To approve as a correct record the Minutes of the Council held on 3 July 2012 attached.

Resolved: That the minutes of the meeting held on 3 July 2012 be signed by the Mayor as a correct record.

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

Councillor Pollesche declared a personal interest with regard to Item 14 (a) Notices of Motion on the agenda. The nature of the interest being that her husband was an employee of BAA Airports Limited.

Lord True and Councillors Elloy, Acton, Nicholson, Harbourne and Bond declared a personal interest with regard to Item 14 (a) Notices of Motion on the agenda. The nature of the interest being that they were holders of airplots.

Councillor Butler declared a prejudicial interest with regard to Item 14 (b) Notices of Motion on the agenda. The nature of the interest being that he was the proprietor of a company which would be financially impacted on by the proposed changes to planning regulations.

Councillor Cardy declared a prejudicial interest with regard to Item 14 (b) Notices of Motion on the agenda. The nature of the interest being that he was a Director of the Richmond Housing Partnership.

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

Councillor Elloy presented a petition on behalf of the residents of Manor Grove in which over 50% of residents were seeking the introduction of a 20 mph zone.

Councillor Elloy presented a further petition regarding the proposed relocation of bus stops in King Street, Twickenham.

None received

There were no public questions on this occasion.

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

Attached

(a)   In accordance with the notice given, Councillor Bond asked the Cabinet Member for Schools:

‘Can the Cabinet Member tell us how the Council fared in providing primary places for Borough families in 2012?’

Councillor Hodgins replied in the following terms ‘Despite a 9% application increase, all in-borough children whose parents applied – either on-time or late – were allocated places well before the autumn term. The proportion of applicants offered their first preference (75%) and the proportion offered one of their first three preferences (91%) rose to all-time highs. These figures are as a result of our permanent expansions programme – with Hampton Wick, St Mary’s, and Orleans and St Stephen’s all admitting extra pupils on a permanent basis this year – augmented by shared forms of entry and temporary expansions. We are working to secure places, including at free schools, for future years.

Councillor Eady asked a supplementary question regarding the use of bulge classes to accommodate additional children. Councillor Hodgins responded by explaining that a 10 year ongoing plan included provision to permanently increase capacity within the Borough’s primary schools.

Councillor Martin asked a supplementary about the role of Free Schools in providing extra places. Councillor Hodgins noted that two applications for primary free schools had been approved and the Council looked forward to working with both schools in the future.

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

‘Why is he maintaining a £1.2 million tax-break for landlords of empty properties whilst cutting benefits from low income families?’

Councillor Samuel replied in the following terms, ‘This is a singularly inopportune question when we are in the middle of consultation and on this particular item we have signalled very clearly our flexibility. Councillor Knight subscribes very happily, to the extreme left wing demonology which casts as villains bankers and landlords. In this borough the largest landlord is Richmond Housing Partnership and perhaps Councillor Knight will tell us this evening why he wants social housing to pay even more than I am suggesting’.

Councillor Knight asked a supplementary question regarding the need to prioritise those families in receipt of benefits and to ensure empty properties are occupied as soon as possible when they become vacant. Councillor Samuel noted that tenants would most likely be impacted upon by way of increased rents if landlords were hit by higher costs.

Councillor O’Malley asked a supplementary question about the lack of concern regarding this issue raised at the Finance and Performance Overview and Scrutiny Committee meeting where the proposals were considered. Councillor Samuel responded that the debate at the meeting had been constructive and all recommendations included within the report had been approved unanimously.

Councillor Williams asked a supplementary question about the potential impact of the proposals on long term empty properties. Councillor Samuel responded to explain that the proposed scheme limited the numbers of people who would be impacted upon negatively by the changes and encourage landlords to re-let properties at the earliest opportunity.

(b)   In accordance with the notice given, Councillor Chappell asked the Cabinet Member for Education, Youth and Children’s Services:

‘Will the Cabinet Member outline the overall youth provision within the Borough and explain how we are working to ensure that the needs of vulnerable youngsters are being protected despite the tough economic times?’

