Agenda and minutes

That the minutes of the ordinary meeting held on 8 July 2010 and the extraordinary meeting held on 7 October 2010 be taken as read and signed as correct records.

RESOLVED:  That

(i)            the minutes of the meeting held on 8 July 2010 be taken as read and signed as a correct record, subject to a clarification at page 8 (36 - Motion Council Transparency) to read “wished to be recorded as having voted against the decision and for the Motion to be adopted.”

(ii)          the minutes of the extraordinary meeting held on 7 October 2010, be taken as read and signed as a correct record.

To receive declarations from Members of personal or prejudicial interests arising from business to be transacted at this meeting.

The Mayor invited declarations of interest.

(i)           Item 11(2): Motions:  Proposed Cap on Housing Benefit

         Councillor Nana Asante declared a personal interest as her family was in receipt of housing benefit, but considered that she could speak and vote thereon.

         Councillor Thaya Idaikkadar declared a personal interest as his mother was in receipt of housing benefit, but considered that he could speak and vote thereon.

         Councillor Kairul Kareema Marikar declared a personal interest as she was a Council tenant, but considered that she could speak and vote thereon.

         Councillor Barry Macleod-Cullinane declared a personal interest as he was employed by London Councils Ltd, but considered that he could speak and vote thereon.

(ii)         Item 11(5): Motions:  Fare Increases

         Councillor Sue Anderson declared a personal interest as she was a member of the Harrow Public Transport Users Association, but considered that she could speak and vote thereon.

         Councillor James Bond declared a personal interest as an employee of Transport for London, based at North Harrow Station, but considered that he could speak and vote thereon.

         Councillor Stephen Greek declared a personal interest as he was employed by the Greater London Authority, but considered that he could speak and vote thereon.

         Councillor Manji Kara declared a personal interest as he was employed by Transport for London, but considered that he could speak and vote thereon.

(iii)       Item 11(6):  Motions:  Harrow International Vision

         Councillor Nana Asante declared a personal interest as she was born in Tel Aviv, her husband’s brother was from Tillberg and her parents were from LA.  Councillor Asante was also a trustee of Harrow in Europe but considered that she could speak and vote on the Motion.

         Councillors Mrs Lurline Champagnie OBE, Mrinal Choudhury John Cowan, Brian Gate, David Gawn, Manji Kara, Janet Mote, John Nickolay and Joyce Nickolay declared personal interests in that they were trustees of Harrow in Europe, but considered that they could speak and vote thereon.

         Councillor Jean Lammiman declared a personal interest as her husband was the Chairman of Harrow in Europe and she was also a trustee of the organisation, but considered that she could speak and vote thereon.

         Councillor Chris Mote declared a personal interest in that he was involved with the original twinning of the borough with Broken Hill, Zambia in 1966, but considered that he could speak and vote thereon.

To receive any announcements from the Mayor. Information as to recent Mayoral engagements will be tabled.

The Mayor requested that Council note the engagements he had undertaken. The Mayor paid particular attention to the following:

·               On 18 October and 31 August 2010, he had attended the 100^th birthday parties for Mrs Jane Jones and  Mrs May Richards respectively;

·               On 24 October 2010, he had attended a retirement brunch for Rabbi Grunewald at Pinner Synagogue.  On the same day he had also attended a mosque in relation to the Pakistan Flood Relief Event and a Church as part of an event hosted by the Gujarati Christian Fellowship United Kingdom.  This had demonstrated and contributed towards the theme of Diversity in his Mayoral year.

·               On 3 November 2010, he had attended a celebration for Francis Dowley who had worked for the Council for 40 years.  He had also attended the Racal Acoustics Queens Awards. On behalf of the Council, the Mayor had congratulated those presented with awards.

The Council joined the Mayor in congratulating Laura Turner, a resident of Harrow, on winning a gold medal at the recent Commonwealth Games in Delhi for the 100 metres sprint relay.

RESOLVED:  That the report of the Worshipful the Mayor, as tabled, be noted and received.

To receive and consider any procedural motions by Members of the Council in relation to the conduct of this Meeting. 

[Note:  Notice of such procedural motions, received after the issuing of this Summons, will be tabled].

In accordance with Rule 14.6, the Leader of the Council agreed that the referral of the Harrow International Vision Motion to Cabinet be disapplied.  This allowed Council to debate the Motion and make recommendations to Cabinet.

To receive any petitions to be presented by:

(i)           a representative of the petitioners;

(ii)         a Councillor, on behalf of petitioners;

(iii)       the Mayor, on behalf of petitioners.

In accordance with Rule 10, a petition was submitted by Councillor Lurline Champagnie, containing 22 signatures of residents, requesting that the Council consider action to address a traffic hazard at Pinner Green lights.

[The petition stood referred to the next meeting of the Traffic and Road Safety Advisory Panel].

A period of up to 15 minutes is allowed for members of the public to ask questions of the Executive, Portfolio Holders and Chairmen of Committees, of which notice has been received no later than 5.00 pm two clear working days prior to the day of this Meeting.  Any such questions received will be tabled.

In accordance with Rule 11, the questions submitted by members of the public and responded to by Portfolio Holders, were contained at appendix I.

To receive a presentation from the Leader of the Council on business since the last meeting, followed by a question and answer session.  The item is allotted 20 minutes.

The Leader of the Council introduced his report highlighting achievements and proposals since the last ordinary meeting.

At the conclusion of his report, the Leader responded to questions from Members of the Council.

RESOLVED:  That the report of the Leader of the Council be received and noted.

At its meeting on 8^th July 2010, the Council agreed to receive a Petition of 2,487 signatures, submitted by Councillor Stephen Wright, on behalf of petitioners and outlining the following terms:

“We the undersigned request that Harrow Council urgently address the parking issues in Pinner.  Local businesses are suffering as a result of the high car parking charges in comparison with other local High Streets in the area.

We urge Harrow Council to introduce a free ½ hour car parking scheme in Pinner car parks and meter parking areas and to reduce hourly rates to fall in line with Northwood, Ruislip and Eastcote.”

The Petition has been subject to the validation process and meets the threshold of signatures needed to engender a Council debate.  The matter has also been the subject of proactive consideration by Traffic & Road Safety Advisory Panel meetings held on 15 July and 16 September 2010.  That Panel discussed the issue and noted that the outcome of the Council debate should be reported to a future meeting of the Panel.

Councillor Wright may read the terms of the petition on behalf of the petition signatories or may defer to the petition organiser.  There is a period of one minute allocated to present.  A period of 10 minutes is permitted for Members to debate the Petition terms and issues.

Following discussion the Council may choose to refer the petition to the Cabinet to determine the matter, taking into account the views expressed by Council. 

(i)            In accordance with the Council’s Petition Scheme, Council considered a petition which had inititally been received at its meeting on 8 July 2010.

(ii)          The petition contained 2487 signatures and its terms were read by Councillor Stephen Wright as follows:

We the undersigned request that Harrow Council urgently address the parking issues in Pinner. Local businesses are suffering as a result of the high car parking charges in comparison with other local High Streets in the area.

We urge Harrow Council to introduce a free ½ hour care parking scheme in Pinner car parks and meter parking areas and to reduce hourly rates to fall in line with Northwood, Ruislip and Eastcote.

(iii)        A debate was held on the content of the petition.

RESOLVED:  That the petition be referred to Cabinet for consideration.

Report of the Constitution Review Working Group.

Further to Item 9 on the Summons, the Council received a Recommendation from the Constitution Review Working Group.

The Recommendation was formally moved by Councillor Bill Stephenson (Chairman of the Working Group).

RESOLVED:  That the proposed Constitutional changes be approved, as set out in Appendix II to these minutes.

A period of up to 15 minutes is allowed for asking written questions by Members of Council of a member of the Executive or Chairman of any Committee:-

(i)           of which notice has been received at least two clear working days prior to the day of this Meeting; or

(ii)         which relate to urgent matters, and the consent of the Executive Member or Committee Chairman to whom the question is to be put has been obtained and the content has been advised to the Director of Legal and Governance Services by 12 noon on the day of the Council Meeting.

[Any such questions received will be tabled].

In accordance with Rule 12, the questions submitted by Councillors and responded to by Portfolio Holders,  were contained at Appendix III.

The following Motions have been notified in accordance with the requirements of Council Procedure Rule 14, to be moved and seconded by the Members indicated:-

(i)            At item 11(1) the Council received a Motion in the names of Councillors James Bond and Chris Noyce in the following terms:

“This Council notes that the following two statutory instruments came into effect on 1^st October 2010:

1.             The Town & Country Planning (General Permitted Development) (Amendment) (No 2) (England) Order 2010 (2010 No. 2134) will make changes of use from Class C3 (dwellinghouses) to Class C4 (houses in multiple occupation) permitted development.

2.             The Town and Country Planning (Compensation) (No. 3) (England) Regulations  2010 (2010 No 2135)

This Council notes therefore that the Government has amended the planning rules for houses in multiple occupation (HMOs) and as a result from 1^st October 2010 changes of use from family houses to small HMOs will be able to happen freely without the need for planning applications.

This Council is concerned that appropriate time was not given to consultation with Local Authority Planning Services.

This Council also views with concern the possible detrimental effects such permitted development could have on the character and environmental aspects of residential roads including the increase in motor vehicles, refuse and possible nuisance to surrounding neighbours.

This Council regrets that the new legislation does not allow residents to be alerted to such proposals for houses in multiple occupation.

This Council recognises the extra burden placed on Local Authority Planning Services in order to facilitate Article 4 Directions.

This Council resolves to instruct the Chief Executive to write to the Chief Planner at the Department of Communities and Local Government to express our grave concern that such developments can occur without recourse to Local Authority approval.

This Council further instructs the Chief Executive to write to the Members of Parliament for Harrow West, Harrow East and Ruislip, Pinner and Northwood to note our concerns.”

(ii)          There was an amendment proposed in the names of Councillors Keith Ferry and Bill Stephenson, which sought to amend the Motion to read as follows:

“This Council notes that the following two statutory instruments came into effect on 1^st October 2010:

1.             The Town & Country Planning (General Permitted Development) (Amendment) (No 2) (England) Order 2010 (2010 No. 2134) will make changes of use from Class C3 (dwellinghouses) to Class C4 (houses in multiple occupation) permitted development.

2.             The Town and Country Planning (Compensation) (No. 3) (England) Regulations  2010 (2010 No 2135).

This Council notes therefore that the Government has amended the planning rules for houses in multiple occupation (HMOs) and as a result from 1^st October 2010 changes of use from family houses to small HMOs will be able to happen freely without the need for planning applications.

This Council is concerned that appropriate time was not given to consultation with Local Authority Planning Services.

This Council also views with concern the possible detrimental effects such permitted development could have on the character and environmental aspects of residential roads including the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 56.

(i)            At item 11(2) on the Summons, the Council received a Motion in the names of Councillors Kairul Kareema Marikar and Ben Wealthy in the following terms:

         “This Council deplores the unreasonable cap on Housing Benefit which will export poverty to Outer London Boroughs like Harrow. London suffers severe housing shortages which have not been helped by the Conservative Right to Buy Policy as it depleted housing stock.  To make matters worse, the Tory policy of offering private housing as an option for homeless families will mean that Councils in inner London will be setting up a revolving door for families in temporary private housing who will have to be moved to outer London or beyond.

         This Council notes that 59% of families in private housing are living in poverty.  The cap on Housing Benefit is neither fair nor reasonable as it affects the poor and impacts on children who are more likely to be moved several times resulting in unstable education with its consequent impact on education attainment.

         This Council draws the attention of Government to the fact that high rents in London are not a new phenomenon but are driven by the housing shortage.  When the Local Housing Allowance was introduced the average rent in Central London for a 3 bedroom house was £700, twice the cap.  This Council draws the Government's attention to the fact that it is Landlords who profit from Housing Benefit not tenants.  

         As a Council committed to listening and leading, this Council urges Government to look at the root causes of high rents in London and bring out policies which deal with problem instead of ideological cuts which play well in Tory heartlands but penalise the poor and those unfortunate enough to lose their jobs.

         This Council urges the Government to reconsider the cap and reduce the housing benefit bill by funding Councils to build enough social housing thereby stimulating the building industry, creating jobs and giving the country the much needed optimism which will take us out of recession and avoid a depression.

         This Council resolves to:

(1)          instruct the Chief Executive to write to the Prime Minister expressing our concern about this retrograde step which penalises families;

(2)          write to Harrow’s MPs and GLA Member to ask them to raise these concerns in Parliament and the London Assembly;

(3)          work with the other London Boroughs through London Councils to lobby against the Housing Benefit cap;

(4)          support the voluntary and community sector to campaign for fairness for families.”

(ii)          During the debate on this item, Councillor Brian Gate moved a Motion that the question now be put. Upon a vote this Motion was carried.

RESOLVED:  That the Motion, as set out above, be adopted.

(i)            At item 11(3) on the Summons, the Council received a Motion in the names of Councillors Sue Anderson and Victoria Silver in the following terms:

         “This Council notes with deep concern the huge cuts announced during the spending review contain measures that will hit women twice as hard as men in our communities in Harrow.

         The Council believes urgent action is needed by the government to tackle the effect these cuts will have on households and female workers in Harrow - and across the country - because the clear effects will be damaging throughout our communities if the consequences of cutbacks on females and families are not significantly addressed.

         The Council is resolutely committed to helping those in greatest need but the targeting of local government for cuts is tantamount to singling out women for the greatest hit as 75 per cent of local government workers nationally are women and the rolling back of public services hits women particularly hard because they tend to use services more frequently and more intensively, because of their sizable caring responsibilities.

         The Council hopes the government will reconsider its plans because making women bear the brunt of cuts makes a mockery of its claimed commitment to fairness.  We also hope the Council will commit to closely monitoring the impact of changes on women and families in the borough through proper impact assessments and evaluation.”

(ii)          There was an amendment proposed in the names of Councillors Paul Osborn and Susan Hall, which sought to amend the Motion to read as follows:

         “This Council notes with deep concern the huge cuts announced during the spending review contain measures that will hit women twice as hard as men in our communities in Harrow.

         The Council believes urgent action is needed by the government to tackle the effect these cuts will have on households and female workers in Harrow - and across the country - because the clear effects will be damaging throughout our communities if the consequences of cutbacks on females and families are not significantly addressed.

         The Council is resolutely committed to helping those in greatest need but the targeting of local government for cuts is tantamount to singling out women for the greatest hit as 75 per cent of local government workers nationally are women and the rolling back of public services hits women particularly hard because they tend to use services more frequently and more intensively, because of their sizable caring responsibilities.

         The Council hopes the government will reconsider its plans because making women bear the brunt of cuts makes a mockery of its claimed commitment to fairness.  We also hope the Council will commit to closely monitoring the impact of changes on women and families in the borough through proper impact assessments and evaluation

         This Council should lead by example, therefore a full Equalities Impact Assessment should be completed and available for inspection before any decision can be made by Cabinet or by a portfolio holder.”

(iii)       During the debate  ...  view the full minutes text for item 58.

(i)            At item 11(4) on the Summons, the Council received a Motion in the names of Councillors Bill Stephenson and Ben Wealthy in the following terms:

“This Council notes that the Conservative/Liberal Democrat Coalition Government’s Comprehensive Spending Review threatens Harrow’s economic recovery.

Many senior economists believe that the scale and speed of cuts in public spending will damage business and lead to job losses.

Experts have also warned that the Coalition Government’s spending plans are regressive, not progressive, and will hit the poorest hardest.

This Council notes:

Ÿ         Following the Conservative/Liberal Democrat Coalition Government’s budget, the Office for Budget Responsibility downgraded its growth forecast for next year from 2.6% to 2.3% in response to the increased pace of public spending reductions.

Ÿ         In their independent assessment of the Comprehensive Spending Review, the Institute for Fiscal Studies said that the measures were ‘more regressive, than progressive’ and made clear that children were the biggest losers, not bankers.

Ÿ         The Conservative/Liberal Democrat Coalition Government’s Comprehensive Spending Review, outlines big cuts in Local Government spending of almost 30%.  The Local Government Group has been clear that such reductions ‘will lead to cuts at the front line.’

Ÿ         Local Government has had some of the biggest cuts in the public sector, and most authorities’ cuts are significantly front-loaded to 2011/12.

Ÿ         The Conservative/Liberal Democrat Coalition Government have admitted that at least 1 million jobs will be lost - half in the public sector and half in the private sector.

Ÿ         Other cuts to funding for new social housing, child tax credits, university teaching budgets and school modernisation programmes will curb aspirations and opportunities for many people in Harrow.

Ÿ         The Conservative/Liberal Democrat Coalition Government’s decision to raise VAT to 20% in 2011 will damage Harrow businesses and is unfair, hitting those on low and fixed incomes hardest.

This Council believes that the Conservative/Liberal Democrat Coalition Government’s Comprehensive Spending Review will hinder, not help Harrow’s economic recovery.  Furthermore, their wider economic policies are deeply unfair and will hit the poorest and most vulnerable in Harrow hardest.”

(ii)          There was an amendment proposed in the names of Councillors Barry Macleod-Cullinane and Paul Osborn, which sought to amend the Motion to read as follows:

“This Council notes that the Conservative/Liberal Democrat Coalition Government’s Comprehensive Spending Review threatens Harrow’s economic recovery.

Many senior economists believe that the scale and speed of cuts in public spending will damage business and lead to job losses.

Experts have also warned that the Coalition Government’s spending plans are regressive, not progressive, and will hit the poorest hardest.

This Council notes:

Ÿ         Following the Conservative/Liberal Democrat Coalition Government’s budget, the Office for Budget Responsibility downgraded its growth forecast for next year from 2.6% to 2.3% in response to the increased pace of public spending reductions.

Ÿ         In their independent assessment of the Comprehensive Spending Review, the Institute for Fiscal Studies said that the measures were ‘more regressive, than progressive’ and made clear that children were the biggest losers, not bankers.

Ÿ         The Conservative/Liberal Democrat  ...  view the full minutes text for item 59.

(i)            At item 11(5) on the Summons, the Council received a Motion in the names of Councillors Navin Shah and Phillip O’Dell in the following terms:

         “Harrow Council deplores London Mayor Boris Johnson’s proposals for a devastating rise in bus and tube fares with an average increase of 7% going up to an actual increase of 74%.

         This Council notes that:

·               Tube and bus fares went up by 6% in the first year of his Boris Johnson’s Mayoralty and last year single bus journeys went up by 20 %;

·               the coalition government is already hitting Harrow residents with a likely cut of at least 30% in its grant to Harrow Council in addition to the above inflation rises in tube and bus fares;

·               the only legacy of  Boris Johnson has left so far as the people of Harrow are concerned is that of closing ticket offices like North Harrow Station, endless weekend closures of  the Jubilee and Metropolitan line services and the  scrapping of funding for disabled access to Harrow on the Hill and Stanmore tube stations.

         This Council instructs the Chief Executive to communicate this motion to the three Harrow MPs and the London Assembly Member for Brent and Harrow asking them to oppose these fare increases and further instructs the Chief Executive to write to the Mayor of London demanding that the fare increases be scrapped.”    

(ii)          There was an amendment proposed in the names of Councillors Barry Macleod-Cullinane and Susan Hall, which sought to amend the Motion to read as follows:

         “Harrow Council deplores London Mayor Boris Johnson’s proposals for a devastating rise in bus and tube fares with an average increase of 7% going up to an actual increase of 74 %.

         This Council notes that:

·               Tube and bus fares went up by 6% in the first year of his Boris Johnson’s Mayoralty and last year single bus journeys went up by 20 %;

·                the coalition government is already hitting Harrow residents with a likely cut of at least 30% in its grant to Harrow Council in addition to the above inflation rises in tube and bus fares;

·               the only legacy of  Boris Johnson has left so far as the people of Harrow are concerned is that of closing ticket offices like North Harrow Station, endless weekend closures of  the Jubilee and Metropolitan line services and the  scrapping of funding for disabled access to Harrow on the Hill and Stanmore tube stations.

