Agenda item
Questions from the Opposition and other Non-Cabinet Members
Questions to be put to members of the Cabinet in accordance with Standing Order 40.
Minutes:
The Mayor advised Members that this item gave them the opportunity to ask questions of Members of the Cabinet on any matter, which was the responsibility of Cabinet. He confirmed that Members had received written tabled responses to these questions.
The Mayor stated that non-Cabinet Members each had one minute to ask a supplementary question if they so wished.
(i) Supplementary Question from Councillor Shaw to Councillor Miller (Cabinet Member for Stronger Communities
Councillor Shaw asked Councillor Miller that, with regard to keeping lights on in the evenings at Willesden Sports Centre, could he make that a reality this evening as opposed to proposing this as something which could be done.
Secondly, Councillor Shaw asked Councillor Miller that, with regard to better CCTV cameras, could the Council improve upon the current CCTV cameras.
Thirdly, Councillor Shaw asked Councillor Miller that, with regard to access and given that the Police had had a lot of problems with drugs, could the Council consider imposing an access restriction at night, including perhaps a barrier there?
In response, Councillor Miller said that he was aware that this was a real issue and that there were certainly some residents in Willesden Green who had previously raised this and he was quite keen to deal with it as he was also a Ward Member there. In terms of the actions suggested, Councillor Miller stressed that these were all possibilities and mentioned that, at the end of his written response to the initial question put, was an invitation to meet with Councillor Shaw, and residents, to sit down and discuss the best combination in terms of answers to that particular problem. Councillor Miller went on to say that he was, of course, happy to write back to Councillor Shaw and to put on record what was actually decided but he would like to discuss it with Councillor Shaw and the residents also, if at all possible.
With regard to CCTV cameras, Councillor Miller said that a proposal to improve the Council’s CCTV would be brought forward later that week to the Council’s Capital Investment Panel and, depending on the outcome of the Panel’s deliberations, he may be able to announce further progress on CCTV at that time.
(ii) Supplementary Question from Councillor Nerva to Councillor Hirani (Cabinet Member for Community Wellbeing)
Councillor Nerva asked Councillor Hirani what further information he had with regard to the specific impact these community pharmacy changes would have on Brent residents and Brent pharmacists.
In response, Councillor Hirani said that he had come across some information, which outlined the impact on Brent’s pharmacies of the potential changes that had been compiled by Pharmacy Voice, and that contact would be made with them to ascertain how they have got hold of this information. Councillor Hirani said that Pharmacy Voice’s analysis suggested that 22 of Brent’s 74 pharmacies were now at risk of closure because of the Government’s cuts, which equated to 30% of all pharmacists in Brent, and because of the magnitude of the information that the Council had been only today, Councillor Hirani felt it was imperative that the Council followed it up across the list of pharmacies within Brent. Councillor Hirani said that, once again, this showed that the Government was disproportionally affecting Brent. The cuts to pharmacists across the nation was 12% and 30% of Brent’s was at risk as a result of these cuts. So, he said, whether or not people agreed or whether they blamed the previous Labour Government for the mess that had been created and the cuts that were happening, surely Councillors and all Brent parties could unite on the fact that why was Brent being disproportionally cut when compared to other areas.
(iii) Supplementary Question from Councillor Ezeajughi to Councillor Miller (Cabinet Member for Stronger Communities)
Councillor Ezeajughi asked Councillor Miller what the Council was doing to work with the Police and the local community to ensure that Brent continued to be a place where residents felt safe.
In response, Councillor Miller said it was very important that the Council was seen to condemn as strongly as possible this form of violence and to put on record the Council’s intention to use whatever means at its disposal to tackle it. Councillor Miller said that the Council would, of course, be working very closely with the Police to ensure that this happened and referring to the earlier announcement that he gave, Councillor Miller said that the Council buying into the Met Patrol Plus Scheme would certainly mean an increase in Police presence and a visible Police presence in some of these areas that could be used to deter people. Councillor Miller went on to say that the Council was also doing a lot of intelligence-led work with gangs where data was being collated about them and people’s pathways into them so the Council had a softer approach that would think about how the Council’s social services and its education system could intervene with gang members. Further to this, Councillor Miller said that the Council had, thanks to its close work with the Mayor of London, been awarded some extra money on what the Council would normally have received, of £155,000 over the first year from the MOPAC Crime Prevention Fund. Councillor Miller guaranteed Members that some of this money would go towards increasing the Council’s level of intervention with gangs – whether that was the prevention and deterrents or whether that was to do with mentoring, for example. In conclusion, Councillor Miller said that the Council was currently working with officers to work-up some proposals using those funds and would welcome a further meeting with Councillor Ezeajughi as to how this could be taken forward.
(iv) Supplementary Question from Councillor Collier to Councillor McLennan (Deputy Leader)
Councillor Collier asked Councillor McLennan, with regard to her response, whether or not, the right person had answered the question because it had not been so much an issue about treasury management that he was bringing up but more about working and engaging with businesses. On the specific issue of the recent re-evaluation of business rates, this, he said had been around the lobbying that had taken place on behalf of businesses by both businesses and local government. Secondly, Councillor Collier wanted to ask a bit more about whether the Council had any information on the differential impacts of the business rates rise on different sectors in Brent. Lastly, Councillor Collier wished to find out what preparation Brent had made to undertake and manage the changed relationship with business following the localisation of business-let rates, which would come into force in 2020.
In response, Councillor McLennan apologised to Councillor Collier if the initial response had not been clear. She went on to say that the Council had started to look at the potential issue of business rates and the increases and the impact this would have on Brent’s businesses. She said that, in terms of Brent, the average increase was 12% against a national average of 9% and the London average of 23% so, Brent was a little more than the national average but below the London average. Councillor McLennan said that, in terms of working with Brent’s businesses and in terms of working with Councillor Mashari, the Council had been working very closely to see how it could actually look and see how with the increase in business rates, what the Council could actually disseminate because, at the present time, it was still very, very much up in the air and the Council could not actually define until it knew exactly what was going to be happening to the Council so at the present time it was just a watching brief. Councillor McLennan stressed that the Council knew what the issues were. She said that she had been in contact with local businesses in Willesdon concerning the impact there and even accepting it or agreeing their potential increases, but at the present time, this was something that the Council was looking towards and working with its businesses and something that would be evolving as the Council knew more information as it came through. In conclusion, Councillor McLennan reiterated that, at the present time, it was still very much a watching brief because the situation was fluid but was happy to bring back to Council as it affected everyone.
Councillor Davidson, who had submitted a similar original question to those that had been accepted and responded to, requested that Councillor Southwood respond to that question regarding the wider issue of outsourcing contracts, which she agreed to do outside of the meeting.
Supporting documents: