Agenda and minutes

That the minutes of the extraordinary and ordinary meetings held on 7 July 2011 be taken as read and signed as a correct record.

RESOLVED:  That the minutes of the extraordinary and ordinary meetings held on 7 July 2011 be taken as read and signed as a correct record.

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

(i)                 The Mayor invited appropriate declarations of interest. Members declaring the following interests considered these to be personal and that they could speak and vote thereon.

            Item 12(2) – Motion – Pensions

            Councillor Christine Bednell declared that she was in receipt of a pension from the Council.

Councillor Bob Currie declared that he received a pension from the Council. His son and wife were also members of the Local Government Pension Scheme.

Councillor Ann Gate declared that she would be in receipt of a pension from the National Health Service (NHS) and was an employee of the NHS.

            Councillor Brian Gate declared that he was married to an employee of National Health Service, who was contributing to the NHS pension scheme.

            Councillor William Stoodley declared that he had previously been a civil servant and was due to receive a pension in the future.

            Item 12(3) – Motion – Fair Public Transport Fares (Affordable Bus and Tube Fares)

            Councillor James Bond declared that he was an employee of Transport for London.

            Councillor Thaya Idaikkadar declared that his wife worked for Transport for London.

Item 12(4) – Motion – NHS

Councillor Husain Akhtar declared that his son worked for the NHS.

Councillor Ann Gate declared that she was an employee of the NHS.

Councillor Brian Gate declared that he was married to an employee of National Health Service.

Councillor Krishna James declared that she was a registered nurse and that several of her relatives worked for the NHS.

Councillors Chris and Janet Mote declared that their daughter worked at Northwick Park Hospital.

Councillor Bill Phillips declared that he was the Chair of the Headstone North Safer Neighbourhood Panel.

(ii)        Members declaring the following interests considered these to be prejudicial and left the room during the discussion and decision making thereon.

Item 12(2) – Motion – Pensions

Councillor Lurline Champagnie declared that she was in receipt of a pension from the NHS.

Councillors Tony Ferrari, Barry Macleod-Cullinane and Lynda Seymour declared that they were members of the Local Government Pension Scheme (LGPS).

Councillor Stephen Greek declared that he and his sister were members of the LGPS.

Councillor Mrs Vina Mithani declared that he worked for the Health Protection Agency and was part of the NHS Pension Scheme.

Councillor Amir Moshenson declared that his wife was a teacher in the London Borough of Haringey.

Councillor Chris Mote declared that his wife, worked in private education and herpension scheme was linked to the state education pension scheme.

Councillor Asad Omar declared that his son was a member of the LGPS.

Councillor Bill Phillips declared that he was in receipt of a pension from the LGPS.

Councillor Anthony Seymour declared that his wife was a member of the LGPS.

Councillor Navin Shah declared that he was a member of the Greater London Authority’s pension scheme.

Councillor Mrs Rekha Shah declared that she worked in local government and was a Unison member.

Item 12(4) – Motion – NHS

Councillor Sue Anderson declared that she  ...  view the full minutes text for item 150.

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 reported that he had been in office for approximately 6 months and had attended approximately 250 engagements.  The Mayor paid particular attention to the following:

·                     he had conferred the Honorary Freedom of the Borough on Sir Paul Nurse, as agreed by Council;

·                     he had judged a competition amongst primary schools relating to Remembrance Sunday;

·                     he had placed wreaths ahead of Remembrance Sunday in approximately 10 locations across the borough;

·                     he had invited the Harrow Youth Cricket Team to his parlour as a result of its significant achievements.

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

To receive and consider any procedural motions by Members of the Council in relation to the conduct of this Meeting. Notice of such procedural motions, received after the issuing of this Summons, will be tabled.

(i)                 In accordance with Rules 14.6 and 14.7, the Mayor advised that the Leader of the Opposition, Councillor Susan Hall, had exercised her right that the referral of the North Harrow Parking Motion to Cabinet be disapplied.  This allowed Council to debate the Motion and offer comments or recommendations to Cabinet.

(ii)               The Mayor announced that he had received notice, within the tabled papers, of an alteration to Motion 12(10) – Council Tax Freeze from the proposer and seconder of the original Motion.  This would be dealt with at the item concerned.

