Agenda item
Questions from the Opposition and other Non- Executive Members
Questions will be put to the Executive
Minutes:
Councillor Matthews asked on behalf of Councillor Beck what had been done to ensure that the new redevelopment proposals for Brent Cross were fully consulted on, following the Mayor of London indicating he wanted to see a scaled down regeneration project for the area. She added that local residents were again concerned that any new proposals would be rushed through without proper consultation. Councillor Crane (Lead Member for Regeneration and Major Projects) replied that it was good news for Brent that the scheme was to be scaled down and he hoped the Planning Committee would look carefully at the new proposals, taking account of any views submitted. He added that whilst welcoming the Mayor's announcement of the allocation of funding for Barnet's bid towards the Cricklewood development, he was disappointed that the Brent bids – Willesden Green Growing Success and Unlocking Ealing Road Removing barriers to economic growth – had both been rejected. Brent and Harrow's Assembly member, Navin Shah, had been asked to raise the matter with the Mayor's office. Councillor Matthews responded by pointing out that Brent had supported Barnet's bid and would therefore benefit from it. In returning to the Brent Cross proposals, she submitted that the original plans would not have been good for the area. She felt it was imperative that any regeneration was carried out with the best interests of the existing communities in mind and so hoped for support from the Planning Committee and the Executive in ensuring a better plan for the area.
Councillor Denselow asked for an update on the increase in Brent’s recycling rates and how much money this had saved the Council. Councillor Powney (Lead Member for Environment and Neighbourhoods) replied that if all the targets were met the Council would reach a breakeven point and then save £1m the following year. Future savings would increase because the cost of landfill would go up. The use of landfill was also the worst option for the environment because of the greenhouse gases it produced. He stated that everyone should welcome the introduction of the new system. Councillor Denselow thanked Councillor Powney for his reply.
Councillor Hunter asked how many schools had responded to the Council's invitation to discuss joint funding of school crossing patrols by offering to part fund a patrol in their area. Councillor J Moher (Lead Member for Highways and Transportation) replied that very few had come forward but that it was early in the process and senior council officers were engaging with headteachers and school governors. He had not expected schools to immediately respond but thought that some would do so in time. Councillor Hunter expressed her concern that the future remained unclear for seventeen sites and that this was the beginning of the gradual erosion of the service.
Councillor Harrison referred to the issue of school places and that the London Borough of Sutton had suggested raising class sizes from 30 to 35. She asked if the Executive was considering such a move. Councillor Arnold (Lead Member for Children and Families) replied that Sutton had been invited to join Brent and other boroughs to lobby government for additional funding to meet the increased demand for school places. Sutton was similar to Brent in its level of pupil achievement but was unlike Brent in that it had only 8% of children receiving free school meals. She stated that the Council was proud of the performance of its pupils and would not look to risk this by increasing class sizes. Councillor Arnold added that in a very few cases class sizes might exceed 30 at key stage 2 in order to accommodate siblings. Councillor Harrison thanked Councillor Arnold for her response.
Councillor Colwill referred to extra money coming from the Government which he felt could be spent on keeping some libraries open. He stated that the site of Preston library was to be sold to a major supermarket and asked if the Executive would consider approaching the supermarket to provide a small library within the building. Councillor Powney (Lead Member for Environment and Neighbourhoods) disputed that the Council had received extra money. He referred to the library strategy adopted by the Executive which centred on six libraries in the borough and delivering a better library service from them. The future of the old library buildings was the subject of a property review and was a separate process. Councillor Colwill asked again if efforts would be made to secure a small library by way of a S106 contribution from the developer.
Councillor Cummins felt there were problems with the street sweeping service because in his ward the bins were overflowing and the streets were strewn with litter. He asked what was going to be done to improve the service and what areas were being targeted, as referred to in the minutes of the last Council meeting. Councillor J Moher (Lead Member for Highways and Transportation) replied that he did not accept the claim that bins were overflowing with litter. He explained that in reducing the street sweeping service, resources had been put in to dealing with known problem areas. He felt the contractor, Veolia, was doing a good job in most areas of the borough but if specific cases of litter build up were drawn to his attention he would get it looked at. Councillor Cummins responded that it was ironic that the new councillor returned at the Wembley Central by election should have campaigned on cleaning up the streets. He felt an action plan was needed that recognised the existing system was not working and needed to be put right.
Councillor Hirani stated that the issue of the Willesden Green bookshop had been raised at a recent meeting of the Willesden Area Consultative Forum and asked if it would be possible to find alternative premises for it. Councillor Crane (Lead Member for Regeneration and Major Projects) replied that the bookshop was a commercial business and a long term tenant at the existing library centre. The Council was committed to helping find alternative premises in the area. All the bidders for the Willesden Green project had been invited to include the bookshop but all had declined to make such provision. There was therefore no plan to include the bookshop within the new development but the owner would be entitled to a level of compensation and the Council was working with him to find a way forward just as it was helping the Brent Irish Advisory Service to find alternative premises. Councillor Hirani responded by saying he was glad to hear that help was being offered.
Councillor Van Kalwala asked if the Council could be informed of the conclusions contained in the Audit Commission letter in respect of value for money. Councillor John (Leader) replied that she felt the Council's auditors had made a big statement in commending the work of the Council by giving an unqualified audit opinion. There had been many challenges to overcome towards improving the Council's accounting processes and she was therefore very pleased with the report. Councillor Van Kalwala responded by saying this demonstrated that the Council was active in doing the best it could for the local area and achieve value for money.
Councillor Brown stated that the Council was allowing a lot of dumping to take place, especially in the Harlesden area and asked why this was. Councillor J Moher (Lead Member for Highways and Transportation) replied that more dumping had taken place in the borough when a £25 charge for its removal had been introduced. He stated that dumping was caused by people carrying out anti-social activities and specific cases had to be brought to the attention of the Council for action to be taken. Councillor Brown re-iterated that dumping had gone up, particularly in the Harlesden area and that this was according to the Council’s own figures.
Councillor Lorber asked why the Council appeared to be keen to give away for nothing two library buildings in Cricklewood and Kensal Rise rather than re-open them as libraries while the Willesden Green development took place. Councillor Powney (Lead Member for Environment and Neighbourhoods) replied that the buildings were not free when they operated as libraries because it cost money to run them. The Executive had adopted a library strategy to improve the library service which it was following. If the buildings were no longer to be used as libraries the Council was under a legal duty to return them to the owner of the land. Councillor Lorber responded by saying that all councillors were under a fiduciary duty to protect the resources of the Council. He stated that it was the land on which the library buildings stood that had been bequeathed to the Council, not the buildings which had been provided by public subscription. He submitted that the Executive had no authority to give away Council assets.