Agenda and minutes

Apologies for absence were received from Councillor Dodds (Cabinet Member for Performance).

In accordance with the Members’ Code of Conduct, Members are requested to declare any interests orally at the start of the meeting and again immediately before consideration of the matter. Members are reminded to specify the agenda item number to which it refers and whether the interest is of a personal or prejudicial nature.

Members are also reminded of the requirements of Section 106 of the Local Government Finance Act 1992 that they should declare and not vote on specified matters if they are two months or more in arrears with their Council Tax payments.

Councillor Lourie and Councillor Williams both declared a prejudicial interest in items 24 and 31 (Powers to Grant Indemnities to Members and Officers) and left the room during their consideration.

To consider and approve the Minutes of the meeting held on 22 March 2010.

The minutes of the meeting held on the 22^ndMarch 2010 be received and approved and the Chair be authorised to sign them.

Representations were heard from:

• Chas Warlow and Andrew Beedham on item 25 of the agenda – Development of Hydropower at Teddington

• Francis King, Pam Bryant and Bonnie Green on item 26 of the agenda – Hounslow and Richmond community Healthcare.

These were taken at the start of each item to which they related. By agreement, the agenda order was changed to enable those items where members of the public wished to speak to be taken earlier in the proceedings.

No matterswere raised.

No matterswere raised.

There were none.

There were none.

This report advises the Cabinet of the need to re-tender the street lighting maintenance contract and seeks agreement for the re-tendering arrangements.

Report of the Cabinet Member for Traffic, Transport and Parking attached.

The reasons for the decision and any alternative options considered and rejected are set out in the report.

resolved that:

1)      The proposed arrangements for re-tendering of the street lighting services maintenance contract be agreed;

2)      The restricted tender process be agreed;

3)      Authority be delegated to the Director of Environment, in consultation with the Cabinet Memberfor Traffic, Transport and Parking to agree a select list of tenderers.

This report seeks approval to award one contract and extend another in accordance with Clause 13.2(b) of Contract Standing Orders.

Report of the Deputy Leader and Cabinet Member for Resources and the Cabinet Member for Children’s Services and Education attached.

The reasons for the decision and any alternative options considered and rejected are set out in the report.

resolved that:

1)       The tender submitted by Pick Everard be accepted to undertake the secondary special educational needs (sen) & 14-19 capital building programme;

2)      Pick Everard’s current appointment in relation to phase ii of the primary schools capital programme is extended.

This report considers the most appropriate method of purchasing the fixtures, fittings and equipment within the newly built Teddington Secondary School and updates Cabinet on project progress.

Report of the Deputy Leader and Cabinet Member for Resources and the Cabinet Member for Children’s Services and Education attached.

The reasons for the decision and any alternative options considered and rejected are set out in the report.

resolved that:

1)      The use of Kent County Council’s supplies fixtures, furniture & equipment (FFE) framework contract for the procurement of the installation of furniture and equipment for Teddington Secondary School be approved;

2)      Progress on the project be noted.

This report seeks Cabinet approval to build or improve 11 children’s play spaces in Richmond upon Thames in 2010/11 as part of the second phase of the Department for Children, Schools and Families’ (DCSF) Playbuilder Capital Grant Programme.

Report of the Cabinet Member for Youth, culture and Leisure and the Cabinet Member for Environment attached.

The reasons for the decision and any alternative options considered and rejected are set out in the report.

resolvedthat:

The eleven proposed Playbuilder play spaces identified for phase 2 of the capitalprogramme in 2010-11 be agreed, namely:

·         Crane Park

·         Hatherop Park, Hampton

·         Mortlake Green

·         Chase Green, Whitton

·         North Sheen Recreation Ground

·         Bushy Park

·         Richmond Park

·         St Margaret’s Pocket Park

·         Vine Road Recreation Ground, Barnes

·         Palewell Common and Fields, East Sheen

·         Orleans Gardens, Twickenham.

