Agenda item
Question time
In accordance with Standing Order 39, up to ten questions selected by the Leaders of the three main political groups will be followed with supplementary questions to the Executive.
A copy of the selected questions and the answers where possible will be separately circulated to all members.
Minutes:
The selected questions submitted under the provisions of standing order 38 had been circulated together with written responses from the respective Lead Members. The Members who had put the questions were invited to ask their supplementary questions.
In the absence of any member of the Labour Group to ask a supplementary question, the five questions selected by the Leader of the Labour Group could not be heard.
The following three questions had been selected by the Leader of the Liberal Democrat Group.
Concessionary fares scheme
The question from Councillor Anwar had asked if the Leader agreed with the all-party motion from London Councils which deplored the Government’s plan to halve its contribution towards the cost of extending the scheme. Councillor Anwar asked why councils should get the blame for the huge cost of the scheme and for rising council taxes when the Government was depriving London of the money needed to implement their free bus policy. He felt it was cynical of the Government to say they were supporting older people but then withdraw the money to do this. As a supplementary question, Councillor Anwar asked what other grants the Government were removing that would leave Brent Council either having to charge more in Council Tax or reduce services.
Councillor Lorber (Leader) replied that he agreed with the sentiments expressed by Councillor Anwar. He stated that while the Council worked to defend the services it provided the Government was undermining this by imposing cuts in funding. He gave as examples of this the £4M over 4 years for the Freedom Pass, many millions of pounds transferred from the health service and £4M lost towards schemes for the unemployed.
Salt supplies
The question from Councillor Pervez had asked how the Council had been affected by the Government’s decision to centrally co-ordinate all salt supplies. Councillor Pervez felt that it was a sorry state of affairs when well run Councils such as Brent organised themselves well in advance in preparation for the bad weather and then had their grit supplies taken from them. As a supplementary question, Councillor Pervez asked why the Council’s supplies had been redirected to other areas and was it not hypocritical of Councillor John and Dawn Butler, MP to comment on the gritting problem when it was their government that had taken Brent’s grit.
Councillor D Brown (Lead Member for Highways and Transportation) replied that between 16 December and 8 January the Council laid down more grit than it had ever done so before, with 1,517 tonnes of salt used to keep the traffic running on the main highways. The Council had prepared for this by increasing its grit stock. Nevertheless the resources had to be concentrated on the main routes through the borough. Councillor Brown contrasted the service provided with that of past years when the borough had not been so well prepared for bad weather.
Funding for Brent schools
Councillor Leaman’s question had asked if the cheque for £80 million held by Dawn Butler, MP in a recent picture had yet been paid into the Council. In the absence of Councillor Leaman, Councillor Bessong added that it was suspected that the £80M cheque being held by Dawn Butler, MP was not from the Labour Party and had not been sent to Brent Council. As a supplementary question, Councillor Bessong asked when was it likely that Brent’s schools would see the money and was there any danger the programme would be halted in the same way as the colleges programme was starved of cash.
In reply, Councillor Wharton (Lead Member for Children and Families) explained that it was not expected that building work would begin for 18 to 24 months, all being well. He felt there was a danger that the Council would incur costs on project management only for the money not to be forthcoming given the economic uncertainty but he hoped this would not be the case. The Government had been expected to make an announcement on 15 November about the award of funding under the Building Schools for the Future programme. This was important for the Council because interviews were taking place for the senior post which would be responsible for the programme and the announcement would have confirmed that there was a job to be done. In the event there was an unexplained change in arrangements and the announcement was delayed until 30 November. In the meantime Dawn Butler, MP appeared in the press holding a giant cheque. Councillor Wharton stated that this was another example of some people playing politics while the Council was trying to get on with delivering services.
The following two questions had been selected by the Leader of the Conservative Group.
Cremation facilities in the borough
The question from Councillor Mistry had asked if there were any plans to open a crematorium in the borough especially given the large local Hindu population. She asked as a supplementary question if the Council could explore the possibility of finding a suitable site with sufficient car parking and build a facility (not a temple) large enough to accommodate 200-300 people to enable Brent residents to pay their last respects, perform their rituals in relative calm in the knowledge that they did not have to worry about space, parking pressures on neighbours and such like.
Councilor Van Colle (Lead Member for Environment, Planning and Culture) replied that now he better understood what Councillor Mistry was asking for, he felt the provision of such a facility could be explored in consultation with the Hindu community. He added that it would obviously have to meet planning requirements and would not be easy to achieve but he felt it was something that Council officers could look into.
Grit and salt supplies
The question from Councillor Kansagra had asked what the current levels of salt and grit supplies held by the Council were and if any supplies had been diverted by instruction from the Government. He added that it was clear that the Council had been very prudent in ordering extra supplies only for them to then be taken away. Whilst recognising the need to keep the main roads clear he felt that there were other significant roads that were not gritted such as in Barnhill which was one of the highest areas in London. Barnhill has some very steep roads for which brakes are needed even on normal days and he asked as a supplementary question if the Council had a priority list of roads for gritting once the main roads had been treated.
Councillor D Brown (Lead Member for Highways and Transportation) replied that there was already such a list held by the Council and this could be viewed on the Council’s web site. He suggested it was also open to councillors to choose to spend some of their ward money on the provision of grit bins. Councillor Brown stated that if the Council had been able to retain full control of its salt and grit stocks it could have done a lot more. However, as previously explained at the meeting, the Government had redirected some supplies and the Council was now left with only 3 to 4 days supply. As a result of the Government’s actions, Councils did not have the level of supplies recommended by the Government. Councillor Brown stated that the Government’s actions had been very wrong when the Council had tried hard to provide the best service it could to make the borough a cleaner, greener, safer place.
Supporting documents: