Councillors and committees

Agenda and minutes

You can view the individual reports for this meeting by selecting the headings from the numbered list of items at the bottom of this page. Alternatively you can view the entire agenda by selecting 'Agenda Reports Pack' below.

Watch key Council meetings here

Venue: The Guildhall, Kingston upon Thames, KT1 1EU

Contact: Jean Cousens tel. 020 8547 5023  e-mail:  jean.cousens@kingston.gov.uk

Items
No. Item

84.

Apologies

Minutes:

Apologies for absence were received from Councillors Sushila Abraham, Fiona Boult, Lesley Heap, Munir Ravalia, Nicola Sheppard and Christine Stuart.

85.

Declarations of Interest

Members are invited to declare any disclosable pecuniary interests and any other non- pecuniary interests (personal interests) relevant to items on this agenda.

 

Minutes:

There were no declarations of interest.

86.

Minutes

To confirm as a correct record the minutes of the meeting of Budget Council held on 26 February 2019

 

 

Minutes:

Resolved that the minutes of the meeting of Budget Council held on 26 February 2019 be confirmed as a correct record.

87.

Mayor's Announcements

Minutes:

Sri Lankan bomb tragedy

 

The Mayor had sent the Royal Borough’s condolences to the President in Sri Lanka and the High Commissioner for Sri Lanka in the UK after the recent bomb attacks that had taken place in Sri Lanka.

 

The Mayor would be attending a candlelight vigil the following evening (Thursday 25 April) and would be holding a minute’s silence at the Mayor’s Charity Ball on the evening of Friday 26 April which was to be attended by  many representatives from the local Sri Lankan community.

 

Mayor’s Charity Ball

 

All Councillors had been sent by email a link so that they could participate in online bidding as part of the fundraising activities at the Mayor’s Charity and the Mayor encouraged all to take part.

88.

Petitions pdf icon PDF 197 KB

5.1       To receive any petitions – members of the Council or a member of the public may present a petition to the Council on a matter in relation to which the Council has powers, duties or which affects the Royal Borough. 

 

5.2       To debate the petitions referred to in the report at Appendix A of the agenda. [Under the Council’s Petition Scheme, petitions with more than 500 signatures will be debated by the full Council - if possible, at the next ordinary Council meeting after submission.]

 

Additional documents:

Minutes:

88.1    Two petitions were presented by members of the public at the meeting as follows:

 

(1) Assess other options and resident support before awarding estate regeneration contract’ petition

 

The petition which was submitted by Mr Derek Moss had 41 online signatories with KT postcodes and 5 signatories from a paper version and requested:

“At its meeting on 24 April the Council should vote against awarding the contract to Countryside Properties and instruct officers to produce a detailed assessment of the alternatives to joint venture regeneration which are provided by the Government's decision to scrap the HRA borrowing cap, with reference to the 2012 council housing investment plan drawn up by the previous Lib Dem administration.

Once that report has been considered, if the Council still considers that joint venture regeneration is the best option, then before signing a contract with a developer that will waste £1.5m if residents reject the masterplan it should first ballot residents, at a estimated cost of less than £50,000, to find out whether there is any chance of them supporting a regeneration plan that involves the demolition of their homes.

Any ballot should include all residents and home owners on the Estate and the regeneration should only go ahead if at least 50% of eligible voters vote in favour.

 

(2) 'A fair ballot for residents on Kingston's Cambridge Road Estate' petition

 

The petition which was submitted by Mr Phil Bevin had 246 signatories with KT postcodes and requested "Cambridge Road Estate residents must have a free and fair ballot."  The detail of the petition request read:

"We the undersigned believe that, because of the risks posed to the future of residents on Cambridge Road Estate through potential rent rises and the disruption to their lives, the regeneration ballot should represent a free and fair vote and that any associated campaign by RBK Council must honour this principle in a financially responsible manner. To this end we demand:

- on the terms of the ballot:

·           a legally binding ballot on the final proposals that the Council must honour (all viability assessments to be completed before the ballot)

·           that only CRE residents should be balloted and every CRE resident over the age of 16 should be eligible to vote

·           a simple yes/no question on whether the final plans of the regeneration should go ahead

·           that because of the significant change occasioned by the regeneration, no change should take place unless a yes vote garners 50% support but if there is no vote or less than 50% of residents participate in the ballot, there must be an alternative programme of reinvestment in the estate, one that does not include wholesale demolition

·           that residents are informed of what any possible rent or council tax rises they may face on the new estate before the ballot takes place

- on the cost of the ballot:

·           that all resources produced during the campaign by the Council contain a balanced assessment of the risks and opportunities of the plans; council  ...  view the full minutes text for item 88.

89.

