Agenda and minutes

To approve as a correct record the Minutes of the Council held on 24 January 2012 attached.

RESOLVED: That the minutes of the Council meeting held on 24 January 2012 be signed by the Deputy Mayor as a correct record.

Members are asked to declare any interests in matters for consideration at the meeting.

There were no declarations of interest on this occasion.

To receive Petitions in accordance with Council Procedure Rule 2.1 (iv).

There were no petitions presented on this occasion.

Budget papers previously issued for Cabinet attached.  Subject to the Cabinet’s proposals, the formal Council Tax Resolution 2012/13 is attached.

Any questions in accordance with Council Procedure Rule 11.1, of which notice has been given to follow.

(a)   In accordance with the notice given, Councillor Knight asked the Deputy Leader and Cabinet Member for Finance and Resources:

‘Can the Deputy Leader explain why, after a major recession and years of funding cuts, the Council has bigger reserves and balances than ever before?’

Councillor Samuel replied in the following terms ‘I estimate that at the end of next month the reserves will be approximately £2.2million less than was inherited from the last administration. If however, we want to look at a completed year, at the end of last year, the reserves were virtually £5million less than under the last administration.’

Councillor Knight asked a supplementary question regarding the level of reserves and placement of one-off monies into the reserves which had seen them increase in recent years. Councillor Samuel replied that the reserves also included those belonging to schools which had increased the overall level of balances by 72.6% in the last two years.

(b)   In accordance with the notice given, Councillor Williams asked the Deputy Leader and Cabinet Member for Finance and Resources:

‘How has the Administration’s budget plan changed as a result of the findings of the public survey it commissioned from Pollsters OPM?’

Councillor Samuel replied in the following terms ‘The key findings of the report indicate that there are high levels of financial anxieties amongst our residents. I propose to address those concerns during my speech.

Councillor Williams asked a supplementary question about the nature of the types of questions included within the survey and the potential for the results to impact on the budget. Councillor Samuel indicated that the proposed budget met the priorities and eased the anxieties of the residents of the borough.

(c)   In accordance with the notice given, Councillor Jaeger asked the Deputy Leader and Cabinet Member for Finance and Resources:

‘Why is it that, when adult social care expenditure is the only area of public services to have seen a national increase in expenditure over the last two years, locally we have seen decreases to the ACS budget both in 2011-12 and now proposed for 2012 – 13?’

Councillor Samuel replied in the following terms ‘There are three elements to this.  The first is the reablement program which is now delivering the £2.1million savings which were intended. This programme was commenced under the previous administration. Secondly there are a large number of genuine efficiency savings. One example is residential care for those with learning difficulties which is extremely expensive. During the course of the last year, 15% of those receiving this support, as they wanted,  have moved from residential to domiciliary support therefore simultaneously having support that they want and saving the authority money. And the third thing is addressing the £2million shortfall inherited by the Administration in 2010.’

Councillor Jaeger asked a supplementary question about the impact of increased monies from both the Department for Communities and Local Government (DCLG) and NHS upon the proposed budget. Councillor Samuel reported that reductions in the overall budget for ACS had been made as a result of true efficiencies and improved ways of working.

(d)   In accordance with the notice given, Councillor Eady asked the Deputy Leader and Cabinet Member for Finance and Resources?’

‘’Will the Deputy Leader be offering a revenue subsidy from council tax payers to secondary schools to help them meet any funding shortfall for running 6^th forms and will he be differentiating between those schools that are already Academies and those that might convert?’

Councillor Samuel replied in the following terms ‘It is accepted that starting a new 6^th form in its first year or so has a negative effect on a school budget which is very speedily reversed. There are difficulties in the first couple of years and I will be interested to see what representations we receive. As far as the Academies are concerned these are managed by a separate profit making organisation and I would expect them to approach their parent company in the first instance for any financial assistance.’

Councillor Eady asked a supplementary question about the timescales for any financial support. Councillor Samuel noted that any representations received with financial workings would be considered at an appropriate time.

(e)   In accordance with the notice give, Councillor Acton asked the Deputy Leader and Cabinet Member for Finance and Resources:

‘Following his cut of £150,000 to the economic development / tourism budget last year, what plans does the Deputy Leader have for prioritising extra resources for this area of work in the continuing economic downturn?’

Councillor Samuel replied in the following terms ‘There is currently in circulation a detailed paper on this for the next meeting of Cabinet in March which will be available to Members in the coming days. I cannot in the time available do justice to what is a very ambitious and detailed report though I can give you some details. A survey of businesses was conducted in 2007 and the thing that all businesses said they wanted more than anything else was more parking and cheaper parking. This was not previously provided. We have decided to give businesses what they has asked for. The cost of this is considerable but is far more valuable to shops than reports, or committees or more bureaucracy.’

Councillor Acton asked a supplementary question regarding additional funding for town centre development. Councillor Samuel responded that would be considered by Cabinet on 15 March 2012 in the report regarding this matter.

(f)     In accordance with the notice given, Councillor Jones asked the Deputy Leader and Cabinet Member for Finance and Resources:

‘Why has the Deputy Leader failed to continue to fund community development work in the five areas of relative deprivation whilst proposed two new posts for community engagement?’

Councillor Samuel replied in the following terms ‘Firstly the term an area of deprivation is not one by which residents wish their local area to be known. The last administration made 5 time-limited temporary appointments for these posts which have now finished. The two new Community Link Officer positions being put in place will support the community to facilitate its own development.’ 

Councillor Jones asked a supplementary question regarding the lack of mention of communities in greatest need within the budget setting priorities. Councillor Samuel noted that protecting the most vulnerable residents and those in need was a high priority of the current Administration.

Councillor Samuel moved, seconded by Lord True:

1. That the Revenue budget for 2012/13 be agreed
2. That the Richmond Upon Thames’ element of the Band D Council be unchanged at £1,287.39: thereby enabling the Council to accept a further £2.896million one off funding in Council Tax Freeze Grant from Government.
3. That the overall Band D level of Council Tax for 2012/13, including the GLA element be set at £1,594.1 (a reduction of 0.19% on 2011/12) be agreed.
4. That the Council agree the Council Tax 2012/13 resolution (Pages 1 and 2 of the Supplementary Agenda.)

Councillor Knight moved, seconded by Councillor Williams:

At the end of recommendation 1, insert:

‘subject to the following changes:

(i)                  reductions in the budget requirement by:

(a)   £3,100,000 by removing one off capital items from the revenue budget and instead funding them within the Capital Programme in the normal way ;

(b)   £500,000 by removing the one off ‘priority investment’ revenue item from the from the ongoing revenue budget and instead meeting its cost from reserves; and

(c)   £700,000 by continuing to capitalising this amount of revenue expenditure

[Total = £4.3 million]

(ii)                increases in the budget requirement by:

(a)   £1,200,000 to pay for the reversal of front-line cuts to schools support, children’s and youth services;

(b)   £1,500,000 to pay for the reversal of front line cuts to adult social care, including the funding of support for those with ‘moderate’ needs and the removal of the disregard for disability living allowance and the reversal of the 400% increase in the charge for disability blue badges;

(c)   £150,000 to pay for the reversal of cuts to economic development and support for town centres;

(d)   £150,000 to pay for the restoration of community development workers in the 5 areas of relative deprivation;

(e)   £200,000 to pay for the reversal of library cuts including the cost of running a library in Heathfield Ward;

(f)     £300,000 to reverse cuts to the voluntary sector;

(g)   £100,000 to fund a £250 pay rise for council staff paid less than £21,000 a year, in line with other parts of the public sector;

(h)   £500,000 to pay for extra discretionary payment for those families badly affected by cuts to Housing Benefit; and

(i)      £200,000 to pay for the financing costs of the above additions to the capital programme.

[Total = £4.3 million]

The amendment was put to the vote and FELL.

The substantive motion was put to the vote and was CARRIED.

RESOLVED:

1. That the Revenue budget for 2012/13 be agreed
2. That the Richmond Upon Thames’ element of the Band D Council be unchanged at £1,287.39: thereby enabling the Council to accept a further £2.896million one off funding in Council Tax Freeze Grant from Government.
3. That the overall Band D level of Council Tax for 2012/13, including the GLA element be set at £1,594.1 (a reduction of 0.19% on 2011/12) be agreed.
4. That the Council Tax Base for the London Borough of Richmond Upon Thames for 2012/13 be 89,992.04 in accordance with regulation 3 of the Local Authorities (Calculation of Council Tax Base) Regulations 1992 (as amended) be agreed. This was in accordance with the report approved by Cabinet on 26 January 2012.
5. That the following amounts now be calculated by the Council for the year 2012/13 in accordance with Sections 31 – 36 of the Local Government and Finance Act 1992, as amended:

