Councillor Clare Head submitted her apologies.

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 Samuel declared a personal interest in items 12 & 13 on the agenda, namely that he was a School Governor of Buckingham Primary School.

To consider and approve the Minutes of the meeting held on 8 November 2010 attached.

 The minutes of the meeting held on 8 November 2010 be received and approved  

 and the Chairman be authorised to sign them.

There were no representations by members of the public.

There were no matters raised by executive members.

There were no matters raised by non-executive members.

There were no matters referred to the executive for reconsideration.

The report from Overview and Scrutiny Committee was considered at item 16 of the agenda (Procedure for the Appointment of Local Authority Governors).

This report seeks the approval of Cabinet to note the Administration’s

overarching strategy for providing additional high quality primary, secondary

and post-16 places within the borough.

Cabinet heard representations from Jeremy Rodell, Chair of South West London Humanists, which included the following points:

-          that 10% of the borough was of Roman Catholic faith.

-          that taxpayers would provide 90% of the capital costs for the proposed Roman Catholic school.

-          that any admissions policy of the proposed Roman Catholic School would be exempt from adhering to Equality legislation.

-          the proposed strategy should be concerned with choice and diversity with regards all schools and the Roman Catholic Church should be invited to bid for funds and should be subject to the same criteria as all other schools.

-          the current proposed strategy, which was concerned with a new voluntary aided school in the area, illustrated exclusivity and not equality and diversity.

-          Humanists are a non religious group who wish for good schools for all students regardless of their faith.

It was noted that the Group making representations had more than 300 supporters.

The Cabinet Member for Schools stated that the borough faced a combination of challenges in education such as school capacity issues at the primary and secondary level and financial constraints. Councillor Hodgins advised that the proposed strategy would not only increase capacity at primary and secondary school level but also ensure that schools had more autonomy.

Councillor Hodgins commented that Roman Catholic students were not provided for within the borough and that the proposed strategy would provide a much needed Roman Catholic school in the area.  

The Leader of the Council stated that there were many Roman Catholic families in the borough who have to send their children to Roman Catholic schools outside the area. Councillor True advised Jeremy Rodell that he would have an opportunity to participate in future consultations concerning the strategy.

Councillor True commented that reference to Conservative in the document should be deleted, as references to political parties in the Council’s reports were not acceptable.

It was RESOLVED that:

1.  the strategy be approved.

2. authority be delegated to the Cabinet Member for

    Schools to seek additional funding to implement the

    strategy.

This report seeks the approval of Cabinet for the principle of establishing

community boards across the borough and for funding a pilot community

board in the Kew, Mortlake, Barnes and East Sheen quindrat.

Cabinet received a report which sought approval of the principle of establishing

community boards across the borough to support schools and for funding a pilot

community board in the Kew, Mortlake, Barnes and East Sheen quindrat.

It was RESOLVED that:

1.      the principle of establishing community boards within the borough be approved; and

2.      the provision of £5,000 funding to implement the pilot be approved.

This report seeks Cabinet’s approval of the proposed strategy to provide

sufficient high quality primary school places to meet forecast demand. 

Cabinet received a report which sought approval of the proposed strategy to provide

sufficient high quality primary school places to meet forecast demand. 

The Leader of the Council commented that this was an important strategy document

which addressed manifesto commitments.

It was RESOLVED that:

the strategy and recommendations, contained within it, be approved.

This report seeks the approval of Cabinet, in its role as ‘local decision-maker’,

to the proposals to expand the size of Buckingham Primary School, Lowther

Primary School and St Mary’s Church of England Primary School in order to

meet the forecast in demand for places.

Cabinet received a report which sought the approval of Cabinet, in its role as ‘local

decision-maker’, to the proposals to expand the size of Buckingham Primary School,

Lowther Primary School and St Mary’s Church of England Primary School in order to

meet the forecast in demand for places.

It was RESOLVED that:

1. the proposal to expand the size of Buckingham Primary School be approved.
   
   
2. the proposal to expand the size of Lowther Primary School be approved; and

3. the proposal to expand the size of St Mary’s

     Church of England Primary School be approved.

This report considers the procurement route and process of acceptance of a tender

over £100,000 for the appointment of design and cost appraisal consultants to

support the permanent expansion works at Buckingham Primary School.

Cabinet received a report which considered the procurement route and process of

acceptance of a tender over £100,000for the appointment of design and cost

appraisal consultants to support the permanent expansion works at Buckingham

Primary School.

It was RESOLVED that:

1. the procurement of consultancy services to develop a

      detailed design for the permanent expansion of

      Buckingham Primary School via the IESE/OGC

            Consultancy Services Framework be approved.

2. authority be delegated to the Leader of the Council to

      appoint a consultancy services firm to develop a

      detailed design contract for the permanent expansion of

      Buckingham Primary School, provided that the

      recommended contract value is within 10% of the

      pre – tender estimate.

This report seeks approval, through increased Council financial contribution, to

proceed with the Croft Centre development as a Children’s Centre providing a multi-

use educational centre for children with disabilities (urgent decision item).

Cabinet received an urgent report which sought approval to award the construction contract in accordance with Clause 9.9 of Contract Standing Orders for the building and alteration works to Croft Centre, (20 Windham Road, Kew, TW9 2HP) to ensure works could commence and be completed within the funding programme.

The Leader of the Council confirmed that the current administration was not only; supportive of the Croft Centre, its  commitment to continuation (despite the loss of central government funding of over £1 million demonstrated the need for reserves), but also ready to protect the most vulnerable. 

It was RESOLVED that:

1.      the increase in financial contribution for the continuation of the Croft Centre development as a Children’s Centre be approved.

2.      Cabinet approve and accept the tender submitted by Kind & Co. (Builders) Limited to undertake building works as the main contractor for the Croft Centre development, as part of the Children’s Centre

      development programme.  

This report seeks the approval of Cabinet, in its role as ‘local decision maker’, to the proposals to make prescribed alterations to: Stanley Primary School, Christ’s School, Grey Court School, Teddington School and Waldegrave School for Girls.

Cabinet received a report which sought approval of proposals to make prescribed alterations to Stanley Primary School, Christ’s School, Grey Court School, Teddington School and Waldegrave School for Girls.

It was RESOLVED that:

1.      Discontinuation of the Key Stage 1 unit for children with moderate learning difficulties at Stanley Primary School and the establishment of a provision for children with autistic spectrum conditions, with effect from 1 September 2012 be

      approved. The new provision would have a total

      of 22 places, of which five full-time equivalent

      places (ten part-time) would be for foundation

      stage children and 17 places for children in Key

      Stages 1 and 2.

2.      Establishment of an enhanced specialist teaching provision at Christ’s School for six Key Stage 3 and 4 pupils with statements of special educational needs who have specific learning difficulties, with effect from 1 September 2011 be approved.

3.       Establishment of an enhanced specialist teaching provision at Grey Court School for eight Key Stage 3 and 4 pupils with statements of special educational needs who have speech, language and communication needs, with effect from 1 September 2011 be approved.

4.      Establishment of an enhanced specialist teaching provision at Waldegrave School for Girls for six Key Stage 3 and 4 pupils with statements of special educational needs who have autistic spectrum conditions, with effect from 1 September 2011 be approved.

5.      Establishment of an enhanced specialist teaching provision at Teddington School for six Key Stage 3 and 4 pupils with statements of special educational needs who have specific learning difficulties, with effect from 1 September 2012 be approved.

The purpose of this report is to enable a decision to be made on the most efficient

and effective procedure for appointing Local Authority governors and Local Authority

Governor representatives on Academy Councils.

Cabinet received a report which sought consideration of the most efficient and

effective procedure for appointing Local Authority Governors and Local Authority

Governor representatives on Academy Councils and noted the views of Overview

and Scrutiny.

It was RESOLVED that:

1. the recommendations proposed by the Education and Children’s Services Overview and Scrutiny Committee, held on 1 December 2010, to form a panel to consider LA governor appointments be noted.

2. Cabinet approve the amended draft Governor

      Appointment Panel’s terms of reference and

      recommend the document to Council for approval.

Report to follow.

 Cabinet heard representations from Councillor Jerry Elloy which included the  following points:

-          he was concerned about the late submission of the report.

-          he was concerned about the style and substance of the report for example, overstaying issues and obstruction matters residents would immediately receive a warning from Civil Enforcement Officers (CEOs).

-          the new approach did not appear to differentiate between the sanctions, if any, imposed upon “drivers” and “owners” of vehicles in contravention of parking restrictions.

-          he was not opposed to the policy.

-          The following issues required clarity:

·   “grace periods” upon the expiry of a parking session.

    The new proposed approach did not allow for “grace

    periods” when the current strategy granted a driver a 5

    minute “grace period”.

·   whether the 6 fixed CCTV cameras would be used to raise revenue for the project.

·    whether parking restriction signage would be even more conspicuous than the current signage.

The Leader of the Council advised that there was a legal reason for the late submission of this report and stated that Councillor Elloy would receive a comprehensive answer from the Director of Environment when he met him and Cllr Stephen Knight at the planned meeting on Wednesday 8 December 2010.

The Deputy Leader and Cabinet Member for Finance & Resources advised that the new approach was very different from the current parking enforcement practices. It was designed to be humane and sensitive in its treatment of drivers. Councillor Samuel provided a number of parking enforcement matters that occurred prior to May 2010 that would not occur under the proposed new approach.

Councillor Samuel advised that the new approach would follow the Transport for London (TfL) guidelines made under the last government.

The Leader of the Council commented that the new approach was intended to be different in style and substance compared to the current parking enforcement scheme. Councillor True stated that CCTV cameras were standard items of a parking enforcement system and that the new approach represented a fair parking policy which would in fact cost less than previous schemes.

Councillor True thanked Councillor Elloy for his contribution to the discussions.

It was RESOLVED that:

1. the adoption of a new approach to ‘Parking Enforcement’ as detailed in the report be approved.

2. the contents of the confidential report, attached to the agenda, be noted.

To advise Members of the progress made by a number of London Borough’s and Transport for London who submitted applications to the Secretary of State for Transport for approval to introduce permit schemes to manage all activities on the public highway.

Cabinet received a report which advised Members of the progress made by a number of London boroughs and Transport for London who have submitted applications to the Secretary of State for Transport for approval to introduce permit schemes to manage all activities on the public highway.

It was RESOLVED that:

1. Cabinet agree that the local authority should proceed with the application to the Secretary of State for Transport to introduce the Permit Scheme in the borough and agree that authority be delegated to the appropriate officers to manage its implementation.

2. an increase in the staff establishment for the Network

      Management team, of one post at a cost of £41K, which

      would be recovered through permit fees be approved.

To agree a response to the Thames Tunnel consultation.

Cabinet heard representations from Phil Stride, Head of London Tideway Tunnels at Thames Water, which included the following points:

-          that the project was concerned with ending the discharge of 39 million cubic metres of untreated sewage into the River Thames (per year) and therefore the first phase of this process would be consulting local residents who could be affected by this project.

-          Thames Water was keen to receive feedback and consider the views of  anyone who could be affected by the consultation proposals.

-          that the 2^nd phase of the project would begin in September 2011 and that a planning application would be submitted in mid 2012.

-          Thames Water had made every effort to engage local residents, e.g., 165,000 letters had been sent to individuals which included residents along the route of the proposed tunnel path and near the proposed site.

-          Thames Water had published its proposals concerned with the preferred site in publications such as the Evening Standard newspaper (and had also used this medium to advise that the consultation period had been extended – published on Monday 6 December 2010).

-          Thames Water had held exhibitions concerning the preferred site e.g., in Putney where 1,500 people attended (there were more exhibitions scheduled for the future).

-          As a result of a number of enquiries from local politicians Thames Water had carried out “leaflet drops” to over 9,900 residents (20 & 21 December 2010 further leaflet drops would occur).

-          Thames Water would also be conducting public meetings to discuss the proposals (a public meeting would be held on Thursday 9 December 2010).

-          confirmed that Thames Water had stringently followed its methodology concerning the project and had shared, and is willing to share, any documents, plans, methodology with all interested parties.

-          Thames Water had considered 22 preferred sites and had conducted 250 project presentations over the last 2 years.

The Strategic Cabinet Member for Environment & Planning stated that she welcomed the offer to meet Mr Stride at a future meeting.

Councillor Morris advised that she was happy that Thames Water had extended the definition of “interested persons” affected by the proposed project to include for more residents and individuals who could be affected by traffic problems. The Strategic Cabinet Member for Environment & Planning commented that the local authority accepted that there was a sewage problem in London; however, she invited Thames Water to review its position such that the Barn Elms area be a secondary site with another site being the preferred primary site  e.g., Battersea. Councillor Morris further commented that if the proposed Barn Elms area continued to be the primary preferred project site the area would experience traffic problems for 7 years.

Mr Stride confirmed that:

-          he had provided Councillor Morris with a list of areas (including the names of individuals) in which “leaflet drops” had occurred.

-          several London boroughs, including Richmond upon Thames Council, had approved Thames Water’s methodology associated with the proposed project.

-          that Thames Water  ...  view the full minutes text for item 143.

 The report seeks the approval of Cabinet to roll out the proposed model for

  administration hubs in directorates across the council.

Cabinet received a report that sought the approval to roll out the proposed model for administration hubs in directorates across the council. It also asked for responsibility to be delegated to the Director of Adult and Community Services to agree the arrangements for the implementation of the administration hub model in each directorate, including consultation with affected staff.

It was RESOLVED that:

1.       Cabinet confirmed the proposed model for administration hubs across the council, and noted that the proposals were subject to staff consultation and may result in redundancy payments for some staff.

2.       authority be delegated to the Director of Adult and Community Services, the Executive Board lead for the administration business case, to agree the arrangements for the implementation of the

      administration hub model in each directorate, including

      consultation with affected staff.

This report seeks the approval of Cabinet to proposals for taking forward All in One, using the results of the current survey of residents to inform the development of local area plans.

Cabinet heard representations from Councillor David Williams which included the following points:

-          confirmed he had been in discussions with Councillor Fleming about this matter and that he supported the project.

-          welcomed the recognition of and use of Ward Councillors in this project.

-          the Council should be mindful that there were differences between local communities in different areas.

-          that schools, local police and public groups should also be involved in this project.

-          the Local Authority’s role should encompass resident engagement and monitoring duties.

-          it is difficult to get organisations to assist vulnerable individuals.

The Leader of the Council reiterated that he sought cross party support on this project and thanked Councillor Williams for his contribution.

The Strategic Cabinet Member for Community Development advised that as at Friday 3 December 2010 the Council had received 10, 262 responses from the All in One Survey. Councillor Fleming commented that the All in One project was a borough wide programme that would capture comments from a wide variety of residents. The scheme would be followed by a process of community involvement that would replace past structures.

It was RESOLVED that:

1.  Cabinet note the progress of the All in One survey.

2. Cabinet agree to the proposals for taking forward results

    of the survey.

3.      Cabinet agree to the formation of a small cross-party working group of Members to consider the role and involvement of ward Councillors in taking forward All in One and Community Development.

4.      Cabinet agree the outlined way forward for community

      development in the Borough.

To propose an approach for promoting social enterprise within the Council and the

 wider community.

Cabinet received a report which to proposed an approach for promoting social enterprise within the Council and the wider community.

It was RESOLVED that:

1. the proposed approach for promoting social enterprise as set out at paragraph 4.3.4 of the report be agreed.

2. that further proposals for taking forward social enterprise be developed as part of the work to design the Council’s commissioning programme.

To inform the Cabinet of developments within the NHS, nationally, at London level and locally since the last report on Borough Based Commissioning on 22 March 2010. 

Cabinet received a report which informed Members of developments within the NHS since the last report on Borough Based Commissioning on 22 March 2010. The report described the impact of these changes locally, the proposals to secure health functions and resources which would be needed for the implementation of the White Paper proposals and to mitigate risks to local health and social care services.

It was RESOLVED that:

1. the developments in the NHS since the date of the last report to Cabinet on 22 March 2010 be noted.

2. the proposals for the local authority to partner with NHS Richmond for those health functions remaining at a borough Level until 31 March 2013 be agreed.

3. authority be delegated to the Cabinet Member for Adult Services Health and Housing and to the Cabinet Member for Children’s Services and Education to make any further decisions to implement the proposed arrangements.

This report seeks Cabinet approval for the Council to enter into a S75 partnership

agreement with NHS Richmond.  This agreement is required to formalise existing

joint working arrangements, particularly in the context of forthcoming changes to the

NHS.

Cabinet received a report which sought approval for the Council to enter into a S75 partnership agreement with NHS Richmond. This agreement was required to formalise existing joint working arrangements, particularly in the context of forthcoming changes to the NHS.

It was RESOLVED that:

1. the Council enter into a Section 75 Partnership Agreement, under the NHS Act 2006, with NHS Richmond covering a range of joint arrangements as detailed in the report.

2. authority be delegated to the Director of Adult and Community Services and Director of Education, Children’s and Cultural Services, in consultation with the Cabinet Member for Adult Services, Health and Housing and Strategic Cabinet Member for Education, Youth and Children’s Services to finalise this agreement and vary it in the future as required.

To update the Cabinet on steps taken by the owner of the property 85 Whitton Road

Twickenham towards its renovating and to obtain authority for its compulsory

purchase in the event that satisfactory progress is not made.

Cabinet heard representations from Richard Newman, owner of 85 Whitton Road, Twickenham, TW1 1BT which included the following points:

-          he had requested a delay of 6 months in the CPO proceedings so that he could submit and obtain planning permission to assist with the sale of the house.

-          he was concerned that a CPO obtained against the property would have a detrimental effect upon the sale of the property.

-          he disagreed with the comments contained in paragraph 2.3 of the report i.e. that there was a “slowing of recent progress” he felt that the momentum of the sale of the property was gathering pace.

-          confirmed his enthusiasm in wishing to sell the property and was at the mercy of planning and marketing systems.

-          he noted the views of nearby home owners (paragraph 2.4 of the report) i.e. their wish for the Council to use its CPO powers against his property.

-          the house was not currently on the market as he wished to obtain planning permission prior to marketing it for sale.

-          the house was not in a good state of repair to allow people to view the property (for sales purposes).

The Cabinet Member for Adult Services, Health & Housing commented that the matter had been adjourned for 2 months for technical reasons. Councillor Urquhart stated that Members had recognised Mr Newman’s efforts in this matter and commented that he should continue to work with the Council.

The Leader of the Council stated that Cabinet had recognised Mr Newman’s good intentions with regards the sale of his property and invited officers and Mr Newman to continue with the active dialogue that had been established to make progress.

It was RESOLVED that:

1.         Cabinet approve, subject to recommendation  5 (below) the making of a compulsory purchase order (“CPO”) under Section 17 of the Housing Act 1985 (as amended) on the land and buildings known as 85 Whitton Road Twickenham and its submission to the relevant Government office for confirmation.

2.         Cabinet approve that the Council proceed with its acquisition by use of General Vesting Declarations;

3.         Cabinet approve delegated authority to the Director of Environment to settle the compensation payable in acquiring the properties; and

4.         Cabinet approve delegated authority to the Director of Environment to dispose of the property on the open market, including by auction, with the sale documentation to include conditions, in a form approved by the Head of Legal and Electoral Services, requiring the new owner to renovate the property to the satisfaction of the Head of Environmental Services and so that it meets the Decent Homes Standard and is ready for occupation within a specified time.

