Agenda item

Questioner:

Councillor Barry Macleod-Cullinane

Asked of:

Councillor Bill Stephenson, Leader of the Council and Portfolio Holder for Finance and Business Transformation

Question:

Do you have full confidence that the leadership team with you in Cabinet is making decisions in the best interests of Harrow residents?

Answer:

I am going to follow the theme that you have been saying because this has been a very successful year for this administration. 

We have frozen Council Tax, managed to deliver an underspend of £1.1m despite devastating in-year government cuts and budgetary failures by the previous administration.  We have successfully dealt with a totally dilapidated IT system, launched an innovative programme of new projects which are defending and enhancing frontline services whilst making savings.  The Council has won the MJ award, and ‘hank you for your earlier congratulations, for Best Achieving Council over this last year.  Our net residents’ satisfaction has shot up by a staggering 15% over the last year.  This has been achieved with the involvement of all 34 Labour Councillors and 10 Cabinet Members working together with staff, partners and local residents. 

This record, I believe, stands for itself.  An excellent team making difficult decisions in the best interests of Harrow residents to their evident satisfaction.

Supplemental Question:

If you do have full confidence in your Cabinet team, did you follow the advice of your Portfolio Holder for Adult Social Care, Health and Wellbeing whom this side holds in high esteem for her great knowledge and dedication to her Portfolio area when it came to deciding on how to use the £2.1m received under the S.256 Agreement and regarding our Council amendments, especially when, in answer to a member of the public, you said that you were not qualified to comment on this area of activity, so did you overrule your Portfolio Holder? 

Supplemental Answer:

The success of our team is evident in the residents’ satisfaction.

Questioner:

Councillor Paul Osborn

Asked of:

Councillor Margaret Davine, Portfolio Holder for Adult Social Care, Health and Wellbeing

Question:

Why do you feel you were unable to support your administration when it came to our amendments to ensure that the £2.1 million of PCT funding was spent on Harrow’s most vulnerable residents, instead of being paid into the Transformation and Priority Initiatives Fund?

Answer:

In all political parties there are from time to time genuine disagreements and sometimes they are very sincerely held by the people that find themselves in that position.  This was one such an occasion.

Supplemental Question:

Do you think it was accurate of the Leader of the Council at Overview and Scrutiny last night to say that the recommendation from Cabinet to Council was passed without dissent?

Cllr Davine:

I was not at the Overview and Scrutiny Committee last night, so I do not know what exactly was said.  I have argued against the decision and would be surprised if everybody in this room did not realise that.  Otherwise I would not have been in a position to abstain, and I refer to my earlier answer because that is the situation I feel I have been in.

Questioner:

Councillor Paul Osborn

Asked of:

Councillor Bill Stephenson, Leader of the Council and Portfolio Holder for Finance and Business Transformation

Question:

Will you commit now to exempting the Adult Services budget in the event that your administration makes any in-year budget cuts?

Answer:

We do not envisage at this stage that we would need to make any in-year budget cuts unless of course, central government introduces some more in-year cuts as it did last year. 

We will continue to monitor our financial position and take appropriate action as necessary and it would not be sensible to rule anything in or anything out at this stage.  I am sure you would agree that is a sensible way to look at it.

Supplemental Question:

If you think there is a possibility that you might need to make in?year budget cuts, would it not have been sensible to put the £2.1m you were given specifically for Adult Social Care in a contingency fund that could be used for that purpose?

Supplemental Answer:

We already have a contingency fund for Adult Social Care. We put £1m in the PCT money in case there was difficulty between medical and social care.  In relation to the consultation and whether or not we will make the savings there, we certainly do not want to pre-empt this.  We do have a contingency already and that was the social care money which was used precisely for that purpose and that is what it is for.

Questioner:

Councillor Paul Osborn

Asked of:

Councillor David Perry, Portfolio Holder for Community and Cultural Services

Question:

Will you rule out the privatisation of our parks and library services?

Answer:

We are currently conducting the consultation “Let’s Talk” with our residents on what they think about parks, libraries and other cultural services and how they would like to use them.  We believe that we need to hear from our residents about how we should spend Council budgets on services in order to deliver what they need. 

We are also interested in hearing what our residents think about who they think are best to provide those services.  We have a commitment to ensure that we deliver cultural services which enhance the quality of life in the borough as cost effectively as possible.

Supplemental Question:

Have you read your manifesto which states three times that you will not privatise the superb library service?  Can I ask which is more meaningless, your manifesto or the consultation document which puts the option of privatisation on the table?

Supplemental Answer:

As we often say, we are a listening Council and the options which we are highlighting and outlining to the public in our cultural consultation going out on our library services is that we want to hear what people say.  We have put all options in there, so we want to hear on all options.  We are open to all ideas and we will see what results come back, so let us not pre-empt them yet.

Questioner:

Councillor Stephen Wright

Asked of:

Councillor David Perry, Portfolio Holder for Community and Cultural Services

Question:

Regarding the installation of the automated machines in Harrow's libraries, can you please confirm:

(a)               The target date when all of Harrow's libraries will have the new technology fully installed and operating?

(b)               The revenue and capital costs of the new technology equipment when fully installed?

(c)               The installation costs of new technology equipment?

(d)               The redundancy costs of the 34 staff positions that were abolished?

Answer:

Self service is already fully operational in seven of our eleven libraries.  All libraries will be ‘live’ by the end of September 2011.  The library service has been completely restructured since April 2011 and the staff are now working in their new roles.

The implementation costs are contained in full in the Full Business case presented to Council in October 2010.  Final accounts have not yet been received but, to date, we understand that all costs are contained within the original cost envelope and savings are being delivered as projected.

The project is being delivered on time and to budget and will save the Council a net £2.6 million in the first five years of implementation.

Supplemental Question:

To date how much money has been saved by the installation of the new technology?  When do you think real savings will begin to be realised?

Supplemental Answer:

As I said, we have not fully come to its conclusion of the roll-out of the service so we have not got the final accounts.  However, once we do have a final account I am fully prepared to provide you with a copy in report form.

Questioner:

Councillor Barry Macleod-Cullinane

Asked of:

Councillor Graham Henson, Portfolio Holder for Performance, Customer Services and Corporate Services

Question:

Regarding the report on Agency Worker Service; will you guarantee that you view the savings it contains as achievable?

Answer:

The contract, which has been jointly procured with Hammersmith & Fulham, enables us to make further efficiencies without impacting on delivery of services.  The projected savings built in to the MTFS are deliberately conservative, as they are predicated on a number of factors which are variable or at this time unquantified, for example, the impact of the Agency Worker Regulations which come in later this year.   These are set out in the Risk Management section of the report.   I am therefore confident that the savings can be achieved.

Questioner:

Councillor Tony Seymour

Asked of:

Councillor Keith Ferry, Portfolio Holder for Planning, Development and Enterprise

Question:

What is the latest position on the dispute relating to the old Safeway site in North Harrow?

Answer:

Firstly, I need to make clear that the Council is not a party to any dispute that may currently be on-going.

This administration would like to see the Pinner Road frontage of this development brought into appropriate and active use as soon as possible.

I understand that the parties with a contractual interest in the site are Megabowl and Genesis Homes.

The Council has made clear to both parties its very strong desire to see the development of this facility completed as a matter of priority.  Officers were advised on Tuesday 19 July that Genesis and Megabowl are still in discussion and hope to reach a settlement shortly.

Supplemental Question:

When will the people of North Harrow get a supermarket which they so richly deserve and which is regarded as vital to the regeneration of the North Harrow shopping centre?

Supplemental Answer:

I hope as soon as possible but the answer to your supplementary is the same as the answer to your primary question. 

We have to wait for the outcome of the dispute between Genesis and Megabowl.  The date of Tuesday 19 July is significant in that Genesis had a Board meeting that day.  We do not know the outcome of that Board meeting but officers gave me the impression that Genesis had reached a conclusion with Megabowl and that the Board would have to consider that.  I would hope within the next couple of months.

Questioner:

Councillor Tony Seymour

Asked of:

Councillor Phillip O’Dell, Portfolio Holder for Environment and Community Safety

Question:

What programmes of road and pavement maintenance (if any) are planned for the next three years in Headstone North?

Answer:

Currently programmed works for years 2011 and 2012 is the Pinner Park Avenue carriageway.  Other roads in Headstone North Ward likely to be considered for inclusion in programmes over the next three years are probably Chantry Place footway, Melbourne Avenue carriageway, Randon Close carriageway, Manor Way carriageway and Holmdene Avenue carriageway.