(a)   £415, 667,500 being the aggregate of the amounts which the Council estimates for the items set out in Section 31A (2) (a) – (f) of the Act

(b)   £299,812,628 being the aggregate of the amounts which the Council estimates for the items set out in Section 31A (3) (a) – (d) of the Act

(c)   £115,854,872 being the amount by which the aggregate at 2 (a) above exceeds the aggregate at 2 (b) above, calculated by the Council, in accordance with Section 31A (4) of the Act, at its Council Tax requirement for the year

(d)   £1,287.39 being the amount at 2 (c) divided by the amount at 1 above, calculated by the Council in accordance with Section 31 B (1) of the Act, as the basic amount of its Council Tax (Band D) for the year

(e) Valuation bands

being the amounts given by multiplying the amount at 2 (d) above by the number which, in the proportion set out in Section 5 (1) of the Act, is applicable to dwellings listed in a particular valuation band divided by the number which in that proportion is applicable to dwellings listed in valuation band D, calculated by the Council, in accordance with Section 36 (1) of the Act, as the amounts to be taken into account for the year in respect of categories of dwellings listed in different valuation bands

6.         That it be noted that for the year (2012-2013) the major precepting authority has stated the following amounts in precepts issued to the Council, in accordance with Section 40 of the Local Government Finance Act 1992 (as amended), for each of the categories of the dwellings shown below:-

7.         That, having calculated the aggregate in each case of the amounts at 2 (e) and 3 above, the Council, in accordance with Section 30 (2) of the Local Government Finance Act 1992 (as amended), hereby sets the following amounts of council tax for the year (2012-2013) for each of the categories of dwelling shown below:-

            Valuation Bands

8.         That the Director of Finance and Corporate Services be authorised to institute legal proceedings where necessary for the collection of the aforesaid Council Tax and Non Domestic Rates.

None.

There were no questions by members of the public on this occasion.

To receive questions from Members in accordance with Council Procedure Rule 11.2, of which due notice has been given.

Attached.

6 (a) In accordance with the notice given, Councillor Linnette, asked the Strategic Cabinet Member for Community, Business and Culture:

‘Kew Library is one of the three Borough Libraries thought suitable by this administration to be run as a community based ‘Village Library’ with possible involvement of local organisations. Can the Cabinet Member for Community Business and Culture confirm that if the involvement of local organisations is not forthcoming, then Kew Library will continue to operate exactly as it does now and will not close under this administration?’

Councillor Fleming replied in the following terms ‘I can confirm that this Administration is committed to keeping all its public libraries open.  If no local organisations come forward to operate one of the three proposed Village Libraries in Ham, Hampton Wick and Kew, then the Council will continue to operate those libraries as part of its public library network.  The whole benefit of the Village Library initiative is that, by working in partnership with an organisation, the Council may well be able to extend opening hours and improve the services on offer.’

Councillor Burford asked a supplementary question regarding the purpose of reviewing the operation of libraries in Ham, Hampton Wick and Kew. Councillor Fleming confirmed that the libraries would all continue to operate as part of the public library system and outlined the benefits for the community in operating village libraries.

Councillor Evans asked a supplementary question regarding other Councils which operated libraries in this way. Councillor Fleming confirmed that the London Borough of Camden already operated community libraries very successfully.

6 (b) In accordance with the notice given, Councillor Knight asked the Leader of the Council:

‘Does he agree with Councillor Arbour’s statement to the London Assembly on 9^th February 2012 that ‘it is a fact is it not that relatively few Londoners use London transport in any way?’ Most people don’t use London Transport with any sense of regularity?’

Lord True replied in the following terms ‘I don’t have a car, I use London Transport every day and it has immeasurably improved of recent years.’

Councillor Knight asked a supplementary question regarding the reliance of London residents on public transport for every day life. Lord True confirmed this was the case.

Councillor Williams asked a supplementary question regarding travel benefits provided by GLA when compared to the local Freedom Pass. The Leader did not feel it appropriate to comment.

6 (c) In accordance with the notice given, Councillor Salvoni asked the Strategic Cabinet Member for Community, Business and Culture:

‘What action will the Cabinet Member be taking on the recommendations in the Portas Review on High Streets?’

Councillor Fleming replied in the following terms ‘We are taking a report on this matter to Cabinet in March. We are in fact doing a number of things that have already been recommended in the Portas review, for instance car parking. We have introduced 30 minutes free car parking, have recognised the importance of maintaining some kind of town centre infrastructure and appointed a business and retail champion.’