5.         authority be delegated to the Director of Adult and Community Services to suspend the progress of the compulsory purchase procedure in respect of the property, if she is satisfied that the owner is taking appropriate action to restore its condition and return it to residential use and to withdraw the resolution  ...  view the full minutes text for item 149.

To inform Cabinet of the Council’s performance in relation to achieving its priorities

as set out in the Corporate and Community Plans and against the National Indicators

July to September inclusive, quarter 1 of 2010/11.

Cabinet received a report which informed Members of the Council’s performance in relation to achieving its priorities as set out in the Corporate and Community Plans and against the National Indicators July to September inclusive, quarter 1 of 2010/11.

It was RESOLVED that:

1. the progress in relation to key priorities and performance against National Indicators as summarised in the performance report at Appendix A be noted.

2. consideration was given to whether any further action was required

      where performance was identified as amber or red.

This report provides details of the Customer Relationship Management System

upgrade and the associated costs and seeks approval to proceed with the

programme.

Cabinet received a report which outlined the associated costs of the Customer Relationship Management System (CRM) Upgrade Project and sought approval to proceed with the system.

It was RESOLVED that:

Cabinet note the need to upgrade the Lagan CRM system and

approve the funding required as set out in paragraph 3.8 of the report.

The report finalises approval to accept tenders for two contracts for the London

Borough of Richmond upon Thames for street cleaning and related services following

a value for money review by Price Waterhouse Coopers.

Cabinet received a report that sought approval to accept tenders for two contracts for the London Borough of Richmond upon Thames for street cleaning and related services following a value for money review by Price Waterhouse Coopers.

It was RESOLVED that:

1. the award of the London Borough of Richmond upon Thames Street Cleaning Contract Lots 3 (street cleaning) and 2 (gulley cleaning) for a period of 5 years, plus a possible extension for up to 5 further years, the conditionality having now been discharged be approved.

2. the award of the London Borough of Richmond upon Thames Street Cleaning Contract Lot 1 (Graffiti) Contract to MPM Graffiti Solutions for a period of 5 years, plus a possible extension for up to 5 further

           years the conditionality having now been discharged be approved.

                      To obtain authority for terms for a lease of premises to be constructed under

                       the Whitton LIFT project for relocation of staff from the Twickenham Integrated

                       Health and Social Care Team, and also for short term extension of the lease

                       of their existing accommodation until the new premises are available. 

Cabinet heard representations from Councillor John Coombs which included the following points:

-          concern about whether this project was good value for money.

-          the site in question was a “dual use” site i.e. used for two purposes a school and a hospital.

-          33% of the children affected, by this project, are in receipt of fee school meals.

-          concerned that the Heathfield area, which is an area already in need of investment, may suffer as a result of the decision not to invest.

-          approximately 10% / 15% of the Heathfield students come from the Hounslow area.

-          confirmed that his past Cabinet Executive Member role had prevented him from raising his concerns at the relevant Planning Committee which had granted planning permission to the project.

-          asked whether the £400,000 of the £750,000 investment monies could be allocated to the Heathfield area.

The Leader of the Council stated that Councillor Samuel would be happy to discuss matters with Councillor Coombs.

Councillor Fleming advised that there would be library consultation sessions held in 2011 including 2 public meetings in the Heathfield library.

It was RESOLVED that:

1.      the terms for completion of a lease of premises from the Richmond and Twickenham Primary Care Trust for location of staff in the Integrated Health and Social Care Team as set out in paragraph 3.4 of the report and in the confidential report, with authority delegated to the Assistant Director Environment to finalise detailed terms be approved.

2.      authority be delegated to the Assistant Director Environment to agree terms and complete a short-term extension of lease of accommodation at Regal House pending the new premises at Whitton LIFT being available for occupation, if required.

Confidential report attached.

It was RESOLVED that:

The report be noted and approved.

Confidential report attached.

It was RESOLVED that:

The report be approved.

Report to Follow.

It was RESOLVED that:

The report be noted.

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 Paragraph 3 of schedule 12 A (as amended) to the Local Government Act 1972.

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 paragraph 3 as defined in Access to Information Rule 10.4.