Deputations

Minutes:

The Council had received eight deputations of which notice had been submitted in advance in accordance with Standing Order no.17, as follows:

i) Kingston Advocacy Group: Concern about Advocacy Provision in the Borough – presented by Mr Jim Green

[Concerns about the awarding in March of a tender for advocacy services which had previously been held for many years by Kingston Advocacy Group to Cambridge House (based in Southwark).]

ii) Cambridge Road Estate Repairs – presented by Mr Phil Bevin

[Concerns about delays in the time taken to make repairs to properties in the Cambridge Road Estate – request for refurbishment and investment via the Housing Revenue Account.]

iii) Neville House Yard – presented by Ms Deepa Veneik on behalf of Mr Bob Tyler

[Concern about the lack of action from developers after an urgent decision had been taken for the site disposal in June 2018, dumping on the site and loss of potential parking income.]

iv) Elected Mayor Referendum – presented by Mr James Giles

[Bringing to the Council’s attention the rationale for the launch of an ‘Our Kingston’ campaign petitioning for a borough-wide referendum for a directly elected Mayor.]

v) Cambridge Road Estate Decant – presented by Mrs Mary Clark

[Concerns about the details of the Decant Policy including right to return, downsizing, stock for decanting, affordability for freeholders/ leaseholders]

vi) Biodiversity Loss – presented by Alison Fure

[New development should make a positive contribution or net gain to biodiversity; increased urban gradient in the borough reduces habitat and contributes to loss of species in the borough.]

vii) *Climate Emergency Motion amendment – presented by Mr Chris Walker

[The target date for the Council’s Motion for becoming carbon neutral should be brought forward from 2038 to 2025 and be linked to all Council’s policies especially the Local Plan.]

viii) *Climate Emergency Motion amendment – presented by Mr Paul Rees

[The Council should aim to become zero carbon emitting by 2025.]

A briefing note had been circulated to Members which provided officer comments on the Deputations. 

The Council noted all the Deputations.

 

[*Both these deputations related to a Liberal Democrat Group Climate Emergency Motion to be referred from Council to the Environment and Sustainable Transport Committee (refer Minute 93 below).  Information about the deputations would be referred to the Environment and Sustainable Transport Committee for consideration when it considered that Motion.]

90.

Community Motion under Standing Order 7A

Under Standing Order 7(A), a minimum of 500 interested people may present a motion for debate relevant to an issue which affects the Royal Borough at any ordinary meeting of the Council.  An interested person is defined as somebody who lives, works, studies or owns a property or business in the Borough.  The Council shall consider the motion as soon as possible and, wherever practicable, at its next ordinary meeting. 

 

At the meeting, a representative of the signatories will have a period of up to five minutes to address the meeting on the subject.  A further period of up to ten minutes shall be allowed for questions and answers, following which there will be a maximum of 30 minutes in which members of the public present will be given the opportunity to address the meeting for up to 3 minutes each.  After this time, the Council will consider the motion and may accept, modify or reject it.

 

In accordance with the provisions of Standing Order 7A, a community motion, which has been accepted as valid, has been submitted as follows: 

 

“Demanding Better on Resident Parking

"This Council notes:

- the failure of the Liberal Democrat administration to meet their promises, set out in their 2018 local manifesto, to "", and instead pursue a regressive tax on residents living within CPZs;

- the huge public outcry in response to these changes, which has resulted in a petition of over 2000 signatures;

- the lack of openness and transparency in consultation carried out by the current administration and the feelings being expressed by residents that consultation is just a tick box exercise, that they are being ignored by RBK and that the Council is just doing whatever it wants to do; and

- the failure of the Liberal Democrat administration to meet their promise, set out in their 2018 local manifesto, to '', which further reinforces the feeling that RBK will just do whatever it wants to, regardless of the views of residents.

This Council believes:

- the Liberal Democrat council is not engaging with residents; that public consultation has been poor in general but particularly bad in regard to the proposed CPZ charges;

- it is important to find ways to drive behavioural change and improve air quality in the borough by discouraging unnecessary car journeys, encouraging the use of environmentally friendly forms of transport, through less regressive means;

- a regressive tax on older vehicles, whilst allowing newly purchased £100k cars to have free permits, will hit the financially vulnerable the most in our borough; and

- it is imperative that residents feel the council is doing things with residents, not to residents, and, as such, does not consider consultations a 'tick-box' exercise.

This Council resolves to:

                     i.        listen to and engage with our residents;

                    ii.        be sure we have identified groups that need to be included in our consultations and communications;

                   iii.        properly consult with our residents on issues that affect them;

                   iv.        be accountable to our residents;

                    v.  ...  view the full agenda text for item 90.

Minutes:

(1)  The Council agreed to bring forward this item on the agenda because of the large numbers of members of the public attending for it.

(2) Standing Order 7(A) provides for a minimum of 500 interested people to present at any ordinary meeting of the Council a motion for debate relevant to an issue which affects the Royal Borough. 

(3)  In accordance with the Standing Order the following community motion was presented by Mr James Giles:

 “Demanding Better on Resident Parking

A.   "This Council notes:

(i)         the failure of the Liberal Democrat administration to meet their promises, set out in their 2018 local manifesto, to "", and instead pursue a regressive tax on residents living within CPZs;

(ii)       the huge public outcry in response to these changes, which has resulted in a petition of over 2000 signatures;

(iii)      the lack of openness and transparency in consultation carried out by the current administration and the feelings being expressed by residents that consultation is just a tick box exercise, that they are being ignored by RBK and that the Council is just doing whatever it wants to do; and

(iv)      the failure of the Liberal Democrat administration to meet their promise, set out in their 2018 local manifesto, to '', which further reinforces the feeling that RBK will just do whatever it wants to, regardless of the views of residents.