Supplemental Question:

I wish to highlight the special circumstances relating to Capel Gardens, Pinner, in my ward, in which the Chief Executive has recently received a letter from the residents and an informal petition.  This road is in dire need of repair and replacement.  It is a cul-de-sac, one of the steepest in the borough with 78 properties and 2 blocks of flats and also used by parents of the nearby St John Fisher School to drop their children off.  Can this road be included in your current programme due to the very special circumstances? 

Supplemental Answer:

I think you inferred that there had already been a petition submitted to the Council.  There is a methodology for the Department to deal with that petition, so you will hear the outcome from that petition.

Questioner:

Councillor Paul Osborn

Asked of:

Councillor Phillip O’Dell, Portfolio Holder for Environment and Community Safety

Question:

Can you please clarify the process for allocating £100,000 received from TfL's Local Transport Fund scheme to four projects in Harrow, as stated in the report from June's meeting of TARSAP?

Answer:

In each financial year the programme of local transport schemes is prepared in advance of the June TARSAP meeting by officers following confirmation of funding by TfL.

A review of current local issues of interest to Members, public and other key stakeholders is then undertaken by the team of Traffic officers and any links with the Mayoral transport objectives and Harrow’s own LIP objectives established.

Potential schemes are then evaluated taking into account a wide range of factors including cost, delivery time scales, impact and likely public support.  Generally, only the more minor schemes that can be delivered within the financial year and that are not already included in the main LIP programme are usually considered suitable.  The suggested programme of schemes is then discussed with the Portfolio Holder to verify their suitability and the agreed schemes submitted in a report to TARSAP for consideration and wider debate.  TARSAP will recommend the proposed programme, including any revisions required by the Panel, to the Portfolio Holder for approval.

Once approved by the Portfolio Holder the individual schemes are confirmed to TfL and officers will commence the delivery of the programme.  For the 2011/12 programme TARSAP considered four schemes at their meeting on 23 June and recommended approval to the Portfolio Holder.

Questioner:

Councillor Barry Macleod-Cullinane

Asked of:

Councillor Bill Stephenson, Leader of the Council and Portfolio Holder for Finance and Business Transformation

Question:

At the Cabinet Meeting of June 22nd 2011, you described the Council as having a "dysfunctional Housing Revenue Account" when your own out-turn report presented to Cabinet in June 2010 showed a £698k improvement in its position; why the discrepancy in your description in the course of a year?

Answer:

I described the HRA as dysfunctional under the former administration because year after year income was less than expenditure and the HRA reserves were rapidly being frittered away; leasehold charges were continually wrongly charged and other charges were not being collected; tenant and leaseholders satisfaction was plummeting; TLCF meetings were not working.  Need I go on?  Slither and slide.  Totally dysfunctional.

Over this last year we have swept this aside with a new broom through our Housing Ambition Plan under the leadership of Councillor Bob Currie and the Housing support team working together with our excellent staff in Housing and as well as working with tenants and leaseholders. TLCF has now been reformed; leaseholders’ charges have at last been sorted out; income collected from tenants and potentially from leaseholders has substantially improved.  For example, we reorganised the way we collect current tenants rent and improved the proportion of rent collected to 98.36%, from lower to upper quartile performance all in one year.  We also reduced the percentage of  tenants with more than 7 weeks rent arrears to 5.2% and this is now also in the upper quartile of performance.  We reduced overall current tenants’ rent arrears from £796k to £496k in one year.  We also improved the leasehold collection process to reduce the total arrears from £241k to £122k.  Yes it was dysfunctional but no longer.

Next year we expect the HRA account to be in the black for the first time in many years.

Looking ahead we anticipate that the Government’s reform of the HRA – long overdue - will lead to an even healthier HRA.

Another very successful year I think you will agree.

Questioner:

Councillor Barry Macleod-Cullinane

Asked of:

Councillor Bill Stephenson, Leader of the Council and Portfolio Holder for Finance and Business Transformation

Question:

You told me at Cabinet in October last year that your system of trialling Portfolio Holder assistants in secret was 'working very well'.  Do you intend to continue using this system in the future, and if so/if not please explain why that is the case?

Answer:

I have responded to this question a number of times and I have never said anything about ‘secret’.  As I have explained the procedure of trialling Portfolio Holder Assistants a year ago was a very sensible one to take for a new Administration with seven Cabinet members who had never served in a Cabinet and twelve totally new councillors.  I have to say it has also been an outstanding success.  As I have explained over and over again there is no need for such a procedure in the current situation.