(iii)             The Mayor announced that he had received notice, within the tabled papers, of 9 further amendments in respect of Motions on the Summons.  These would be dealt with individually at the items concerned.

(iv)             The Mayor announced that Motions 12(7) “Servicemen Housing” and 12(8) “Employed Housing” fell within the remit of the Executive and stood referred to Cabinet.

(v)               The Leader of the Council, Councillor Bill Stephenson, rose to move a Procedural Motion that Rule 16.6.1 be suspended for Motion 12(6) “North Harrow Parking” as he believed there were factual inaccuracies in the original Motion and any proposed amendment to rectify this would potentially negate it.  Upon a vote, the Procedural Motion was carried.

(vi)             Councillor Barry Macleod-Cullinane rose to move a Procedural Motion that Motion 12(6) be debated prior to Motion 12(1).  Upon a vote, the Procedural Motion was not carried.

RESOLVED:  That

(1)               it be agreed that the North Harrow Parking Motion be the final Motion debated by the Council;

(2)               the alteration to Motion 12(10) Council Tax Freeze by the proposer and seconder to the Motion, be dealt with at the Motion concerned;

(3)               the 9 further amendments tabled in respect of Motions on the Summons, be dealt with individually at the Motions concerned;

(4)               Rule 16.6.1 be suspended for the consideration of Item 12(6) (Motion - North Harrow Parking);

(5)               the procedural Motion under Rule 15.6, seeking the consideration of Motion 12(6) (North Harrow Parking) before Motion 12(1) (Riots), be not agreed.

To receive any petitions to be presented:

(i)                 by a representative of the petitioners;

(ii)               by a Councillor, on behalf of petitioners; or

(iii)             by the Mayor, on behalf of petitioners.

In accordance with Rule 10, the following petitions were presented:

(i)                 Petition submitted by Councillor Nana Asante, containing 63 signatures of residents and users of Harrow Shopping Centres, encouraging each of the 21 Wards in the borough to become a Fair-Trade Ward.

  [The petition stood referred to the Deputy Leader of the Council and Portfolio Holder for Environment and Community Safety].

(ii)               Petition submitted by Councillor Susan Hall, containing 38 signatures of Members and residents, expressing their concern that “Harrow Council’s administration has slashed the funding for the Council-funded Police Team by over £100,000, thereby reducing the total number of officers from seven to five; failed to take full advantage of the offer of 2 for 1 officers from the MPA which, under the previous funding allowance, would have delivered an increase of two additional officers – totaling nine – while still saving money; not given due regard to the consequences of this decision, given that Council itself reports that personal robbery and residential burglary have shown substantial increases in recent months”.

[The petition stood referred to the Deputy Leader of the Council and Portfolio Holder for Environment and Community Safety].

(iii)             Petition submitted by Councillors Krishna Suresh and Chris Noyce, containing 61 signatures of residents, requesting a security gate in the alley way for Lucas Avenue and Clitheroe Avenue residents.

[The petition stood referred to the Deputy Leader of the Council and Portfolio Holder for Environment and Community Safety].

(iv)              Petition submitted by Councillor Krishna Suresh, containing 182 signatures, requesting assistance and advice to help find the Moola Manthiram registered charity to find a permanent venue.

[The petition stood referred to the Portfolio Holder for Community and Cultural Services].

(v)                Petition submitted by Councillor James Bond, containing 133 signatures of residents, requesting the Council clean up and secure the derelict site that was once used as changing rooms and is located on Headstone Manor at the edge of the open space beside Headstone Lane opposite Pinner Park School.

[The petition stood referred to the Deputy Leader of the Council and Portfolio Holder for Environment and Community Safety].

(vi)              Petition submitted by Councillor James Bond, containing over 2,000 signatures of residents, requesting the Council to reinstate the Admiral Nursing Service in Harrow.

[In accordance with the Council’s petition scheme, the petition stood referred to the next Full Council meeting].

(vii)            Petition submitted by Mr Jeremy Zeid, containing 652 signatures, requesting the Council take into account the views of customers, shoppers, residents and tax payers before serving an Enforcement Notice on 27-28 Kenton Park Parade.