Councillor Percival replied in the following terms: ‘Youth support provision provides positive activities, project work, the Duke of Edinburgh Award, participation and volunteering programmes via the Council’s Youth Centres, outreach work in schools, street work and specialist and commissioned projects. Targeted youth support is in place for the vulnerable young people providing substance misuse services, sexual health service, information, advice and guidance on employment. I’m also delighted to say that 30 young people recently visit Helskini to exchange with their counterparts over there as well.’

Councillor Chappell asked a supplementary question regarding protected monies for priority areas of youth work activity. Councillor Percival responded that preventative work focussing on risky behaviours remained high priority.

Councillor Knight asked a supplementary question regarding reductions in some areas of youth provision as a result of reduced government grants. Councillor Percival noted that further clarification regarding funding would be provided in writing to Councillor Knight.

Councillor Elliot asked a supplementary question regarding youth provision in Whitton. Councillor Percival noted that a weekly youth service session had been provided at Whitton Community Association and long term provision was currently being explored.

(c)   In accordance with the notice given, Councillor Elloy asked the Cabinet Member for Highways and Streetscene:

‘What action does he plan to improve safety for cyclists in the light of a 30% rise in cycling accidents in the Borough over the past two years and will he reconsider his proposal to remove cycle lanes from Twickenham?’

Councillor Harrison replied in the following terms: ‘The increase in accidents involving cyclists is not just confined to this borough, it is a general trend across the whole of central London. I can confirm that the local cycle accident rate is a matter of concern to us. We have commissioned a consultant to review our 5-year accident data to analyse locations and causes of collisions and, to propose appropriate remedial measures for implementation. These measures will include engineering, educational and enforcement interventions.  

Turning to the Twickenham Area Action Plan we will ensure we improve safety for cyclists. A 20mph speed limit will be introduced together with ‘Advanced Stop Lines’ for cyclists at traffic signal junctions. And we will be recommending advisory cycle lanes in the detail design on London Road and King Street subject to the availability of appropriate road widths.’

Councillor Elloy asked a supplementary question regarding the role of the Council’s Cycling Champion and expressed concern regarding the statistics quoted. Councillor Harrison explained that he worked closely with the Council’s Cycling Champion.

Councillor Harborne asked a supplementary question regarding the location of any of the major junctions identified as part of the Mayor of London’s review. Councillor Harrison replied to confirm that 3 junctions with the Borough had been identified as part of the review.

Councillor Roberts asked a supplementary question regarding quotes included in a local publication from the Council’s Cycling Champion. Councillor Harrison explained that he was unable to comment on the content as the publication was outside of the Council’s control.

(d)   In accordance with the notice given, Councillor Bouchier asked the Cabinet Member for Adult Services, Health and Housing:

‘How is Adult Services tackling fraud in the Borough?’

Councillor Urquhart responded in the following terms: ‘Sadly fraud does occur in this borough and it would be remiss of our officers not to chase it up. They are doing a lot of good work in a number of areas including housing.   A recent example is a woman seeking to be re-housed by the Council who claimed she was living with a woman as her carer, but officers visited and established that the woman had died.

Staff frequently use credit checks to ensure we assist only honest applicants, and one woman who said she was being evicted by her mum was found to have had a tenancy elsewhere for 3 years.  Also using social media which the public think the officers aren’t savvy about, they’re managing to detect fraud as well.’

Councillor Bouchier asked a supplementary question regarding recent prosecutions. Councillor Urquhart reported that five prosecutions for blue badge fraud had recently been successful and investigations were ongoing into misuse of the freedom pass.

Councillor Matthias asked a supplementary question about the accuracy of the financial assessment process. Councillor Urquhart explained that all staff received fraud training and officers worked closely with the Department of Work and Pensions and stakeholder groups to minimise the risk of non declaration.

(e)   In accordance with the notice given, Councillor Coombs asked the Cabinet Member for Adult Services, Health and Housing:

‘How many new affordable homes were completed in 2009/10, 2010/11 and 2011/12 and how many does she anticipate will be completed in 2012/13 and what does she think will be the impact of the recent Government announcements?’

Councillor Urquhart responded in the following terms: ‘The number of affordable homes completed in 2009/10 was 54, 2010/11 103 and 2011/12 there were 244. In 2012-13 we  are currently anticipating 25 new affordable homes completing with the potential for more subject to Registered Providers’ internal approvals. Such variation in delivery across the years is very common.

Until there is further clarity on the details of the Government’s package of measures it is difficult to assess impact, however, the need for affordable housing remains high and we will continue to work to support the development of high quality affordable homes in this borough.’

Councillor Coombs asked a supplementary question regarding the level of affordable housing investment referred to by the Deputy Leader and Cabinet Member for Finance and Resources and the consideration of such applications by the Planning Committee. Councillor Urquhart responded to confirm that the current priority was to deliver larger homes for larger families and that the current year’s housing capital monies had been largely invested already. Land availability for new builds was noted to be an ongoing issue.

Councillor Butler asked a supplementary question regarding the support of the Government for affordable housing development. Councillor Urquhart responded that a government stimulus package had been available and would guarantee developer debt to raise money for housing development for the public and private sectors.

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

‘Why has the Council signed up to Re:Fit?’

Councillor Samuel responded in the following terms: ‘Re:Fit is a scheme sponsored by the Mayor of London and by his predecessor that aims to work on existing public buildings to reduce their carbon emissions. The other aspect of it is that it also reduces energy use and there is a guaranteed payback.  That means that quite apart from the other advantages all our rate payers will benefit because every scheme has a guaranteed saving.’

Councillor Elliot asked a supplementary question regarding the number of buildings which would benefit from the scheme. Councillor Samuel commented that in the first phase, between 6 – 10 buildings would be nominated. These buildings would then be surveyed as to the level of investment required and the subsequent predicted savings.

Councillor Miller asked if the list of proposed buildings could be shared with all Councillors in advance of final selection. Councillor Samuel agreed with this request.

Councillor Porter asked a supplementary question regarding the likely financial savings which would result from the scheme. Councillor Samuel explained that the project looked to make savings of around 28% although following an investment of £1.1 million, the London Borough of Ealing had saved 29%.

(g)   In accordance with the notice given, Councillor Elengorn asked the Cabinet Member for Environment and Planning, Parks and Highways:

‘In light of the Planning Committee’s decision on 19 December 2011 to add a provision to the planning permission for Twickenham Station which ‘secures full funding for the employment by the Council of an officer to liaise between the residents of St Mary’s Terrace, Cole Park Road and the site owner (s) and their contractors for the period of the construction’ why has that officer been employed by Solum rather than the Council and what action does she propose to restore confidence in the integrity of the Planning Committee’s decision?’

Councillor Morris responded in the following terms: ‘No officer has yet been employed, because as you say the decision was for someone to act in this role during construction but we are some way from this. The Council however recognises that as construction will be delayed due to the Judicial Review it would help the residents during this process if an officer was employed by the Council to act for the residents in a liaison role. Although this goes beyond what was requested by the planning committee, this Council is dedicated to helping the residents of Twickenham.’

Councillor Elengorn asked a supplementary question regarding the officer appointed by Solum. Councillor Morris acknowledged what the Planning Committee had wanted in approving that particular condition and that this would be delivered for residents.

Councillor Salvoni asked a supplementary question regarding the steps taken by Solum to appoint the officer. Councillor Morris confirmed that the appointment had been made prior to the announcement of the Judicial Review and had not been approved by the Council.

The time allowed for Members Questions had elapsed and a written response would be provided to all remaining notified questions.

(h)   In accordance with the notice given, Councillor Salvoni asked the Cabinet Member for Highways and Streetscene:

‘ Can the Cabinet Member give us an update on the fair parking policy and specifically on the number of complaints received recently concerning parking enforcement?’

‘The fair parking policies are now part of the way of life on Parking Services. The Civil Enforcement Officers (CEO’s) have all been trained in the protocols and have received Customer Care training. On the run up to the Olympics the CEOs received a customer care training package that focused on how to help tourists within the borough. We have received numerous compliments regarding how polite and helpful the CEOS are. We have received two formal complaints this year, one was regarding a permit issue and the other regarding a sign hidden by branches of a tree.(the sign was re positioned.)Since April 12, 775 warning notices have been issued to vehicles in contravention and 2652 have been cancelled under our customer care policies. The CEO error rate has also reduced dramatically to 0.5%. This has come down from over 3% a year ago and reflects the training and refresher training that is taking place.

