Agenda and minutes
Venue: Committee Room 3, Brent Town Hall, Forty Lane, Wembley, HA9 9HD
Contact: Toby Howes, Senior Democratic Services Officer 020 8937 1307 Email: toby.howes@brent.gov.uk
No. | Item |
---|---|
Election of Chair Minutes: In the absence of both the Chair and Vice Chair, nominations were sought for Chair of the committee for this meeting. Councillor Mitchell Murray and Councillor Hopkins were nominated. Both nominations were put to the vote and Councillor Mitchell Murray was declared Chair for this meeting.
RESOLVED:-
that Councillor Mitchell Murray be elected as Chair of the committee for this meeting. |
|
Declarations of personal and prejudicial interests Members are invited to declare at this stage of the meeting any relevant financial or other interest in the items on the agenda. Minutes: Councillor Hopkins declared an interest in that she had been approached by local residents and the Brent Trade Union in Council in respect of item five, ‘Control of distribution of free literature on designated land’. However, she did not consider the interest prejudicial and remained present to consider this item. |
|
Minutes of the last meeting held on 1 February 2012 PDF 159 KB The minutes are attached. Minutes: RESOLVED:-
that the minutes of the last meeting held on 1 February 2012 be approved as an accurate record. |
|
Matters Arising Minutes: None. |
|
Call-in of Executive decisions from the meeting of the Executive held on 23 April 2012 PDF 99 KB Decisions made by the Executive on 23 April 2012 in respect of the following report was called in for consideration by the Call In Overview and Scrutiny Committee in accordance with Standing Orders 6 (b) and 18.
Control of distribution of free literature on designated land
The reasons for the call in are:-
(1) The report does not quote the relevant passage of the act, nor explain that interpretation of the act would be a matter for the courts.
(2) The report does not explain the evidence base for the problem. There should be a context paragraph explaining why they think the problem will get so much worse, why existing measures are inadequate and what action other London boroughs are taking.
(3) The report should either time limit these powers or make explicit that they are being requested permanently. At the moment the report implies they are just for the Olympic period from the way it is worded.
(4) The issue of enforcement, in particular the circumstances which would lead to action by council officers, is unclear.
(5) Equalities issues are dealt with inadequately: for example many small businesses in Brent are owned by members of particular ethnic minorities and small non-commercial group which are not charities or political organisations may be disproportionately affected given the level of fees proposed.
(6) The report does not sufficiently make clear whether small organisations which are not charities or political organisations and do not cause litter will be compelled to take out licenses and risk fines.
Suggested action for the Call In Overview and Scrutiny Committee to take:-
(1) Clarify how the controls will be enforced and who they will affect.
(2) Consider whether further information is needed about the equalities impacts of the decision.
(3) Recommend that if the council goes ahead with the proposal it should consult on and adopt a code of practice for enforcement of the controls, including guidance as to how officers will use their discretion, particularly in the case of small unlicensed distributors (commercial and non-commercial) who are not causing littering.
The Executive report is attached. The Lead Member and Lead Officer are invited to the meeting to respond to Members’ questions. Minutes: Decisions made by the Executive on 23 April 2012 in respect of the following report were called in for consideration by the Call In Overview and Scrutiny Committee in accordance with Standing Orders 6 (b) and 18.
Control of distribution of free literature on designated land
The reasons for the call in were:-
(1) The report does not quote the relevant passage of the act, nor explain that interpretation of the act would be a matter for the courts.
(2) The report does not explain the evidence base for the problem. There should be a context paragraph explaining why they think the problem will get so much worse, why existing measures are inadequate and what action other London boroughs are taking.
(3) The report should either time limit these powers or make explicit that they are being requested permanently. At the moment the report implies they are just for the Olympic period from the way it is worded.
(4) The issue of enforcement, in particular the circumstances which would lead to action by council officers, is unclear.
(5) Equalities issues are dealt with inadequately: for example many small businesses in Brent are owned by members of particular ethnic minorities and small non-commercial group which are not charities or political organisations may be disproportionately affected given the level of fees proposed.
(6) The report does not sufficiently make clear whether small organisations which are not charities or political organisations and do not cause litter will be compelled to take out licenses and risk fines.
Suggested action for the Call In Overview and Scrutiny Committee to take:-
(1) Clarify how the controls will be enforced and who they will affect.
(2) Consider whether further information is needed about the equalities impacts of the decision.
(3) Recommend that if the council goes ahead with the proposal it should consult on and adopt a code of practice for enforcement of the controls, including guidance as to how officers will use their discretion, particularly in the case of small unlicensed distributors (commercial and non-commercial) who are not causing littering.
The Chair invited Councillor Lorber, one of the councillors who had called in this item, to summarise the reasons for the call in. Councillor Lorber began by stating that the report that went to the Executive lacked clarity in a number of areas. He felt that the subsequent supplementary briefing that had been circulated to the committee had partially resolved this, however some outstanding issues remained. He then drew Members’ attention to the reasons for call in and suggested action for the committee to take as set out in the agenda.
The Chair then invited members of the public who had requested to speak to address the committee. Peter Murray introduced himself as the Secretary of the Brent Green Party, a campaigner against climate change and as a local resident. Peter Murray explained that he regularly leafleted on a number of issues, such as during elections, nuclear waste and publications on climate change. He felt that ... view the full minutes text for item 5. |
|
The Executive list of decisions for the meeting that took place on 23 April 2012 PDF 78 KB The list of decisions is attached. Minutes: RESOLVED:-
that the Executive list of decisions for the meeting that took place on 23 April 2012 be noted. |
|
Date of next meeting The next meeting of the Call In Overview and Scrutiny Committee will be confirmed at the Annual Council meeting on 16 May 2012 and will take place in the event of there being any call-ins of decisions made by the Executive meeting that preceded it. Minutes: It was noted that the next meeting the Call In Overview and Scrutiny Committee was scheduled for Wednesday, 6 June 2012 and would only take place if there are any call ins from the Executive meeting held on 21 May 2012. |
|
Any other urgent business Notice of items raised under this heading must be given in writing to the Democratic Services Manager or his representative before the meeting in accordance with Standing Order 64. Minutes: None. |