[The petition stood referred to the Portfolio Holder for Planning, Development and Enterprise].

A period of up to 15 minutes is allowed for members of the public to ask questions of members 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 question submitted by a member of the public and responded to by a Portfolio Holder is contained at Appendix I.

To receive a presentation from the Leader of the Council on business since the last ordinary 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.

Report of the Constitution Review Working Group.

Further to Item 8 on the Supplemental Summons, the Council considered the recommendations from the Constitution Review Working Group.

The recommendations were 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.

Recommendation I:             Cabinet

                                                (8 September 2011)

Further to Item 9 on the Summons, the Council received a Recommendation from the meeting of Cabinet held on 8 September 2011.

The Recommendation was formally moved by the Leader of the Council, Councillor Bill Stephenson.

RESOLVED:  That

(1)               the amended terms of reference at appendix III to the minutes and the new name for the body, Tenants’, Leaseholders’ and Residents’ Consultative Forum, be noted;

(2)               the changes to the Executive Procedure Rules at appendix IV to the minutes, to take account of the new terms of reference for the Tenants’, Leaseholders’ and Residents’ Consultative Forum be approved.

Recommendation II:                        Cabinet

                                                (18 October 2011)

Further to Item 10 on the Summons, the Council received a Recommendation from the meeting of Cabinet held on 18 October 2011.

The Recommendation was formally moved by the Leader of the Council, Councillor Bill Stephenson.

RESOLVED:  That

(1)               the Cabinet Decision Making Protocol, at appendix V to the minutes, amending the Key Decision thresholds be agreed and included in the Council’s Constitution;

(2)               the amended Financial Regulations, at appendix VI to the minutes, be agreed and adopted into the Council’s Constitution.

A period of up to 15 minutes is allowed for asking written questions by Members of Council of a member of the Executive or the 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.

(i)                 In accordance with Rule 12, the questions submitted by Councillors and responded to by Portfolio Holders, are contained at Appendix VII.  Responses to those questions which were not reached during the period allowed for questions are also included and were circulated to all Members in written form.

(ii)               At the conclusion of the time allowed for this item, Councillor Paul Osborn rose to move a Motion that Rule 12.2.2 be suspended to allow the time to be extended for Council to receive and hear the remaining Questions with Notice.  Upon a vote, this Motion was not carried.

The following Motions have been notified in accordance with the requirements of Rule 15, to be moved and seconded by the Members indicated:-

(i)                 At item 12(1) the Council received a Motion in the names of Councillors Nana Asante and Mitzi Green in the following terms:

“This Council wishes to place on record its thanks to all those staff in Children's Services for all that they did to ensure that Harrow remained unaffected during the unrest in August.  This includes those Youth Workers who went out on patrols with police and those who worked with the young people themselves.  This was building on a bedrock of work that is carried out throughout the year by working with and engaging young people.  We thank them for all that they did and continue to do in spite of the challenging financial times we find ourselves in.

This Council wishes to acknowledge the positive way in which Harrow Police works closely with the Council.  This Council notes that close partnership working through the Harrow Partnership was a factor in preventing riots in Harrow.  This Council wishes to place on record its thanks to Harrow Police for effective preventative work which saved the borough’s businesses from potential destructive loss and disruption and helped confirm Harrow’s place as a safe borough.

This Council notes that the challenges created by the riots will not be tackled by moralising, but by sustained investment in jobs supported by an economy whose recovery is not hamstrung by the steepest spending cuts since World War 2. 

This Council instructs the Chief Executive to write to:

·           The Borough Commander and thank him and his officers for their safety they provided to Harrow residents and businesses. 

·           The Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government and urge him to make available more funds to buttress Cross Sector Partnership and for the exceptional work in Education and Youth Services that takes place in Harrow .

·           The Treasury citing the commendable work of Harrow Police and Harrow’s Youth Workers and urge that specific funding should be set aside to fund the exemplary youth and partnership work going on in Harrow.”

