Agenda item
Questions from the Opposition and other Non- Executive Members
Questions to be put to members of the Cabinet in accordance with standing order 40.
Minutes:
Councillor Kelcher referred to the importance of the Harrow Road and the proposed parking and loading restrictions about which local businesses had expressed concern. He asked for a commitment to work closely with the Harrow Road Business Alliance to ensure that changes to parking and loading restrictions along the stretch of the Harrow Road passing through Kensal Green ward did not adversely impact on the local businesses in the area. Councillor Southwood (Lead Member for Environment) replied that the part of the road being referred to was a very busy thoroughfare with pressure on parking and loading provision. She stated that she would work with the Alliance to ensure that the planned scheme did not inhibit their ability to do business.
Councillor Hossain asked that thanks be given to the neighbours, Council officers and the police who all responded swiftly to a serious problem in College Road when intruders broke into a garage and created a huge mess that needed to be cleaned up; she also thanked the Parks Service for dealing with Japanese Knotweed in Preston Park. Councillor Hossain posed the question of how long such public services would continue to exist before being put out to private companies or the voluntary sector. Councillor Southwood (Lead Member for Environment) replied that she was delighted to be able to thank all those involved. The teams in question had experienced huge financial pressures but continued to do a good job. She stated that it showed that there were public servants working on behalf of the Council that were prepared to put in extra effort for local residents in areas that did not always gain much attention.
Councillor Chohan asked if representations would be made to Transport for London against the plan to close all London Underground ticket offices despite the Mayor of London’s promise in 2008 to keep them open. He felt this would have a detrimental effect on crime prevention and accessibility for older passengers. Councillor Southwood (Lead Member for Environment) replied that this reminded her of the broken promise by the Mayor which was extremely disappointing. She agreed that the biggest impact would be felt by people who needed a little more assistance when travelling, whether elderly or with disabilities. Councillor Southwood stated that she was not confident in the equality impact assessment that had been carried out, nor were any lessons being learnt from the ticket offices that had already been shut. She assured members that she would be working closely with Navin Shah, AM (London Assembly Member) to hold the Mayor to account on how he implements the closures and that he was taking into account all the equalities aspects that he should be.
Councillor Bradley asked about the implications of the Government’s forced sale of Council homes in Brent. He asked what the effect would be of depriving the borough of the capital receipt and rent income and on the long term housing strategy for the borough. Councillor McLennan (Lead Member for Housing) replied that the implications were very stark. She was awaiting an announcement on the proposed Housing Bill which had been long delayed. It was to be assumed that the National Housing Federation and housing associations were in discussion with the Department for Communities and Local Government trying to influence the outcome. As an example, housing association tenants would have similar rights to buy as Council tenants and the Council would have to replace high value properties. It was estimated that 15% of Londoners would be able to afford to buy and in Brent this could represent up to 2,400 sales, although this was all subject to receiving the details of the proposal. It was not known how high value property would be determined but it was currently estimated that there would be 650 such properties in Brent. It would mean a loss of rent putting pressure on the housing stock.
Councillor Choudry stated that minimum wage workers who rented would be up to £32 worse off as a result of the Chancellor’s summer budget even after all the planned rises in the minimum wage. He asked, given that more than half of households in Brent rented, what the impact would be on local residents. Councillor Choudry was particularly concerned that this would mostly affect the most vulnerable groups in the borough. Councillor Mashari (Lead Member for Employment and Skills) replied that the impact would be mostly felt by the working poor. People on benefits faced increasing financial pressures over the next few years, significantly there were cuts to in work benefits as much as out of work benefits. As an example anyone receiving working tax credits with an income of more than £3,800 will be worse off and there would be a disproportionate adverse impact on ethnic minority communities. Councillor Mashari also referred to the child tax credit cap limit to two children which would again disproportionally impact on ethnic minority groups. She stated that reduced income for these families was likely to lead to missed rental payments and have an impact on the Council’s collection levels.
Councillor Davidson stated that the Government’s Troubled Families programme had achieved stunning results with 810 families in Brent having their lives transformed and, that Brent residents were enjoying record low levels of unemployment. He contrasted this with the Council’s green bin tax which had led to record fly tipping in the borough. He asked if the Cabinet would praise the economic and social record of the Conservative Government instead of misleading local residents suggesting every perceived problem in Brent was the Government’s fault. Councillor Moher stated that the Cabinet would support any initiative that helped the most disadvantaged members of society, including the Troubled Families programme which, she stated, was based on the Labour Government’s family intervention programmes. Councillor Moher thanked the team running the programme for their hard work and dedication in helping so many families. However, she did not accept that the results were stunning because this would suggest a life changing situation, when in fact the use of food banks was increasing, rents soaring and people were being evicted. The jobs on offer often involved zero hours contracts and although employment was rising many people were taking on multiple jobs to make ends meet. She referred to those who would be worse off when the cuts to tax credits were introduced and the increase in the uptake in free school meals, all of which showed that people were not better off.