This Council agrees that, in order to protect and assist some of Harrow’s most vulnerable people from the uncertainty and vagaries of fare prices charges, this Council guarantees that no resident who currently receives a discretionary disabled Freedom Pass will cease to do so as a result of any action taken or decision made by this Council.

Council instructs the Chief Executive to communicate this motion to the three Harrow MPs and the London Assembly Member for Brent and Harrow asking them to oppose these fare increases and further instructs the Chief Executive to  ...  view the full minutes text for item 60.

At item 11(6) on the Summons, the Council received a Motion in the names of Councillors Nana Asante and Graham Henson in the following terms:

“This Council notes with some concern the pessimism of the governments’ spending plans and the short-sighted cuts which threaten the economic recovery.  The Council notes with great concern the in-year cut of the Migrants Impact Fund which has cost London authorities an estimated £2.4 million.  This Council also puts on record its concern at the cut in LAA Reward Grant, an act which undermines the credibility of future agreements with Government.  This assault on Local Government funding makes the silence on the important area of community and social cohesion even more worrying.

The Council believes that the Government should take some lessons from a Council that listens and leads, and tap into the optimism and potential of residents and enable them to work towards a brighter future.  This Council is resolutely committed to furthering Community Cohesion and celebrating the fact that Harrow is the most religiously diverse borough of England and Wales. 

This Council commits to renewing its international vision by:

·                working towards recognition of Harrow as a Fair Trade borough in March 2011;

·                following the example of its twin town Douai and exploring the possibility of twinning with more towns and cities such as Balakot, Bhuj, Broken Hill, Hargeisa, Pattan, Port au Prince, Kingston, La, Tilburg and Tel Aviv, underlining the tremendous advantage such links can bring, both to the harmony of the Borough and its future development.

This Council resolves to:

(1)          explore the feasibility of Harrow twinning with further towns and cities;

(2)          involve residents in creating opportunities for experiencing and exploring other cultures thereby building an atmosphere for economic development and trade opportunities, a positive climate to counterbalance the doom and gloom coming from the current Government;

(3)          work with London Councils to mitigate the impact of the short-sighted cuts on our residents.”

RESOLVED:  That the substantive Motion, as set out above, be recommended to the Executive.

Report of the Director of Legal & Governance Services.

Further to item 12 on the Summons, Council received a report of the Director of Legal and Governance Services providing a summary of the urgent decisions taken by Cabinet, and the use of the special urgency procedure since the last ordinary meeting of Council on 8 July 2010.

RESOLVED: That the report be noted.

Report of the Director of Legal & Governance Services.

The Director of Legal and Governance Services advised of three urgent decisions taken in respect of matters reserved to Council, following consultation with the Leaders of each of the Political Groups, since the last meeting.

RESOLVED:  That the decisions taken under delegation by the Director of Legal and Governance Services, on behalf of Council, be noted.

(i)            At 10.28 pm, during the debate on the Item 11(4) (Motion:  Standing Up for Harrow), the Mayor put to the vote a procedural motion under Rule 9.2 that the closure of time for the Council meeting be extended until the completion of all remaining business on the Summons.  Upon a formal vote, this proposal was not agreed;

(ii)         At 10.30 pm, in the course of the consideration of Item 11(4) (Motion:  Standing Up for Harrow), the Mayor advised that the ‘guillotine’ procedure had come into operation for the determination of the remaining business on the summons and was applied to Items 11(4) (Motion: Standing Up for Harrow), 11(5) (Motion:  Fare Increases), 11(6) (Motion: Harrow International Vision), 12 (Decisions Taken Under the Urgency Procedure by Cabinet and Portfolio Holders), and 13 (Urgent Decisions on Matters Reserved to Council).

RESOLVED:  That the provisions of Rules 9.2 and 9.3 be applied as set out at (i) and (ii) above.