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

“This Council wishes to place on record its thanks to all those staff in Children's Services for all that they did to ensure that Harrow remained unaffected during the unrest in August.  This includes those Youth Workers who went out on patrols with police and those who worked with the young people themselves.  This was building on a bedrock of work that is carried out throughout the year by working with and engaging young people.  We thank them for all that they did and continue to do in spite of the challenging financial times we find ourselves in.

This Council wishes to acknowledge the positive way in which Harrow Police works closely with the Council.  This Council notes that close partnership working through the Harrow Partnership was a factor in preventing riots in Harrow.  This Council wishes to  ...  view the full minutes text for item 160.

(i)                 At item 12(2) the Council received a Motion in the names of Councillors Graham Henson and Krishna Suresh in the following terms:

“This Council notes that the LGPS is a sustainable, good quality pension scheme that benefits from being funded and locally managed. It is valuable to employers and employees alike.

This Council is concerned by proposals announced by the Chancellor in the last CSR to impose an extra 3.2% contribution tax on scheme members, increasing scheme average member contributions from 6.6% to 9.8% and notes that none of the additional revenue will go towards improving the financial security of the scheme and that in addition, research indicates that 40-50 per cent of affected members may opt out of the scheme as a result of this policy, thereby undermining the viability of the largest pension scheme in the UK.

Current Government proposals are not a genuine attempt to make the schemes more sustainable, they are a cash grab by the Treasury, imposing an additional tax on workers.

This Council notes that public service workers have suffered an ongoing pay freeze, widespread redundancies and cuts and closures of many vital services on which our communities rely.

This Council further notes that the LGA wrote to the Chancellor on 16 February 2011 to express concerns that mass opt-outs would be both undesirable and damaging to the scheme – Council shares these concerns.

This Council is disappointed that the Government has failed to negotiate fully and openly with the Trade Unions and regrets that the Government’s intransigence has increased the possibility of industrial action.

This Council notes that the trade unions and community groups have agreed to organise local and national protests in support of public services, jobs and pensions.

This Council agrees to support the work of the Trade Unions in raising awareness of this issue and local government employees in defending their pension scheme.

This Council resolves to ask the Chief Executive to write to the Chief Secretary to the Treasury and the Secretary of State for Local Government to express Council’s concerns and urge the Government to rethink their proposals.”

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

            “This Council notes that:

·           the Local Government Pension Scheme (LGPS) is one of the most generous of all public sector pensions in the UK;

·           public sector pensions are much more generous than those in the private sector, and that the National Association of Pension Funds has stated the chances of new private employees getting enrolled into pension schemes equivalent to those in the public sector are “nil”;

·           a full-time Harrow Council employee earning the Council’s average salary, who has spent their life working in local government, would receive a £43,626 lump sum and an annual pension of £16,433 under the LGPS;

·           Aon Consulting estimate that the average private sector pension pot of £56,000 would result in an annual pension of just £1,200. Even a pension pot  ...  view the full minutes text for item 161.

(i)                 At item 12(3) the Council received a Motion in the names of Councillors Jerry Miles and Sue Anderson in the following terms:

“This Council condemns the Mayor of London for allowing London Bus & Underground fares to rise sharply over the past four years. 

This Council notes that since Boris Johnson was elected in 2008, the cost:
 

·           a single bus ticket is up by 56%, costing Londoners £260 a year more; 

·           a weekly bus and tram pass is up 47%, costing Londoners £317 a year more;

·           a weekly zone 1-4 travelcard up by 23%, costing Londoners  £416 a year more;

·           a weekly zone 1-6 travelcard is up 22%, costing Londoners £509 a year more.         

This Council notes that with the cost of living rising in London, the decision made by Boris Johnson to increase fares again was ill-judged and unfair to Londoners who need the Mayor to be on their side.  The Council further notes that under the Tories, Londoners are less well off with every day that passes.

This Council welcomes the proposal from the Mayoral Labour Party candidate to initially reduce fares by 5%, and then to freeze fares in the following year.

This Council instructs the Chief Executive to write to the Mayor of London urging him to put Londoners first and reconsider the year on year increase which has a serious financial impact on families who are battered by lower wages, a high cost of living and the inability of this Government to promote policies which get the Economy growing.”

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

“This Council condemns the Mayor of London for allowing London Bus & Underground fares to rise sharply over the past four years.  

This Council notes that since Boris Johnson was elected in 2008, the cost:
 

·           a single bus ticket is up by 56%, costing Londoners £260 a year more; 

·           a weekly bus and tram pass is up 47%, costing Londoners £317 a year more;

·           a weekly zone 1-4 travelcard up by 23%, costing Londoners  £416 a year more;

·           a weekly zone 1-6 travelcard is up 22%, costing Londoners £509 a year more.         

This Council notes that with the cost of living rising in London, the decision made by Boris Johnson to increase fares again was ill-judged and unfair to Londoners who need the Mayor to be on their side.  The Council further notes that under the Tories, Londoners are less well off with every day that passes.

This Council welcomes the proposal to initially reduce fares by 5%, and then to freeze fares in the following year.

This Council instructs the Chief Executive to write to the Mayor of London urging him to put Londoners first and reconsider the year on year increase which has a serious financial impact on families who are battered by lower wages, a high cost of living and the inability of this Government to promote policies which  ...  view the full minutes text for item 162.

(i)         At item 12(4) the Council received a Motion in the names of Councillors Krishna James and Margaret Davine in the following terms:

“This Council notes with concern that:

·           serious issues confront the NHS: reducing the cost base of the NHS by £20bn, whilst forcing through top-down reorganisation carries a high risk of destabilising patient care and the capacity of the NHS to respond to events. 

·           the changes being proposed accelerate the replacement of a publicly owned and integrated National Health Service by a privatised and fragmented market system.  This Council believes that extensive use of markets is inconsistent with our free at the point of need model of health service. 

·           evidence from attempts at market led reform shows that use of financial competition has not brought about the reforms that were claimed.

·           considerable progress was made within the health service over the previous 13 years  due to increased investment and targets,  not the market system.  This Council wishes to point out that the country with the greatest market usage has the highest administrative costs and scores poorly on almost every international comparison of outcomes.

This Council welcomes the responsibility for Public Health being vested in the Local Authority but urges that funding of public health should be increased year on year as a share of total health spending to enable a welcome shift to preventative care and education.

The Council instructs the Chief Executive to write to the Secretary of State for Health and point out that the scale of reform proposed at a time when £20 billion of cuts are being made will lead to disorganisation, chaos and poorer patient outcomes.

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

“This Council notes with concern that:

·           serious issues confront the NHS: reducing the cost base of the NHS by £20bn, whilst forcing through top-down reorganisation carries a high risk of destabilising patient care and the capacity of the NHS to respond to events. 

·           the changes being proposed accelerate the replacement of a publicly owned and integrated National Health Service by a privatised and fragmented market system.  This Council believes that extensive use of markets is inconsistent with our free at the point of need model of health service. 

·           evidence from attempts at market led reform shows that use of financial competition has not brought about the reforms that were claimed.

·           considerable progress was made within the health service over the previous 13 years  due to increased investment and targets,  not the market system.  This Council wishes to point out that the country with the greatest market usage has the highest administrative costs and scores poorly on almost every international comparison of outcomes.

This Council also notes that, under the existing organisational structure:

1.                  Harrow Primary Care Trust (PCT) was rated as the sixth worst PCT in the country in 2010 (138th out of 144) by the Health Service Journal, with the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 163.

(i)                 At item 12(5) the Council received a Motion in the names of Councillors Navin Shah and Bill Stephenson in the following terms:

“Harrow Council deplores the Mayor of London’s policy and actions which attack frontline policing.  This Council is particularly concerned about the Mayor’s policy of cutting police numbers which puts Harrow at serious risk of increase in crime and hampers the success of Safer Neighbourhood Teams introduced by Ken Livingstone.  The Council notes:

·           The Mayor’s hypocrisy in asking the Prime Minister, after the  August riots, not to cut police budgets when he himself continues unabatedly to implement cuts in London police numbers;

·           That according to the Metropolitan Police Authority, London will lose 1800 police officers by 2013/14;

·           The reduction of Safer Neighbourhood Team sergeants in London by 150 this year and 150 next year reducing from 630 to 330;

·           The depletion and serious weakening of Safer Neighbourhood teams in Harrow arising from the reduction of 5 sergeants this year and with further reductions next year;

·           Harrow’s ability to tackle crime will be seriously reduced by the loss of 34 police officers this year;

·           The 18.4% increase in residential burglaries and the 56.3% increase in personal robberies, the rise in snatches and other crime in Harrow.