(i)      In accordance with the notice given, Councillor Nicholson asked Councillor Chappell:

‘Why has the proposed new by-law on illegal moorings, agreed by Regulatory Committee in May, still not been sent to the Minister of State for approval?’

‘Since May officers have been gathering the relevant information to be sent with the proposed wording. This includes legal documents concerning ownership of a number of Parcels of land as well as the production of a map indicating where 24 hour mooring will be permitted so as to protect those areas that the council feels moorings should not be allowed. With such a busy year which has included these same officers in preparations for the Jubilee celebrations, the Olympics and the Paralympics, the work has progressed slower than expected however members have been asked to make comments on the proposed 24 hour mooring sites by the 28th September 2012 before the information is sent to the Secretary of State following agreement from the Strategic Cabinet Member for the Environment. I would encourage all councillors to give their views to officers to reflect both their and their residents' views.’

(j)      In accordance with the notice given, Councillor Mathias asked the Cabinet Member for Community Development:

‘Can the Cabinet Member explain what the Council is doing to address the problem of empty shops?’

‘Support for town and local centres is designed to maintain their vitality and viability for shoppers, businesses and investors.  This includes improving the public realm, the introduction of 30 minutes free car parking, supporting tourism and events, providing supportive regulatory and planning regimes and in Twickenham developing the Action Area Plan and the ‘BID’.  We support town centre associations to develop locally led and innovative promotional initiatives through our Opportunities Fund.  

We monitor the number of vacant shops which remains relatively low and work with commercial agents and business associations to encourage new occupiers including temporary 'pop-up' uses. ‘

(k)    In accordance with the notice give, Councillor Roberts asked the Cabinet Member for Adult Services, Health and Housing:

‘Why have the promised new community notice boards still not materialised, almost a year after the existing notice boards were left unmaintained?’

‘The Cabinet Member decision to proceed with the Community Notice Boards was made on 29 May 2012. The boards take 8 weeks to produce taking us into the Olympic period where the Mayor of London instructed no non-essential highway or pavement works until after the Games had finished. Now the Games have ended the boards will be in place in the next 2 months.’

(l)      In accordance with the notice given, Councillor Miller asked the Cabinet Member for Environment and Planning, Parks and Highways:

‘What has been the impact of the design quality of new buildings approved in this Borough of the Administrations failure to hold any meetings of the Design Panel in 2011 or so far in 2012 and what improvement does she expect to follow from the decision to reinstate the Design Panel?’

‘I am confident that with the Council’s revised planning policies combined with the expertise of officers and within the local community, reflected in their comments on planning applications, will ensure the quality of new buildings will not have been compromised while I have been reviewing the Panel.

I do recognise that the new National Planning Policy Framework commends local design review arrangements and I have asked officers to establish an appropriate review body which can help work towards even higher standards of design in the future.’

(a)        Councillor Williams has given notice to raise the following Ward Concern:

            “Blue Plaques in Ham and Petersham.”

(Ham, Petersham and Richmond Riverside Ward)

(a)   In accordance with the notice given Councillor Williams highlighted his concern regarding the lack of blue plaques in Ham and Petersham and more widely across the Borough. He outlined the process by which Blue Plaques were awarded by English Heritage and informed members of some of the notable figures whom he believed should be recognised. He sought support from the Council to set up a campaign to increase the number of submissions from Richmond residents.

Councillor Morris noted that English Heritage relied on the public to suggest relevant buildings and individuals who should be acknowledged via the blue plaque system and requested that Councillors direct any suggestions to English Heritage.

Attached

Attached

(1)   Treasury Management Annual Report 2011/12

Resolved: That the Treasury Management Annual Report 2011/12 and Prudential Indicators be approved.

(2) Olympic Games and Diamond Jubilee Celebration

Councillor Samuel addressed Members regarding the content of the report. He noted that the success of the events had been based on the hard work and dedication of all of those who had been involved. The comments were endorsed by Councillor Knight. He noted the particular success of Mo Farah as a resident of the Borough who would be bestowed the honour of Freedom of the Borough at a Special Council meeting in 2013.

The Borough’s Member Sports Champion, Councillor Martin indicated that the Olympics had raised the profile of sport across the Borough and that it would leave a positive legacy for the wellbeing and health of residents of all ages.

