Issue - meetings

To debate the motions submitted in accordance with Standing Order 41.

Members are asked to note:

·            The motions submitted for debate have been attached.

·            Where a motion concerns an executive function, nothing passed can be actioned until approved by the Executive or an officer with the relevant delegated power.

(Agenda republished to include the motions submitted for debate on 16 November 2022)

(1)        The following Motion submitted by the Conservative Group, was declared LOST and not approved:

“Measures to tackle Flooding in Brent

In the past few years, flooding in Brent and other areas is getting more frequent and severe. Whilst this is partly due to climate change and global warming, it also reflects the massive level of regeneration, development and building on green and brown fields sites which is detrimental to the drainage of rainwater and it is felt future planning policy must reflect.

We are losing more green and open spaces which used to soak up the rain water. The Council’s policy of tarmacking footpaths also does not allow water to permeate in the ground. Just a little rain and we observe streams of water flowing on the roads and pavements.

We notice that flood water collects in low lying areas and does not recede for a few days after it rains which means that in the current situation more frequent and severe flooding will take place. 

We appreciate that Brent alone cannot stop global warming and climate change and recognise that the borough has a Flood Risk management Strategy in place, however we can take further steps to mitigate the consequences and protect our residents’ lives and property.

As a result this Council calls on Cabinet to:

1)          Reverse the policy of tarmacking the footways and replace with paving slabs and bricks which allows more water to soak in the ground, especially in known flood risk areas;

2)          Reverse the policy of large scale developments which are reducing the green open spaces and making Brent a concrete jungle;

3)          Implement a regular gully cleaning and leaf collection program, especially in the flood prone areas;

4)          Implement a regular program of inspecting all drains and gullies in areas identified as flood risk and repair as necessary and the Council’s responsibility, including Brent’s brooks and rivers;

5)          Introduce a policy that makes it’s illegal to concrete over the whole of a rear garden as this also impedes the draining of rainwater.  We suggest a maximum of 20% of the rear garden can be paved or concreted over.

If Brent is serious about global warming and climate change and wants to protect its citizens now and for future, it's the least it can do.”

(2)    The following Motion submitted by the Liberal Democrats Group was unanimously AGREED:

“Holding Housing Associations to Account

The Council notes:

Many Brent residents live in properties managed by Housing Associations. They may be Housing Association tenants, leaseholders or shared owners.

The number of residents who will live in properties managed by Housing Associations will continue to grow in the coming years, as more large tower blocks and Housing Association managed units are approved and built in our borough.

Housing Associations were originally set up as charitable, non-profit making organisations, with the aim to provide low cost housing for people.

In recent times, as Housing Associations have grown in number and as their stock has vastly increased, their  ...  view the full decision text for item 17

Before moving on to consider the motions listed on the summons, the Mayor advised members that a total of 40 minutes had been set aside for the consideration of the four motions submitted for debate, based on an initial allocation of 10 minutes per motion. Should the time taken to consider the first motion be less than 10 minutes he advised that the remaining time available would be rolled forward for consideration of the remaining motions.

16.1    1^st Motion (Conservative Group) – Measures to tackle flooding in Brent

The Mayor invited Councillor Kansagra to move the first motion which had been submitted on behalf of the Conservative Group.  Councillor Kansagra began by providing context on what he felt to be the severity of flooding issues in Brent and increase in frequency.  Whilst acknowledging climate change and global warming as factors it was, however, felt that the increasing level of development on green and brownfield sites was also having a detrimental impact on the drainage of rainwater.  In addition, the Council’s policy of tarmacking footpaths was also felt to be making the position worse by increasing surface water run off as opposed allowing water to permeate into the ground naturally.  Although it was recognised that the Council could not prevent global warming and climate change on their own, Councillor Kansagra felt that the suggested actions detailed within the motion would assist in mitigating the consequences of local flood events and protect resident’s lives and properties, which he hoped all members would support.

The Mayor thanked Councillor Kansagra for moving the motion, then invited other members to speak with the following contributions received.

Councillor Lorber, speaking in support of the motion, felt that further consideration was required in relation to the use of asphalt for the repair and replacement of footways, given its effectiveness and impact in terms of surface water pooling and run off.  Reflecting on specific issues in his own ward, he highlighted the issues caused by uneven footway surfaces and pooling of surface water, which he felt not only increased flood risks but also caused potential hazards for elderly and disabled residents.  In concluding his comments, Councillor Lorber also took the opportunity to highlight concerns regarding the potential environmental impacts of what he felt was overdevelopment being permitted in front and back gardens and other green spaces across Brent.

Councillor Krupa Sheth, in responding to the motion as Cabinet Member for Environment, Infrastructure and Climate Action, started by welcoming the reference and acknowledgement within the motion to the impact of climate change.  Highlighting the Council’s commitment towards tackling the climate emergency she highlighted how environmental issues remained a key consideration within policy and new development proposals, with bio-diversity, flooding and drainage assessments routinely included as part of the planning considerations for new developments.  In highlighting what she felt was the governments poor record on environmental issues she also felt it important to recognise that many new developments within the borough were actually designed to enhance bio-diversity and provide  ...  view the full minutes text for item 17

To debate the motions submitted in accordance with Standing Order 41.