Harrow Council congratulates Ken Livingstone on his pledge to London and Harrow’s residents to restore police numbers including saving Safer Neighbourhood Teams. 

This Council instructs the Chief Executive to write to the Mayor of London informing him of this motion and asking him to rescind the cuts in policing, in particular, to the sergeants in Safer Neighbourhood Teams.”

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

“Harrow Council deplores the Mayor of London’s policy and actions which attack frontline policing.  This Council is particularly concerned about the Mayor’s policy of cutting police numbers which puts Harrow at serious risk of increase in crime and hampers the success of Safer Neighbourhood Teams.  The Council notes:

·           The Mayor’s hypocrisy in asking the Prime Minister, after the  August riots, not to cut police budgets when he himself continues unabatedly to implement cuts in London police numbers;

·           That according to the Metropolitan Police Authority, London will lose 1800 police officers by 2013/14;

·           The reduction of Safer Neighbourhood Team sergeants in London by 150 this year and 150 next year reducing from 630 to 330;

·           The depletion and serious weakening of Safer Neighbourhood teams in Harrow arising from the reduction of 5 sergeants this year and with further reductions next year;

·           Harrow’s ability to tackle crime will be seriously reduced by the loss of 34 police officers this year;

·           The 18.4% increase in residential burglaries and the 56.3% increase in personal robberies, the rise in snatches and other crime in Harrow.

Harrow Council welcomes the pledge to London and Harrow’s residents to restore police numbers including saving Safer Neighbourhood Teams. 

This Council instructs the Chief Executive  ...  view the full minutes text for item 164.

(i)                 At item 12(6) the Council received a Motion in the names of Councillors Anthony Seymour and Janet Mote in the following terms:

“This Council welcomes the £860,000 received from the Mayor of London’s Outer London Fund to regenerate Harrow’s shopping centres, and extends its thanks to the staff responsible for the successful bid.

This Council further notes that:

·           North Harrow has been allocated £360,000 of the Outer London Fund to, among other things, improve parking in the area and install more on street parking spaces, and that this proposal is considered the highest priority for local traders.

·           As a result of a decision made by Cabinet on 18^th October 2011, the remaining free parking in Harrow is set to be abolished.

·           When the North Harrow Safeway closed in 2004, assurances were given that the first hour of parking would be free until a new supermarket was up and running on the site.

This Council therefore urges Cllr. Phillip O’Dell, Deputy Leader and Portfolio Holder for Environment and Community Safety, to exempt North Harrow from the Council’s plans to abolish free parking across the Borough.  Not to do as such would damage business in the area and dishonour the assurances made.

This Council additionally calls on the Chief Executive, Harrow’s three MPs and its GLA Member, to write to the Mayor of London to convey thanks and gratitude for the Outer London Fund money.”

(ii)               Further to the agreement at Minute 152 to suspend Rule 16.6.1 an amendment in the names of Councillors Bill Stephenson and Keith Ferry, was submitted which sought to amend the Motion as follows:

“This Council welcomes the £860,000 received from the Mayor of London’s Outer London Fund to regenerate Harrow’s shopping centres and congratulates all the staff involved in this successful bid noting that Harrow received the second largest amount awarded from the Fund.

This Council notes

·           the events which have already taken place in the Town Centre - the illuminated tulips, and in North Harrow - the wonderful late night shopping festival, and further events to come;

·           that the Council has made a further bid for funding from the remaining £40 million in the Outer London Fund;

·           that North Harrow has already been allocated £360,000 from the first bid.

This Council fully supports the further bid for funding including money to regenerate the North Harrow District Shopping Centre, in particular, to install more on-street parking spaces;

This Council further instructs the Chief Executive to bring this motion to the attention of the Mayor of London and to Harrow’s three MPs.”