This report seeks the approval of Cabinet, in its role as ‘local decision-maker’, to the proposals to close Stanley Infant and Nursery School on 31 August 2010 and to expand the age and size of Stanley Junior School on 1 September 2010. The proposals will effectively amalgamate the two schools and provide additional primary school places to meet forecast demand.

Report of the Cabinet Member for Children’s Services and Education attached.

The reasons for the decision and any alternative options considered and rejected are set out in the report.

resolved that:

The proposals to close Stanley Infant and Nursery School, to expand the age range and increase the admission number of Stanley Junior School be agreed.

This report updates Cabinet on the use of the £2,850,000 approved at Cabinet on 12 October 2009 and seeks authority to draw down £150,000 for Sponsored Moves and £140,000 from the 10/11 budget to secure the delivery of affordable housing and encourage both private funding and Homes and Community Agency (HCA) grant into the borough.

Report of the Cabinet Member for Adult Services, Health and Housing attached.

The Cabinet Member for Adult Services, Health & Housing introduced this report. She congratulated the officers who had worked hard to leverage in the funding for these projects. 

The reasons for the decision and any alternative options considered and rejected are set out in the report.

resolved that:

1)      The sum of £140,000 in grant fundingfrom the 2010/11 Housing CapitalProgramme beused to securethe deliveryof affordablehousing at 361 St. margaret’sRoad;

2)      The sum of £150,000 in grant funding from the 2010/11 Housing Capital Programme be used to fund the Sponsored Moves Programme.

This report seeks approval of a set of Heads of Terms associated with the sale of land for the Whitton LIFT scheme.

Report of the Deputy Leader and Cabinet Member for Resources, the Cabinet Member for Adult Services, Health And Housing and the Cabinet Member for Youth, Culture and Leisure attached.

The reasons for the decision and any alternative options considered and rejected are set out in the report.

resolved that:

Approval be given to proceed in line with the Heads of Terms for the sale of land for the Whitton LIFT scheme.

This report sets out proposals for a borough wide graduate internship scheme. 

Report of the Deputy Leader and Cabinet Member for Resources attached.

The reasons for the decision and any alternative options considered and rejected are set out in the report.

resolved that:

1)      The proposal set out in the report be agreed;

2)      The scheme is funded from the Recession and Recovery Fund up to £500,000;

3)      The sum of £548,000 is allocated to the Recession and Recovery Fund from the 2009/10 and 2010/11 Local Authority Business Growth Incentive Grant Fund.

This report seeks agreement for grants in excess of £100,000 to voluntary organisations for the period 1 April 2010 to 31 March 2012.

Report of the Cabinet Member for Communities attached.

The reasons for the decision and any alternative options considered and rejected are set out in the report.

resolved that:

          The grants set out in Appendix A be awarded.

This report identifies the benefits and opportunities of extending Thamesbank Credit Union into Richmond upon Thames and to request agreement to the council making a payment of up to £10,000 as a contribution towards administration and the costs of promoting the scheme.

Report of the Cabinet Member for Communities attached.

The reasons for the decision and any alternative options considered and rejected are set out in the report.

resolved that:

1)      The report be noted;

2)      Match funding of up to £10,000 in total over two years to support the extension of the Thamesbank Credit Union into the Borough be agreed.

This report presents the proposals of the cross party Devolution and Engagement Working Group, following consultation on its initial findings.

Report of the Cabinet Member for Communities attached.

The reasons for the decision and any alternative options considered and rejected are set out in the report.

resolved that:

(1)   It be agreed in principle (with the full decision to be reserved to the Leader and Cabinet appointed following the May election) that:

(a)   The postponed ACM round which had taken place in previous election years in July be CANCELLED

(b)   ACMs be renamed as Ward Committees and be established on a pilot basis from September 2010 with

Ø      one Member appointed as the Lead Member/chair or two Members appointed as joint chairs in Joint Wards,

Ø      committee support from Democratic Services,

Ø      good links with PLG meetings and Ward champions, 

Ø      proper report back mechanism in place from meeting to meeting.

(c)   The experimental ACM/PLG format on same evening to be retained and trialled in other Wards.

(d)   Officers be requested to assess the type, location and contacts for publicity for the meetings

(e)   A possible secondment for a ward liaison role, concentrating on three wards, be piloted before giving further consideration to the employment of a Ward co-ordinator.

(2)   A performance framework be developed (for agreement by the next Cabinet) with defined outcomes and targets to enable analysis of the pilot.

This report summarises the decision of the High Court on the judicial review of the decision of January 2009 of the Secretary of State for Transport.

Report of the Leader and Cabinet Member for Strategy and Partnerships attached.

The reasons for the decision and any alternative options considered and rejected are set out in the report.

resolved that:

1)      The decision of the High Court in this case be welcomed;

2)      Tribute is paid to the combined efforts of the six local authorities and all the other bodies and the legal team involved, which joined together so effectively to enable such a case to be contested successfully.

This report seeks Cabinet’s endorsement of the Corporate self assessment for level 4 of the Equality Standard for Local Government.   The Corporate self assessment (Appendix one) may be viewed via the Cabinet meetings webpage

Report of the Leader and Cabinet Member for Strategy and Partnerships attached.

The reasons for the decision and any alternative options considered and rejected are set out in the report.

resolved that:

The corporate self assessment report for level 4 of the equality standard for local government be endorsed.

This report is being presented to Cabinet to enable review of the Council’s revenue and capital budget management.

Report of the Deputy Leader and Cabinet Member for Resources attached.

The reasons for the decision and any alternative options considered and rejected are set out in the report.

RESOLVED that:

The latest projections / performance and activity information in the report be noted.

Report to follow.

The Environment Agency is actively promoting a hydropower development

opportunity at Teddington weir. This report details the Council’s intention to

engage in this process through submission of an Expression of Interest.

Report of the Deputy Leader and Cabinet Member for Resources attached.

The Deputy Leader and Cabinet Member for Resources introduced the report. He expressed the view that this project was an exciting opportunity for the borough. He explained that the Environment Agency had asked for expressions of interest in developing ahydropower energy generation scheme at Teddington weir. He stated that he was aware of a number of local community based groups who wished to be involved.

Councillor Knight expressed the view that the Council was best placed to make a bid which would securesubstantial benefits to the local community. He stated that it was unfortunate that a competitive situation had developed.However he emphasized that the council is keen to work with local groups in submitting a bid, if possible.

Cabinet then heard from Mr. Chas Warlow, a director of Ham Hydro. He explained that the company had its roots in the local group Ham United and was committed to finding low carbon energy solutions for the area. He confirmed that the company is preparing to submit an expression of interest to the Environment Agency to run this project. Mr. Warlow stated that the company possessed a wide range of expertise in the field which would enable it to submit a robust case for the generation of hydropower which could be sold to the grid. Funds would then be re-invested in the local community.

Mr Warlow said that he and his colleagues were surprisedto find themselves in a state of competition with the Council and expressed the view that the Council possessed no internal expertise in these matters and that it would be ineligible for claiming feeder tariffs from the scheme.

Cabinet members put a number of questions to Mr. Warlow regarding the legal status and financial standing of Ham Hydro. He stated in response that the company was in the process of incorporation and registration with Companies’ House. He also stated that the company was able to access funding, but was unable to disclose details.

Cabinet was then addressed by Mr. Andrew Beedham, a local resident who was representing the Ham United community group.He thanked the council for its efforts in achieving low carbon solutions generally and in relation to this project. However, he was of the view that in this case the project needed full community support to enable it to succeed. He expressed the view that the council was running the risk of alienating those community groups with its approach in this case. He therefore urged the Council to work collaboratively and not to submit a competing bid.

In response to questions by Cabinet members, Mr Beedham stated that the group had done a significant amount of work on the project and that it possessed a wide range of people with different fields of expertise who could deliver a successful scheme.