B.   This Council believes:

(i)         the Liberal Democrat Council is not engaging with residents; that public consultation has been poor in general but particularly bad in regard to the proposed CPZ charges;

(ii)       it is important to find ways to drive behavioural change and improve air quality in the borough by discouraging unnecessary car journeys, encouraging the use of environmentally friendly forms of transport, through less regressive means;

(iii)      a regressive tax on older vehicles, whilst allowing newly purchased £100k cars to have free permits, will hit the financially vulnerable the most in our borough; and

(iv)      it is imperative that residents feel the Council is doing things with residents, not to residents, and, as such, does not consider consultations a 'tick-box' exercise.

C.   This Council resolves to:

(i)         listen to and engage with our residents;

(ii)       be sure we have identified groups that need to be included in our consultations and communications;

(iii)      properly consult with our residents on issues that affect them;

(iv)      be accountable to our residents;

(v)       make sure senior Administration politicians are answerable to our residents for policy and that they do not stand behind Council officers who are employed to implement policy agreed by politicians; and

(vi)      in light of the thousands of residents who have displayed their opposition to the proposed CPZ charges, to immediately halt the rollout of changes to resident parking permits, and seek a better way forward."

 

(4)  A briefing paper had been circulated prior to the Council meeting to assist Members to debate this Community Motion.  The Council heard representations from ten members of the community as follows: Stephen Reilly,  ...  view the full minutes text for item 90.

91.

Motion on Air Quality

In accordance with Standing Order No 8(A)(5), the Council will debate a motion which has been submitted by Members of the Council.

This will alternate, from meeting to meeting, between a motion submitted on behalf of the Administration and a motion submitted on behalf of Opposition Members of the Council.

The following Motion has been received from the Conservative Group:

Proposed by Councillor David Cunningham

Seconded by Councillor Kevin Davis

 

This Council notes that:

1.            Air quality is a concern for residents and this Council;

2.            The latest figures available demonstrate that on average there are 5 attributable deaths people per ward in the Borough from PM2.5 pollution (NB this does not mean that this number die, but that this is the equivalent level of pollution total pollution-related deaths) Source: Air Quality Information for Public Health Professionals  - Greater London Authority;

3.            Since 2012 we have seen improvements in air quality in 24 of the 40 areas that we monitor;

4.            There have been improvements in our 2 worst polluted areas of Cromwell Road and Tolworth roundabout but that there have been significant increases in pollution on areas of the Kingston relief Road and near the Cambridge estate.

This Council believes that:

Despite what has been done more action is required to tackle this public health problem and that it needs to be done quickly.

This Council resolves that:

1.            The Administration brings forward in 60 days a new air quality implementation plan that:

a.            is discussed at the Environment and Sustainability Committee on 24 June  2019, and recommended to Full Council to debate and agree at the meeting of the 9 July 2019;

b.            brings forward a costed plan to implement on-street electric charging on residential roads and prevent trailing cables littering the streets where owners have no driveways;

c.             consults on and introduces an anti-idling scheme and fines for taxis, mini-cabs and cars at stations and schools;

d.            works with schools on main transport routes to bring forward a costed plan and timescale for implementation of defensive air quality measures on school boundaries;

e.            designs and consults on changes to the relief road in Kingston;

f.              creates a costed plan for “after GO cycle” to demonstrate the future ongoing commitment of this council to cycling and ensure that the Mayor’s GO Cycle money is good value through further council investment;

g.            consults and costs a cycle hire scheme that works for all the Borough and not just transport nodes.

h.            creates a plan for green screens, walls and algae tubes at major transport nodes, in particular at major bus stops.

 

2.            until such time as this new strategic implementation plan is brought forward, the council will suspend any unilateral schemes that are perceived to improve air quality and are not targeted for implementation across the entire borough until such time as Full Council ratifies the implementation action plan on the 9 July 2019.

3.            agree that any schemes arising out of the new implementation plan  ...  view the full agenda text for item 91.

Minutes:

(1) Standing Order No 8(A)(5) provides for the Council to debate a motion which has been submitted by Members of the Council, alternating, from meeting to meeting, between a motion submitted on behalf of the Administration and a motion submitted on behalf of Opposition Members of the Council.

 

(2) A Motion had been submitted from the Conservative Group on the Council as follows:

“This Council notes that:

1.            Air quality is a concern for residents and this Council;

2.            The latest figures available demonstrate that on average there are 5 attributable deaths people per ward in the Borough from PM2.5 pollution (NB this does not mean that this number die, but that this is the equivalent level of pollution total pollution-related deaths) Source: Air Quality Information for Public Health Professionals  - Greater London Authority;

3.            Since 2012 we have seen improvements in air quality in 24 of the 40 areas that we monitor;

4.            There have been improvements in our two worst polluted areas of Cromwell Road and Tolworth roundabout, but that there have been significant increases in pollution on areas of the Kingston Relief Road and near the Cambridge Estate.

“This Council believes that:

Despite what has been done more action is required to tackle this public health problem and that it needs to be done quickly.