(iii)             Upon a vote, the amendment at (ii) was carried;

(iv)             Upon a further vote, the substantive Motion, as amended, was agreed for submission to the executive.

RESOLVED:  That the substantive Motion as amended and set out at (ii) above, be referred to the Executive.

In accordance with Rule 14.7, this Motion stood referred to the Executive.

In accordance with Rule 14.7, this Motion stood referred to the Executive.

At item 12(9) the Council received a Motion in the names of Councillors Susan Hall and Barry Macleod-Cullinane in the following terms:

“This Council offers its thanks and gratitude to Harrow Police, Council staff, youth workers and all emergency services members who contributed to ensuring that Harrow remained free of rioting and disorder during the London-wide riots in August this year.

This Council further applauds the efforts of our police in keeping Harrow as one of the safest boroughs in London, with some of the lowest crime levels and an 11% drop in overall crime over the past year.

The Chief Executive is instructed to write to Harrow Police to express the gratitude of the Council for their continuing hard work.”

RESOLVED:  That the substantive Motion be unanimously adopted.

(i)                 At Item 12(10) the Council received a Motion in the names of Councillors Barry Macleod-Cullinane and Susan Hall in the following terms:

“This Council welcomes the announcement by the Government that, for the second year running, Councils will be provided with financial support to allow them to freeze their council tax rates.  This Council confirms it will incorporate this funding and a council tax freeze into its budget for 2012/13, which will help Harrow’s hard-pressed residents in these troubling financial times.

This Council also supports the decision of the Mayor of London, over the last three years, to freeze the Mayoral precept that is collected by councils on behalf of City Hall.  This Council encourages the Mayor to do so again this year.

The Leader of the Council is instructed to write to the Chancellor of the Exchequer, the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government and the Mayor of London to express the Council’s support for these policies.”

(ii)               There was an amendment in the names of Councillors Bill Stephenson and Phillip O’Dell, which sought to amend the Motion as follows:

“This Council notes that for the financial year 2011/12 the Government provided financial support allowing the Council to freeze council tax and that this funding was written into the base budget for four years.  This Council welcomes this much needed help for Local Government.

This Council notes the announcement by the Government to provide financial support allowing the Council to freeze Council Tax for the financial year 2012/13 but notes that this has not been written into the base budget for subsequent years, hence causing severe financial difficulties for the financial year 2013/14 and subsequent years.

With this in mind Council instructs the Chief Executive to write to the Chancellor, Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government, and their shadows and the 3 Harrow MPs advising them of this motion and expressing the Council’s support for any help offered to local government.”

(iii)             Upon a vote, the amendment at (ii) was carried.

(iv)             Upon a further vote the substantive Motion, as amended, was agreed.

RESOLVED:  That the substantive Motion, as amended and set out at (ii) above, be adopted. 

Report of the Director of Legal and Governance Services.

The Council received a report of the Director of Legal and Governance Services providing a summary of the urgent decisions taken by Cabinet, the Leader and Portfolio Holders, and the use of the special urgency procedure since the last meeting.

RESOLVED:  That the report be noted.

Report of the Director of Legal and Governance Services.

The Director of Legal and Governance Services advised of an urgent decision taken in respect of a matter reserved to Council since the last meeting.

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

(i)                 At 10.28 pm, during the debate on the Item 12(3) (Motion:  Fair Public Transport Fares [Affordable Bus and Tube Fares]), 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 vote, this proposal was not agreed;

(ii)               At 10.30 pm, in the course of the consideration of Item 12(3) (Motion:  Fair Public Transport Fares [Affordable Bus and Tube Fares]), 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 12(3) (Motion: Fair Public Transport Fares [Affordable Bus and Tube Fares]), 12(4) (Motion:  NHS), 12(5) (Motion: Police Cuts – Putting Safety at Risk), 12(6) (Motion: North Harrow Parking), 12(9) (Motion: Crime in Harrow), 12(10) (Motion: Council Tax Freeze), 13 (Decisions Taken Under the Urgency Procedure by Portfolio Holders, Leader and Deputy Leader and Use of Special Urgency Procedures) and 14 (Decision Taken Under the Urgency Procedure – Council).

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