In discussion Cabinet noted that the Council had been placed in a difficult position by the Environment Agency who had placed a tight timetable for submission of expressions of interest. The  ...  view the full minutes text for item 240.

The reasons for the decision and any alternative options considered and rejected are set out in the report.

RESOLVED that:

1)      The criteria for the assessment of requests for the grant of indemnities to Members and officers as set out in appendix A to the report be agreed;

2)      In future authority to determine such requests should be delegated to the Head of Legal and Electoral Services and the Director of Finance and Corporate Services in consultation with the Leader of the Council and the Leaders of Opposition parties.

This report informs Cabinet of recent developments with regard to Hounslow and Richmond Community Healthcare.

Report of the Cabinet Member for Adult Services, Health and Housing and the Cabinet Member for Childrens Services and Education attached.

Cabinet heard representations from Mr. Francis King. He stated that the Council had made its position clear at the PCT Board in relation to the proposals regarding Hounslow and Richmond Community Healthcarein stating that it found the proposals “unacceptable”.  He urged the Council to take a stronger line and argued that the Council should insist with NHS London that it continues to support the development of Richmond and Hounslow Healthcare towards a Community Foundation Trust. Furthermore, the lack of timely consultation of the matter represented a serious breach by the PCT of the compact agreement with the voluntary sector. He suggested that the Council should consider an appeal to the Secretary of State if NHS London did not reconsider its position.

The Cabinet then heard from Mrs Pam Bryant, the Chair of the League of Friends of Teddington Memorial Hospital. She stated that she was strongly opposed to the alignment of local community healthcare services with a remote, acute hospital trust. She emphasized the substantial local opposition to these proposals and criticised the lack of engagement on the part of the PCT Board. In response to questions Mrs. Bryant stated that staff were confused and worried about the proposals.

Cabinet next heard from Mrs Bonnie Green, Chair of the Richmond upon Thames LINk, who expressed reservations about the proposals.

The Cabinet then heard from Councillor Carol Stratton, the Deputy Chair of the Council’s Health Housing and Social Care Overview and Scrutiny Committee. She indicated that the chair had written to the London Strategic Health Authority opposing the plans for vertical integration of provider services. She expressed concerns about the proposals, the lack of consultation and the haste with which they were being pushed through. [Councillor Stratton’s detailed representations on behalf of the Health Overview and Scrutiny Committee are attached as an Appendix to these minutes]

The Cabinet Member for Adult Services, Health and Housing stated that she was appalled at the way this matter had come about. She said that the proposal represented an imposed integration with an acute service or non local community provider and that it had been rushed through. She stated that the Council should lay down a marker that this proposal and the process were unacceptable to the Council as a democratically elected and accountable body.

In discussion Cabinet considered that it should ask for a delayed timetable and that it should work with their counterparts at Hounslow Borough Council to challenge the proposal. If necessary the two Councils should consider a bid themselves to provide these services.  Cabinet would do everything in its power to oppose the imposition of a remote acute hospital or non local community provider trust to take over this local service. It was agreed that a copy of the minute on this item should be sent to Mr King who had not been able to stay for the debate.

The reasons for the decision and any alternative options considered and rejected are set out in the report.

RESOLVED that:  ...  view the full minutes text for item 242.

To decide having regard to the particular nature of the business to be transacted, whether or not to exclude the Press and Public during consideration of the following items on the grounds that they were likely to disclose exempt information by virtue of Paragraphs      of schedule 12 A (as amended) to the Local Government Act 1972.

RESOLVED that:

Having regard to the particular nature of the business to be   transacted the press and public be excluded during consideration of the following items on the grounds that they were likely to disclose exempt information by virtue of paragraphs 1,3 and 5 of Schedule 12A of the Local Government Act 1972.

Confidential report attached.

RESOLVED that the report be noted.

Confidential report attached.

RESOLVED that the report be noted.

Confidential report to follow.

RESOLVED that the report be noted.

Confidential report.

RESOLVED that the report be noted and that the particular request be declined in this case.