Members are asked to note:

·                That the motions submitted have now been republished with the agenda along with the proposed amendments of which notice has beenn received.

·                Where a motion concerns an executive function, nothing passed can be actioned until approved by the Executive or an officer with the relevant delegated power.

(Agenda republished to include the motions on 16 September 2022 and notice of amendments on 21 September 2022)

(1)       Following the approval of an amendment moved by the Labour Group in relation to the original Motion submitted by the Conservative Group, the following Motion (as amended) was AGREED:

“Kingsbury Curve

Residents living either side of the Jubilee line between Kingsbury and Wembley Park have to put up with the excruciating noises when the trains go past on what is known as the Kingsbury Curve.  Following the return of Night Tube services on the Jubilee line, a speed restriction has been applied during Night Tube services.

The noise is so bad that it can be heard in people’s homes even with all the windows shut!  The World Health Organization (WHO) recommends that noise exposure levels should not exceed 70 dB over a 24-hour period, and 85 dB over a 1-hour period to avoid hearing impairment. Residents have suggested that this section of the track regularly exceeds these levels.

The track has been there for around 90 years, yet it is only in the past 4 years that these noises have started which coincided with the removal of trees and shrubs from the bank together with replacing the sleepers with concrete ones and relaying the track.

TfL are aware of the problems and work continues to find the right solution but it is anticipated that it will be a long-term piece of work. TfL have conducted trials over the summer period and are reviewing whether a small reduction in speed could be applied to all trains in this section of the track without adversely impacting the service we provide to passengers. However, speed restrictions are implemented sparingly given the impact on timetables across the entire Jubilee line.

We appreciate that residents have raised multiple concerns about the impact of the noise on their wellbeing and their quiet enjoyment of their home. They cannot fully enjoy their gardens in the summer or leave their windows open and children struggle to study because the noise is a serious distraction.

This Council is asked to recognise:

The legal duty it is under to take such action to enforce those who create excessive noise, whether that be by loud parties, music, cars revving their engines, or even night time deliveries, duties which this Council does its best to carry out.

It’s duty to protect its residents from this intrusive and excruciating noise.

This Council therefore resolves:

To request that TfL work with residents and Brent Council to address the noise concern with a robust engineering-led procedure to prioritise works as quickly as possible.

To request that TfL provide residents with a named contact, with ready access to experts that are working to tackle the root cause of noise. This involves visits to residents' homes to measure noise levels both before and after any work is undertaken.

To request that TfL explore measures to mitigate the impact of the noise over the Christmas holidays.

To lobby the Secretary of State for Transport for additional capital investment to upgrade and improve the infrastructure that helps keep  ...  view the full decision text for item 18

Before moving on to consider the motions listed on the summons, the Mayor advised members that a total of 40 minutes had been set aside for the consideration of the four motions submitted for debate, based on an initial allocation of 10 minutes per motion. Should the time taken to consider the first motion be less than 10 minutes he advised that the remaining time available would be rolled forward for consideration of the remaining motions.

17.1    1^st Motion (Conservative Group) – Kingsbury Curve

The Mayor invited Councillor Maurice to move the first motion which had been submitted on behalf of the Conservative Group. Councillor Maurice, began by providing context to the issue highlighted within the motion by sharing an audio clip of the sound made by trains travelling along the Kingsbury Curve section of the Jubilee line track running between Kingsbury and Wembley Park underground stations.  In moving the motion he outlined the nuisance, disturbance and detrimental impact being experienced by local residents living adjacent to the Kingsbury Curve as a result of the noise generated by the frequency of services running along that part of the track.  It was felt this had coincided with the removal of trees and shrubs from the railway bank and re-laying of the track along that section of the line by TfL, with residents affected even when their windows were closed.  In view of the detrimental impact on the quality of life, health and wellbeing of those residents living adjacent to the line the motion was calling upon the Council to take action to protect residents and to ensure that TfL took the necessary action to rectify the cause of the issues identified, which he hoped all members would support.

The Mayor thanked Councillor Maurice for moving the motion and then drew members’ attention to an amendment submitted on behalf of the Labour Group, which had been circulated in advance of the meeting.

Councillor Muhammad Butt was then invited to move the amendment on behalf of the Labour Group who began by acknowledging the work also undertaken by Councillors Johnson and Fraser (as local ward councillors) to support local residents in their attempts to address the concerns highlighted relating to the impact of the noise being experienced.  Whilst recognising the detrimental impact on local residents, Councillor Butt explained that the amendment moved on behalf of the Labour Group was seeking to strengthen the action being sought by looking to work in partnership with TfL and local residents in order to mitigate the ongoing impact whilst identifying a robust engineering-led solution and to prioritise these works as quickly as possible.  The amendment also recognised the need to continue lobbying central government for the additional capital investment required to support the upgrade and improvement of TfL infrastructure which it was felt would also be key in addressing the concerns identified.  On this basis the amendment moved was as follows:

To add the wording underlined and delete the wording indicated

“Kingsbury Curve

Residents  ...  view the full minutes text for item 18

To debate the motions submitted in accordance with Standing Order 41.