To conclude, Lord True gave particular thanks to those who had been involved in planning for and supporting the Royal Visit in May 2012.

Resolved:

1. That thanks be given to all those involved in the successful delivery of the River and Road Torch Relays and four Olympic Cycle Races in the Borough
2. That all those Borough based sportsmen and women, resident, businesses and organisations involved in the wider Olympic Games and Paralympic events be congratulated.
3. That thanks be given to all those involved in the successful delivery of Her Majesty The Queen’s Diamond Jubilee events this summer.

Attached

Resolved: That the revised Statement of Licensing Policy be adopted.

Attached

Councillor Miller commended the Overview and Scrutiny Annual Report 2011 – 2012 to the Council for approval.

Resolved: That the Overview and Scrutiny Annual Report 2011 – 2012 be approved.

None

There were no reports on joint arrangements and external organisations.

Attached

Resolved:

(a)   That the Council notes the constitutional and operational changes as required by the Local Authorities (Executive Arrangements) (Meetings and Access to Information) (England) Regulations 2012

(b)   That authority is delegated to the Head of Paid Service to ensure full compliance with the regulations and the required constitutional amendments

(c)   That timescales for implementation with regard to Regulations 5, 10 and 13 be confirmed when legal advice has been obtained to clarify the operational implications of these matters.

Attached

Resolved:

1. That the Council adopts the revised Members Code of Conduct.
2. That the appointment of the Independent Person(s) be delegated to the Chief Executive in conjunction with the Group Leaders with a view to the appointment being confirmed at the next meeting of Council.

None

There were no executive decisions taken as a matter of urgency reported to the meeting.

None

There was no quarterly report on special urgency decisions.  

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

The Mayor made the following announcements:

• The summer period had been extremely busy and she had attended a number of events celebrating the Olympics and had been delighted to represent the Council at the Cycling Time Trials at Hampton Court at which Bradley Wiggins won a gold medal.
• Locally, the spirit of the Queen’s Jubilee Celebrations had been kept alive by senior residents’ tea parties which had been well supported by Members of all wards.
• The Mayoralty had maintained the link with the Chilean Embassy by attending the annual Bernado O’Higgins ceremony in Richmond.
• Richmond had been represented in the Great River Race by the Deputy Mayor and Teddington Skiff Club.
• Fundraising for the Horse Rangers Association and the Poppy Factory had been gathering pace. The Last Night of the Proms and Ham Polo Club events had both been very successful. The next event would be a Halloween Quiz on 26 October 2012.

At the start of the meeting, Members of the Council were informed of the recent success of the Borough in the London in Bloom Awards. A range of gold, silver gilt and silver awards had been awarded and for the first time, Richmond Upon Thames had been awarded the top award, Borough of the Year 2012.

In addition to this, the Mayoralty had accepted a vase celebrating the Royal Jubilee which had been engraved by a local engraver, Mr Andy Philips.

(a)        Lord True, Leader of the Council, has given notice to move:

            "That this council unanimously reaffirms its opposition to a third runway at Heathrow and to any intensification of the use of Heathrow and calls upon all councillors, our GLA member and our local MPs to work together across party lines to sustain that position permanently."

(b)       Councillor Elengorn has given notice to move:

            “This Council, wishing to safeguard the quality of the built environment in Richmond upon Thames, supports the Local Government Association in rejecting the government’s claim that the planning system is stifling economic growth and opposes government’s proposals to significantly extend permitted development rights and to allow the removal of affordable housing requirements from developers.”

(a) Motion: Pursuant to the motion, Lord True proposed and Councillor Knight seconded:

‘This Council unanimously reaffirms its opposition to a third runway at Heathrow and to any intensification of the use of Heathrow and calls upon all Councillors, our GLA Member and our Local MP’s to work together across party lines to sustain that position permanently.’

The motion on being put to the Council was CARRIED.

(b) Motion: Pursuant to the motion, Councillor Elengorn proposed and Lord True seconded:

‘This Council, wishing to safeguard the quality of the built environment in Richmond Upon Thames, supports the Local Government Association in rejecting the Government’s claim that the planning system is stifling economic growth and opposes the Government’s proposals to significantly extend permitted development rights and to allow the removal of affordable housing requirements from developers.’

The motion on being put to the Council was CARRIED.