“This Council resolves that:

1.            The Administration brings forward in 60 days a new air quality implementation plan that:

a.         is discussed at the Environment and Sustainability Committee on 24 June  2019, and recommended to Full Council to debate and agree at the meeting of the 9 July 2019;

b.         brings forward a costed plan to implement on-street electric charging on residential roads and prevent trailing cables littering the streets where owners have no driveways;

c.         consults on and introduces an anti-idling scheme and fines for taxis, mini-cabs and cars at stations and schools;

d.         works with schools on main transport routes to bring forward a costed plan and timescale for implementation of defensive air quality measures on school boundaries;

e.         designs and consults on changes to the relief road in Kingston;

f.          creates a costed plan for “after GO cycle” to demonstrate the future ongoing commitment of this council to cycling and ensure that the Mayor’s GO Cycle money is good value through further council investment;

g.         consults and costs a cycle hire scheme that works for all the Borough and not just transport nodes;

h.         creates a plan for green screens, walls and algae tubes at major transport nodes, in particular at major bus stops.

2.            Until such time as this new strategic implementation plan is brought forward, the Council will suspend any unilateral schemes that are perceived to improve air quality and are not targeted for implementation across the entire borough until such time as Full Council ratifies the implementation action plan on the 9 July 2019.

3.            Agree that any schemes arising out of the new implementation plan must be subject to full public engagement and consultation  ...  view the full minutes text for item 91.

92.

Cambridge Road Estate Redevelopment Joint Venture Contract Award pdf icon PDF 117 KB

To consider the report with recommendations at Appendix C of the agenda pack.

Additional documents:

Minutes:

The Council agreed to bring forward this item on the agenda because of the large numbers of members of the public attending for it.

The Council considered a report at Appendix C of its agenda pack which incorporated a report to and recommendations from the Finance and Contracts Committee meeting on 18 March 2019 relating to the mechanisms through which the Council will enter into a joint venture to deliver the redevelopment of the Cambridge Road Estate.  (The report included in Annex 1 Enclosure 2 commercially sensitive elements of the procurement exercise outcomes which are exempt from disclosure to the public in accordance with the provisions of paragraph 3 of Part 1 of Schedule 12A to the Local Government Act 1972 and were consequently circulated separately to Members of the Council.) Members also had regard to the two petitions on this topic which had been heard earlier in the meeting.

Cambridge Road Estate (CRE) is a council estate of over 830 homes in Norbiton Ward, built in the late 1960s and early 1970s and now in need of major investment.  Over the last two years the Council has been preparing the ground for a comprehensive phased regeneration of the area.  This included undertaking a procurement process to secure a suitably qualified and experienced developer partner to enter into a 50:50 joint venture with the Council to deliver a comprehensive redevelopment, including new homes and community facilities that meet modern standards.  It is a key priority of the Council to ensure that residents are at the heart of the regeneration plans.

The Committee recommended that Countryside Properties (UK) Ltd, previously identified as the preferred bidder, should now be awarded the contract and a Limited Liability Partnership (LLP) be established with Countryside in order to bring forward the development of the estate. 

 

RESOLVED that:

1.            the contract be awarded to Countryside Properties (UK) Ltd;

2.            a Limited Liability Partnership (LLP) be established;

3.            authority be delegated to the Finance and Contracts Committee to: (a) appoint RBK councillors and officer representatives to the LLP Board and any other related body; and (b) review and approve LLP Business Plans; and

4.            authority is delegated to the Director of Growth (in consultation with the Director of Corporate and Commercial, Leaders, relevant Administration Portfolio Holders, and Opposition Spokespeople) to agree the name of the Joint Venture LLP, negotiate the final detailed terms of the agreements being entered into, and agree that the Council enter into the following agreements:

·                LLP Members’ Agreement

·                Development Agreement

·                Completion Agreement

·                Phase Lease and Works Agreement

·                CPO Indemnity Agreement

·                Project Management Agreement

·                Construction Management Agreement

·                Corporate Services Agreement

·                Any ancillary agreements or documents necessary to give effect to the setting up of the Joint Venture LLP in accordance with the agenda report and its appendices

Voting:

For: 39 Members of the Council (The Deputy Mayor (Councillor Olivia Boult) and Councillors Zain Abbas, Stephanie Archer, Roy Arora, Kim Bailey, Tricia Bamford, Rowena Bass, Mark Beynon, Tim Cobbett, David Cunningham, Emily Davey, Kevin  ...  view the full minutes text for item 92.

93.

Motion: Declaration of Climate Emergency

In accordance with Standing Order No 8(A)(3) and (6), the following Motion has been submitted by the Administration – to be moved and seconded without comment and stand referred without discussion to the Environment and Sustainable Transport Committee.

 

Proposed by Councillor Hilary Gander

Seconded by Councillor Sam Foulder-Hughes

 

Climate Emergency Motion

 

This Council notes:

(i)            the impacts of climate breakdown are already causing serious damage  around the world;

(ii)          unfortunately, while current plans and actions locally are making a difference, they are not enough. The world is on track to overshoot the Paris Agreement’s 1.5°C limit before 2050;

(iii)         the ‘Special Report on Global Warming of 1.5°C’, published by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change in October 2018;

(a)       describes the enormous harm that a 2°C average rise in global temperatures is likely to cause compared with a 1.5°C rise; and

(b) confirms that limiting Global Warming to 1.5°C may still be possible with ambitious action from national and sub-national authorities, civil society and the private sector.

(iv)         all governments (national, regional and local) have a duty to act, and local governments that recognise this should not wait for their national governments to change their policies;

(v)          strong policies to cut emissions also have associated health, wellbeing and economic benefits; and that recognising this;

(vi)         a growing number of UK local authorities have already passed 'Climate Emergency' motions; and

(vii)        individuals cannot be expected to make this reduction on their own. Society needs to change its laws, taxation, infrastructure, etc. to make low carbon living easier and the new norm.