Councillor Salvoni asked a supplementary question regarding the role of local residents and businesses in leading the development and promotion of their areas. Councillor Fleming confirmed this should be the case and that town teams to facilitate this type of work were being investigated.

Councillor Stockley asked a supplementary question regarding work being undertaken to reduce the number of vacant premises across high streets in the Borough. Councillor Fleming replied that this issue was one largely to be dealt with by Central Government but confirmed that meetings between the Council and local landlords had been set up to locally to discuss the issue.

Councillor Acton asked a supplementary question about any plans to further extend Business Improvement Districts across the Borough. Councillor Fleming confirmed that a feasibility study was being undertaken before any further decisions would be made.

6(d) In accordance with the notice given, Councillor Williams asked the Cabinet Member for Schools:

‘Will he comment on the recent statement by the Richmond Inclusive Schools Campaign that, in proposing a new Voluntary Aided school at Clifden Road, the Council is in breach of the Education Act 2011, which requires of Councils that need a new school first to try and set up a new Academy or Free school, rather than a Voluntary Aided school?’

Councillor Hodgins replied in the following terms: ‘Let me reassure you that it is the professional advice of officers both in Legal and Education Services that this statement as referred to does not accurately reflect the proposal and specifically under Section 11(1A) of the Education Act, the Diocese is able to propose and advertise such a change. The proposal was approved by the Secretary of State barely two months ago.’

Councillor Williams asked a supplementary question regarding the need to get a second legal opinion on this issue. Councillor Hodgins confirmed this was not required.

Councillor Evans asked a supplementary question about the decision making process for the use of the Clifden Road site. Councillor Hodgins noted that following the full public consultation, the decision would be taken by Cabinet.

Councillor Eady asked a supplementary question regarding the potential for a Catholic Academy in place of a Catholic Voluntary Aided Secondary School. Councillor Hodgins confirmed the proposal had been put forward by the Diocese and not the Council.

6(e) In accordance with the notice, given, Councillor Elliott asked the Strategic Cabinet Member for Environment and Planning, Parks and Highways:

‘What did the residents of Whitton say in the All-in-One consultation in regards to public transport?’

Councillor Morris replied in the following terms ‘Public transport did not emerge as a significant issue for the majority of respondents in the Whitton and Heathfield village area. When respondents were asked what they liked best about their local area, transport links was the second most frequently mentioned thing. Only 10% felt it was one of the key things that needed to be improved although most wanted to see the station upgraded.’

Councillor Elliot asked a supplementary question regarding ongoing discussions in relation to Whitton Station. Councillor Morris confirmed that Whitton was the next station which would seek funding in conjunction with Network Rail to improve the infrastructure as part of the ‘Access for All Scheme’.

Councillor Harbourne asked a supplementary question regarding previous improvements to Twickenham Station. Councillor Morris confirmed there had been none.

Councillor Jaeger asked a supplementary question regarding the potential redevelopment of Whitton station should Access for All funds be no longer available this year. Councillor Morris confirmed the proposal would be closely investigated in line with the programme for 10 carriage trains being rolled out.

6(f) In accordance with the notice given, Councillor Elloy asked the Cabinet Member for Highways and Streetscene ‘What weight is given when local residents ask for shared use of clearly underutilised business parking bays and what is the consultation process?’

Councillor Harrison replied in the following terms ‘Requests concerning a change in status of a parking bay or bays are investigated for current utilisation and the availability of other parking in the vicinity. If it is established through surveys that a bay is under utilised and that there is overall benefit in changing its designation to shared use, the statutory consultation process would then be initiated. This involves the placement of a notice on the street, notice in the local press and letters to potentially affected frontages in the area. The consultation period is 21 days during which representations to the proposal can be made. Any representations received are reported to the Cabinet Member with appropriate recommendations for consideration and potential approval.’

Councillor Elloy asked a supplementary question regarding a particular instance where it was his belief that the consultation process had not been properly followed. Councillor Harrison agreed to investigate the matter.

Councillor Porter asked a supplementary question seeking an example of where the consultation process had changed parking bay usage. Councillor Harrison provided an example where car club bays had been converted to general parking bays and noted that usage was constantly under review.

It was proposed by Councillor Knight and seconded by Councillor Williams that a motion be put before Council to suspend Standing Orders to continue the meeting for a maximum of thirty minutes beyond 10pm.

On being put to the vote, the motion FELL.

The Chief Executive advised the Council that due to the 3 hour maximum length of the meeting being reached, all remaining items of Executive Business and reports of the Head of Paid Service would be immediately put to the vote.

To ensure that the Council met its statutory duty under the Localism Act to publish the Pay Statement by 31 March 2012, she advised Members that Item 8 B – Report of the Remuneration Committee should also be put to the vote.

All remaining business would be transacted at the next meeting of Council.

It was proposed by Councillor Knight with the assent of Council that Item 8 C – Fraud Policies also be immediately put to the vote.

RESOLVED:

1.      That the business of the meeting be concluded at 10pm

2.      That outstanding items of Executive Business and Reports of the Head of Paid Service be immediately put to the vote.

3.      That to ensure the Council met its statutory duty under the Localism Act to publish the Pay Statement by 31 March 2012, Item 8 B – Report of the Remuneration Committee be immediately put to the vote

4.      That Item 8 C – Fraud Policies be put immediately to the vote.

5.      That Members Questions 6 (g) – (i) and the Ward Concern be considered at the next meeting of Council

7a) Councillor Jaeger has given notice to raise the following Ward Concern:

“The overall plan, timetable and budgets for improvements to Whitton.”

(Whitton Ward)

The ward concern raised by Councillor Jaeger regarding the overall plans, timetable and budgets available for improvements in Whitton will be considered at the next meeting of Council due to the business of the meeting not exceeding the three hour maximum duration.

Attached.

CAPITAL PROGRAMME 2012/13 – 2016/17

Councillor True moved, seconded by Councillor Samuel:

(1)   That the Council approve the overall capital budget for 2012/13 as part of the overall financial strategy

(2)   That the Council approve the Prudential Indicators as set out in Appendix B to the report.

Councillor Knight moved, seconded by Councillor Eady:

In recommendation 1(1) at end insert:

‘subject to the following changes:

1.      a reduction in the budget of £25 million by the removal of funding for sixth forms

2.      the addition of:

(i)                  £25 million for the provision of extra secondary school places, either through a new inclusive secondary school or the expansion of existing schools;

(ii)                An additional £1 million per annum for the provision of extra affordable housing;

(iii)               £500,000 to enable certain proposals in the Outer London Fund second round bid for Whitton, in particular library relocation capital works;

(iv)              £400,000 for the re-provision of a permanent public library in Heathfield Ward as part of the planned development of Heathfield Infant and Junior Schools; and

(v)                £350,000 for the improvement and modernisation of Heatham House youth centre, including disability access

The amendment was put to the vote and FELL.

The substantive motion was put to the vote and was CARRIED.

RESOLVED:

(1)   That the overall capital budget for 2012/13 as part of the overall financial strategy be approved.

(2)   That the Prudential Indicators as set out in Appendix B to the report be approved

TREASURY MANAGEMENT POLICY AND STRATEGY FOR 2012/13

RESOLVED:

(1)   That the Treasury Management Policy for 2012/13 as set out in Appendix A be approved

(2)   That the Treasury Management and Investment Strategy for 2012/13 as set out in Appendix B be approved

(3)   That the Investment Criteria for 2012/13 as set out in Appendix C be approved.

Attached.

RESOLVED: That the pay statement, produced in response to the Localism Act 2011 be approved.

Attached.

RESOLVED: That the revised Anti-Fraud and Corruption Strategy and the Whistle blowing Policy be approved.

None

There were no reports of Overview and Scrutiny Committees.

None

There were no reports on joint arrangements and external organisations.

None.

There were no reports of the Head of Paid Service.

Attached

RESOLVED: That the decision taken as a matter of urgency as set out in paragraph 3.2.1 of the report (London Boroughs Grant Scheme – Proposed Expenditure 2012/13) be noted.

To receive any announcements from the Mayor, Leader, Members of the Cabinet or the Head of Paid Service.

The Deputy Mayor, on behalf of the Council made the following announcements regarding upcoming Mayoral events:

• 1 March 2012 – a concert by the Llanelli Male Voice Choir would take place at 7pm in Duke Street Baptist Church.
• 17 March 2012 – an evening of food and entertainment would take place to celebrate St Patrick’s Day.
• 21 April 2012 – a celebration dinner would take place for St George’s Day.

None.

There were no notices of motion submitted on this occasion.