Members are asked to note:

·                that the motions submitted have now been republished with the agenda along with proposed amendments of which notice has been received.

·                Where a motion concerns an executive function, nothing passed can be actioned until approved by the Executive or an officer with the relevant delegated power.

(Agenda republished to include the motions on 7 July 2022 and subsequent notice of proposed amendments on 11 July 2022)

(1)        Following the approval of an amendment moved by the Labour Group in relation to the original Motion submitted by the Conservative Group, the following Motion (as amended) was AGREED:

“Pollution of the Wealdstone Brook

The Wealdstone Brook, which runs in open water, starts in Harrow, runs through Woodcock Park in Kenton and then into Wembley past all the new developments around the stadium before reaching the River Brent, has been heavily polluted with untreated human sewage and toxic chemicals for some considerable time.

The Wealdstone Brook has nothing living in it – it is effectively a dead river.  The toxic smells which have come from liquids evaporating at low temperatures from the Brook water are nauseating and residents who live close to the Brook or have been walking close to the Brook in Woodcock Park, have been feeling physically sick as a result of these noxious odours.

Thames Water, who have been investigating the sources of the pollution, have admitted liability for cleaning up the pollution.  They have agreed that the pollution of the Wealdstone Brook is one of the worst they have come across but as a result of the shared responsibility for the maintenance of the Brook as it passes through Brent, Brent Council and the Environment Agency must also share some of the responsibility.

As a result the residents living nearby have expressed their disgust at the state of the Brook and this council considers that Thames Water should have acted with greater urgency once it had reports of untreated human sewage, toxic gases and smells vaporising from the water of the Wealdstone Brook.

This council notes that almost £19bn was paid out in dividends to shareholders in the nine major water companies operating in England between 2010 and 2021.

This Council therefore resolves:

To do whatever is necessary and within the Council’s power to ensure that the water in Wealdstone Brook is cleaned up.

To ask the Leader of the Council and the Leaders of the Opposition Groups to write to the Secretary of State for the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs and the Chief Executive of the Environment Agency, to call for additional support for Brent Council to respond to the pollution in Wealdstone Brook and enforce the principle of the ‘polluter pays’.

To support the Labour Party pledge of common ownership of water services to unlock the desperately needed investment in water infrastructure and create services that are run on behalf of consumers, not shareholders profit.

To do what the Council can toensure that the agencies concerned take the necessary steps to detect and rectify all wrongly connected foul sewers which run into the Brook and to put them right at no cost to Council tax payers, in Brent.

To seek legal opinion as to whether legal action can be taken against the agencies that have responsibility for ensuring that the Wealdstone Brook is free of pollution if there is no immediate rectification of the problem.  ...  view the full decision text for item 17

Before moving on to consider the motions listed on the summons, the Mayor advised members that a total of 40 minutes had been set aside for the consideration of the four motions submitted for debate, based on an initial allocation of 10 minutes per motion. Should the time taken to consider the first motion be less than 10 minutes he advised that the remaining time available would be rolled forward for consideration of the remaining motions.

17.1  1^st Motion (Conservative Group) – Pollution of Wealdstone Brook

The Mayor invited Councillor Maurice to move the first motion which had been submitted on behalf of the Conservative Group.  Councillor Maurice, in moving the motion, felt it was important to recognise the concerns being raised by local residents (as outlined during the earlier deputation by John Poole) in relation to the impact being caused by the significant levels of pollution within Wealdstone Brook.  In view of what were felt to be the serious risks to public health and the health and wellbeing of the surrounding local community he queried why the issue had not been treated as a  major incident and advised the motion was calling on the Council to take urgent action, working collaboratively with the Environment Agency and Thames Water, to address the issues whilst also examining the potential for any legal action to ensure that those agencies with responsibility for the Brook undertook the necessary action to clean it up and avoid any immediate rectification of the problem.

The Mayor thanked Councillor Maurice for moving the motion and then drew members’ attention to an amendment submitted in the name of Councillor Krupa Sheth on behalf of the Labour Group in relation to the motion, which had been circulated in advance of the meeting. 

Councillor Krupa Sheth was then invited to move the amendment and having acknowledged the frustrations and concerns expressed earlier in the meeting regarding pollution within the brook once again highlighted the work being undertaken with Thames Water and the Environment Agency (as the main regulatory bodies with shared responsibility for maintenance of the brook) in seeking to ensure the necessary action was taken to not only clear the pollution but also to detect and rectify its source.  In reminding members of the reasons for not seeking to declare a major incident, members were advised of the work being undertaken with Public Health to monitor the impact on the local population.  Having outlined the work being undertaken with the relevant partner agencies to ensure the necessary action was being taken to address the concerns identified Councillor Krupa Sheth ended by also highlighting the need, as set out within her amendment, to consider the current ownership model for water infrastructure and in seeking to enforce the principle that the polluter should pay.  On this basis the amendment moved was as follows:

“Pollution of Wealdstone Brook

The Wealdstone Brook, which runs in open water, starts in Harrow, runs through Woodcock Park in Kenton and then into Wembley past  ...  view the full minutes text for item 17