not follow it up.
Supplementary Question
Councillor Young asked if the NHS had now made contact with the Cabinet Member for Social Care and Health Integration on the pilot.
The Cabinet Member for Social Care and Health Integration confirmed contact had been made and discussions on the pilot were ongoing.