This Council resolves to:

(i)            declare a ‘Climate Emergency’ that requires urgent action;

(ii)          establish a new working group, with a remit to:

(a)  draw together the work of the Council, already underway, to reduce the impacts of climate change, identify gaps and develop a plan that aims to set a challenging target date of 2038 for carbon neutrality and a baseline figure from which achievement will be measured;

(iii)         seek advice from experts to develop 5-year carbon budgets, across all the Council’s activities;

(iv)         consider the climate change impact of the Council’s activities to inform the action plan;

(v)          to assess the feasibility of requiring all risk and procurement assessments to   include Carbon Emission Appraisals, including presenting alternative approaches which reduce emissions wherever possible;

(vi)         the working group will include council officers, partners and Members from across the Council;

(vii)        task a director-level officer with responsibility for reducing the carbon emissions resulting from the Council’s activities according to the plan;

(viii)      equip all our staff, particularly those involved with planning, buildings, energy and transport management and procurement of goods and services, with an awareness of the CO2 costs and impacts of everyday activities, and the ability and motivation to reduce emissions;

(ix)         report on the level of investment in the fossil fuel industry that our pensions plan and other investments have, and review the Council’s investment strategy to give due consideration to climate  ...  view the full agenda text for item 93.

Minutes:

(1) In accordance with Standing Order No 8(A)(3) and (6), the following Motion was submitted by the Administration, to stand referred without discussion to the Environment and Sustainable Transport Committee:

‘Climate Emergency

“This Council notes:

(i)            the impacts of climate breakdown are already causing serious damage around the world;

(ii)          unfortunately, while current plans and actions locally are making a difference, they are not enough. The world is on track to overshoot the Paris Agreement’s 1.5°C limit before 2050;

(iii)         the ‘Special Report on Global Warming of 1.5°C’, published by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change in October 2018:

(a)  describes the enormous harm that a 2°C average rise in global temperatures is likely to cause compared with a 1.5°C rise; and

(b) confirms that limiting Global Warming to 1.5°C may still be possible with ambitious action from national and sub-national authorities, civil society and the private sector.

(iv)         all governments (national, regional and local) have a duty to act, and local governments that recognise this should not wait for their national governments to change their policies;

(v)          strong policies to cut emissions also have associated health, wellbeing and economic benefits; and that recognising this;

(vi)         a growing number of UK local authorities have already passed 'Climate Emergency' motions; and

(vii)        individuals cannot be expected to make this reduction on their own. Society needs to change its laws, taxation, infrastructure, etc. to make low carbon living easier and the new norm.

“This Council resolves to:

(i)            declare a ‘Climate Emergency’ that requires urgent action;

(ii)          establish a new working group, with a remit to:

(a)  draw together the work of the Council, already underway, to reduce the impacts of climate change, identify gaps and develop a plan that aims to set a challenging target date of 2038 for carbon neutrality and a baseline figure from which achievement will be measured;

(iii)         seek advice from experts to develop 5-year carbon budgets, across all the Council’s activities;

(iv)         consider the climate change impact of the Council’s activities to inform the action plan;

(v)          to assess the feasibility of requiring all risk and procurement assessments to include Carbon Emission Appraisals, including presenting alternative approaches which reduce emissions wherever possible;

(vi)         the working group will include council officers, partners and Members from across the Council;

(vii)        task a director-level officer with responsibility for reducing the carbon emissions resulting from the Council’s activities according to the plan;

(viii)      equip all our staff, particularly those involved with planning, buildings, energy and transport management and procurement of goods and services, with an awareness of the CO2 costs and impacts of everyday activities, and the ability and motivation to reduce emissions;

(ix)         report on the level of investment in the fossil fuel industry that our pensions plan and other investments have, and review the Council’s investment strategy to give due consideration to climate change impacts in the investment portfolio;

(x)          work towards involving the wider community, including local businesses and our  ...  view the full minutes text for item 93.

94.

Questions

In accordance with Standing Order 6 (1&2) replies will be given to questions of which notice has been given  which may be addressed to the Mayor, the Leader of the Council, Portfolio Holders,  the Leader of the Opposition, Chairs of the Standing and Neighbourhood Committees and Members representing the Council on Outside Bodies.

 

Minutes:

In accordance with Standing Order 6 (1&2), 37 Council questions had been submitted, of which a maximum of 7 were to receive replies at the meeting (the remainder to receive replies in writing).

 

However, given the lateness of the meeting, it was RESOLVED that all the Council Questions would receive replies in writing.  [The written replies to all the Council Questions are included in Annex 1 to the minutes of the meeting.]

 

Voting - unanimous

 

95.

LGA Corporate Peer Review [Finance and Contracts Committee - 4 April 2019] pdf icon PDF 55 KB

To consider the report with recommendations at Appendix B of the agenda pack.

Additional documents:

Minutes:

The Council considered a report at Appendix B of its agenda pack which incorporated a report to and recommendations from the Finance and Contracts Committee meeting on 4 April 2019 relating to the LGA Peer Review of the Council.

 

At the Council’s request, the Local Government Association (LGA) had conducted a Corporate Peer Review of the organisation during January 2019 in order to support the Council’s transformation and improvement - and so that the Council could learn from best practice.  LGA Corporate Peer Reviews are based around a standard framework comprising the following themes: our understanding of the local place and priority setting; leadership of place; financial planning and viability; organisational leadership and governance; and capacity to deliver.  In addition to these standard themes, the Council asked for the review to look deeper at the financial planning and viability element and to consider the Council’s ambitions in relation to improving community engagement.

 

The Peer Review final report and recommendations which had been published on the Council’s website on 14 March 2019 were incorporated in the report to the Council.

 

Overwhelmingly, the Review Team were struck by the potential and opportunity that exists for the Council, both as an organisation and as a leader of place:  The Council has much to call upon to drive things forward, including a committed and talented workforce, a passionate elected membership and the goodwill of partners.  The prospect of harnessing all of this and uniting it behind fulfilling the potential and the opportunity means that these are very exciting times for Kingston’.  The key recommendations of the Review report were summarised as follows:

 

the Royal Borough of Kingston upon Thames should:

·         capitalise upon the opportunity as an organisation and a leader of place, involving establishing a clear vision and sense of purpose.

·         seize the place leadership through building relationships with partners.

·         establish a single, shared understanding about the scale of the financial challenges being faced and mechanisms that provide real grip and rigour around the delivery of savings and budget spend.

·         bring about greatly improved communication across the Council.

·         establish greater collective leadership of corporate and strategic issues.

·         determine what community engagement means in Kingston and the approaches to be adopted.

·         continue the review of the council’s Constitution and governance arrangements.

·         conclude the organisational restructure in as timely a fashion as possible.

·         prioritise/sequence the corporate system and process changes that the Council recognises are needed and then inject pace and rigour at each stage.

 

The Finance and Contracts Committee had resolved that authority be delegated to the Chief Executive, in consultation with the Leader of the Council, to develop a Council action plan to respond to the recommendations of the Peer Review.  This Action Plan was attached as Annex 2 to the report to Council.   The Action Plan expands on the initial response of the Strategic Leadership Team, listing the activity that is underway or will be undertaken to take on board the recommendations of the Peer Review.  Each activity has a senior  ...  view the full minutes text for item 95.

96.

Appointment of Monitoring Officer

A local authority is legally required to designate certain statutory officer posts, among which is the role of Monitoring Officer under the provisions of Section 5 of the Local Government and Housing Act1989.  The primary role of the Monitoring Officer is to ensure lawfulness and fairness of decision making.   The Monitoring Officer contributes to the promotion and maintenance of high standards of conduct through the provision of support to the Audit, Governance and Standards Committee.  The officer is also responsible for the maintenance of the Register of Members’ Interests and the separate Register of Gifts and Hospitality and provides advice on the scope of powers and authority to take decisions, maladministration, financial impropriety, and budget and policy framework issues to all Councillors.

 

A local authority is legally required to designate certain statutory officer posts, among which is the role of Monitoring Officer under the provisions of Section 5 of the Local Government and Housing Act1989.  The primary role of the Monitoring Officer is to ensure lawfulness and fairness of decision making.   The Monitoring Officer contributes to the promotion and maintenance of high standards of conduct through the provision of support to the Audit, Governance and Standards Committee.  The officer is also responsible for the maintenance of the Register of Members’ Interests and the separate Register of Gifts and Hospitality and provides advice on the scope of powers and authority to take decisions, maladministration, financial impropriety, and budget and policy framework issues to all Councillors.

In view of the forthcoming departure from the Council of the current Monitoring Officer (and Assistant Director, Governance and Law), Quentin Baker, it is necessary to appoint a suitable replacement on a temporary basis, pending a permanent appointment to this position.

Marie Rosenthal qualified as a solicitor in 1983 and has worked in senior positions in a number of local authorities including Hertfordshire CC, Swindon BC, and City of Cardiff Council.

It is recommended that Marie Rosenthal be designated as the Council’s Monitoring Officer with immediate effect for the period until a new Assistant Director of Governance and Law is appointed.

 

 

Minutes:

A local authority is legally required to designate certain statutory officer posts, among which is the role of Monitoring Officer under the provisions of Section 5 of the Local Government and Housing Act1989.  The primary role of the Monitoring Officer is to ensure lawfulness and fairness of decision making.   The Monitoring Officer contributes to the promotion and maintenance of high standards of conduct through the provision of support to the Audit, Governance and Standards Committee.  The officer is also responsible for the maintenance of the Register of Members’ Interests and the separate Register of Gifts and Hospitality and provides advice on the scope of powers and authority to take decisions, maladministration, financial impropriety, and budget and policy framework issues to all Councillors.

In view of the forthcoming departure from the Council of the current Monitoring Officer (and Assistant Director, Governance and Law), Quentin Baker, it was necessary to appoint a suitable replacement on a temporary basis pending a permanent appointment to that position.

 

Resolved that Marie Rosenthal be designated as the Council’s Monitoring Officer with immediate effect for the period until a new Assistant Director of Governance and Law is appointed.

 

Voting - unanimous

97.

Returning Officer and Electoral Registration Officer

The statutory functions of Returning Officer (RO) for Elections and Referenda, and Electoral Registration Officer (ERO) are currently undertaken by the Assistant Director of Governance and Law (who is currently designated as the Proper Officer for these functions within the Council’s Constitution).

The Electoral Registration Officer is responsible for the preparation and maintenance of the registers of parliamentary electors for any parliamentary constituency (or part of a constituency) within its area, and of local government electors for its area.  The Returning Officer holds personal statutory responsibility for the effective delivery of these elections.

In view of the forthcoming departure from the Council of the current Assistant Director of Governance and Law, Quentin Baker, it is necessary to designate a Returning Officer and Electoral Registration Officer.

 

Recommended that:

 

1.         in accordance with the Representation of the People Act 1983 and all related legislation, Ian Thomas, the Chief Executive (Head of Paid Service) of the Council, is appointed with immediate effect as:

(a)                Returning Officer, and designated the Proper Officer for the purposes of Elections and Referenda; and

(b)                Electoral Registration Officer;  and

 

2.         the Monitoring Officer is authorised to make any consequential changes to the Constitution and Scheme of Delegations.

 

Minutes:

The statutory functions of Returning Officer (RO) for Elections and Referenda, and Electoral Registration Officer (ERO) are currently undertaken by the Assistant Director of Governance and Law (who is designated as the Proper Officer for these functions within the Council’s Constitution).

 

The Electoral Registration Officer is responsible for the preparation and maintenance of the registers of parliamentary electors for any parliamentary constituency (or part of a constituency) within its area, and of local government electors for its area.  The Returning Officer holds personal statutory responsibility for the effective delivery of these elections.

 

In view of the departure from the Council of the Assistant Director of Governance and Law,  it was necessary to designate a Returning Officer and Electoral Registration Officer.

 

Resolved that:

 

1.            in accordance with the Representation of the People Act 1983 and all related legislation, Ian Thomas, the Chief Executive (Head of Paid Service) of the Council is appointed with immediate effect as:-

(a)        Returning Officer, and designated the Proper Officer for the purposes of Elections and Referenda; and

(b)        Electoral Registration Officer; and

2.            the Monitoring Officer is authorised to make any consequential changes to the Constitution and Scheme of Delegations.

 

Voting - unanimous

98.

Statutory and Proper Officer Functions

Following the establishment of the role of Corporate Head of Democratic and Electoral Services, it is recommended that the following Statutory and Proper Officer functions listed in Article 11.01(c) which were allocated to the Democratic Services Team Leader are now allocated to the Corporate Head of Democratic and Electoral Services:

 

Statutory Officer:

·         Scrutiny Officer

 

Proper Office functions:

·         Notice of political groups

·         Certification of copies of minutes, byelaws or other documents

Minutes:

Following the establishment of the role of Corporate Head of Democratic and Electoral Services, it was resolved that the following Statutory and Proper Officer functions listed in Article 11.01(c) of the Constitution, which had been previously allocated to the Democratic Services Team Leader, be allocated to the Corporate Head of Democratic and Electoral Services:

 

Statutory Officer:

        Scrutiny Officer

 

Proper Office functions:

        Notice of political groups

        Certification of copies of minutes, byelaws or other documents

 

Voting - unanimous

99.

Approval of Member absence

The law provides that where a Council member fails throughout a period of six consecutive months from the date of their last attendance to attend any meetings of the authority then, subject to certain exceptions, they cease to be a member of the authority unless the failure was due to some reason approved before the expiry of that period.

 

The authority’s approval if not limited in time (and most authorities in giving approval will specify both the reason to which the approval relates and the period for which it will run), lasts until it ceases to have effect because the councillor has resumed attendance, or the reason to which the approval relates no longer applies or the councillors’ term of office has ended.

 

When ill-health is a reason for absence, it is not always possible to provide a definite time for resumption of attendance.  Therefore the Council is initially requested to approve the absence, on health grounds, of Councillor Fiona Boult until 10 July 2019, as it will potentially be the case that, by late May, Councillor Boult will have been absent from meetings of the Council for six months, on the grounds of ill-health.  (Should the request for a further leave of absence be required, this would be submitted to the Council meeting on 9 July 2019.)

 

 

Minutes:

The Council considered a report on apologies submitted on health grounds by a member of the Council which had been submitted because it would potentially be the case, by late May, that Councillor Fiona Boult would have been absent from meetings of the Council for six months.

 

Resolved that approval of absence, on health grounds, be given to Councillor Fiona Boult for a period of absence until 10 July 2019.

 

Voting - unanimous

100.

Appointments to the Health and Wellbeing Board

The Council is RECOMMENDED to make the following appointments to the Health and Wellbeing Board:

 

(1) Following the retirement of Siobhan Clarke as Managing Director of Your Healthcare CIC), it is recommended that Ed Montgomery, who is currently one of Siobhan’s alternates on the Health and Wellbeing Board, and is to be appointed the interim Managing Director of Your Healthcare, be appointed as the (non-voting) advisory member representing Your Healthcare on the Health and Wellbeing Board, replacing Ms Clarke - with Grant Henderson continuing as alternate Board member.

 

 

(2) It is recommended that Dr Annette Pautz be appointed as alternate for all three representatives from the Clinical Commissioning Group (Dr Naz Jivani, Dr Phil Moore and Dr Pete Smith) who are voting (non-elected) members of the Health and Wellbeing Board.  (Dr Pautz was previously appointed solely as Dr Jivani's alternate.)

 

Minutes:

RESOLVED that the following appointments be made to the Health and Wellbeing Board:

 

(1) Ed Montgomery, interim Managing Director of Your Healthcare CIC, be appointed as the (non-voting) advisory member representing Your Healthcare (replacing Siobhan Clarke, who has retired).  [Grant Henderson to continue as alternate Board member.]

 

(2) Dr Annette Pautz be appointed as alternate for all three representatives from the Clinical Commissioning Group (Dr Naz Jivani, Dr Phil Moore and Dr Pete Smith) who are voting (non-elected) members of the Board. 

 

Voting – unanimous

101.

Election of the Mayor for 2019/20

At the Council meeting on 20 March 2001 it was agreed that, other than in an Election Year, the Mayor should be elected at the Ordinary Council meeting immediately preceding the Annual Meeting.  (In an Election Year the Mayoral election would take place at the Annual Meeting, as it did in 2018.)

 

Accordingly, the Council is asked to elect the Mayor for the Royal Borough for the Municipal Year 2019/20.

 

Nominations received will be circulated for the Council meeting.

 

The formal installation of the Mayor will take place at the Annual Meeting on 14 May 2019

 

 

Minutes:

At the Council meeting on 20 March 2001 it was agreed that, other than in an Election Year, the Mayor should be elected at the Ordinary Council meeting immediately preceding the Annual Meeting.

 

One nomination was submitted - from the Liberal Democrat Group - in the name of Councillor Margaret Thompson.

 

There being no other nominations, the Mayor duly declared Councillor Margaret Thompson elected as Mayor of the Royal Borough for the Municipal Year 2019/20.

 

[The formal installation of Councillor Thompson as Mayor would take place at the Annual Meeting on 14 May.]

 

 

102.

Urgent Items authorised by the Mayor

 

 

To consider any items which, in the view of the Mayor, should be dealt with as a matter of urgency because of special circumstances in accordance with S100B(4) of the Local Government Act 1972.

 

 

 

 

Background Papers  held by Democratic Support 020 8547 5023

 

  • Relevant Committee Agendas.

Minutes:

There were no urgent items authorised by the Mayor.

103.

Exclusion of the Press and Public

The following resolution is included as a standard item which will only be relevant if any exempt matter is to be considered at the meeting for which the Committee wish to resolve to exclude the press and public:

 

To exclude the public from the meeting under Section 100(A)(4) of the Local Government Act 1972 on the grounds that it is likely that exempt information, as defined in paragraph *….of Part I of Schedule 12A to the Act, would be disclosed and the public interest in maintaining the exemption outweighs the public interest in disclosing the information.

 

(*relevant regulatory paragraph to be indicated)

 

104.

Annex to the Minutes- Written Replies to Council Questions

Minutes:

 

Annex 1

 

WRITTEN REPLIES TO COUNCIL QUESTIONS

 

 

By Councillor Sam Foulder-Hughes

 

To Councillor Diane White, Portfolio Holder for Children’s Services including Education

 

Question:

 

What are we doing to lobby Government to make sure Headteachers never have to clean toilets?

 

Written reply:

 

The Council recognises that schools are facing significant financial pressure in running schools within the funding level that is being made available by Government through the Dedicated Schools Grant. 

The Administration is committed to not reducing schools budgets by transferring funding from the schools block to allow for high needs service funding pressures without the agreement of the Schools Forum. 

Council officers have met with the DfE a number of times since May to discuss the funding pressures for education and has highlighted the pressures being faced by local schools at these meetings as well as the escalating funding gap for high needs education.

Sir Ed Davey MP, with the support of the Leader and Portfolio holder, has also actively lobbied Ministers for more resources for education.

 

 

By Councillor Roy Arora

 

To Councillor Malcolm Self, Portfolio holder for Planning Policy, Culture and Heritage

 

Question:

 

Can the Portfolio Holder now answer the question concerning the programme for the Housing Delivery Test first asked for on the 12 March 2019 and then promised to all members of the SHAP Committee on the 19 March 2019? Can the Member also tell us the style of consultation he proposes on this issue?

 

Reply:

 

Initial work has commenced on pulling together details of the Housing Delivery Test results for the Council and some proposals that would form the basis of a draft Action Plan.

The next steps are for there to be a meeting with myself as the Portfolio Holder and the Opposition Spokesperson for planning to run through the issues.

This would then provide a steer for officers to continue the development of the Action Plan with the target of it being presented to the June meeting of the Strategic Housing and Planning Committee.

It is too early at this stage to confirm what steps the Council might seek to use as part of the proposed Action Plan.

Therefore we are not in a position to make a decision on the type of consultation that might be undertaken, as this would be directly related to the detail of these suggested activities.

 

 

By Councillor Tricia Bamford

 

To Councillor Margaret Thompson, Portfolio Holder for Adult Social Care

 

Question:

 

What do you think of the Government missing its own deadline for a sixth time to publish details of the care system reforms for disabled adults and older people?

 

Reply:

 

The publication of the Green Paper has been delayed several times: it was originally due to be published in “summer 2017”. The latest position is that it will be published “at the earliest opportunity”, although the Health and Social Care Secretary had previously said in January 2019 that he “certainly intended for that [publication] to happen before April [2019]”.

The original rationale for the Green Paper  ...  view the full minutes text for item 104.