Transcript

Therefore please could I ask that all attendees turn on their microphone when they are invited to speak and remember to turn off their microphone when they have finished speaking. Please note that this is a council meeting being held in public and not a public meeting. All remarks therefore should be addressed through me as chair. Please note that we are not expecting a fire alarm this evening so if an alarm is found, sounded, you will follow my instructions to evacuate the building. As usual each question will be introduced by the relevant executive member, followed by an opportunity of members of the council to ask questions, followed by members of the public to ask questions. And the questions must be related to the item being deliberated. When questions on each item are complete we will then move that item to a vote and once that vote has been taken there will be no further discussion on that item. I would like to reassure everyone that the executive members have read all the papers and appendices supplied for them for this meeting. Please note also that two agenda items this evening have been accompanied by exempt reports which are for information only. We ask members to ensure that they do not make reference to or ask questions about any of the information in the exempt appendices until we have excluded the press or members of the public from that confidential part of the meeting if necessary. And the executive have decided previous to this meeting that that won't be necessary. Thank you. In addition I have agreed that Mr. Martin has requested a deputation this evening relating to item F8, the people-friendly streets individual exemption policy. So therefore I am going to move that item to the beginning of the agenda because I think there is some other interest in this item as well. So that being said, we have to do a few formal matters. Apologies for absence. We received apologies for Councillor Micheline Safi and Gongo. Declarations of interest, any declarations of interest? No. Minutes of the previous meeting being held on the 27th of June 2024. Is there any comments on those minutes? No. Agreed. Thank you very much. Therefore, deputation. Could I please ask Mr. Martin if you could turn on your microphone? I have three minutes for your deputation. Okay, wonderful. Thank you. Good evening. I sat in this chamber in 2021 outlining my concerns about the consultation surrounding low traffic neighbourhoods. And not to say that much hasn't changed, but I could have used that very same deputation this evening and the same points would be equally valid. And let's recap on what I said. A lack of consultation with the 9000 blue badge holders. A failure to properly consult with disabled workers and business. And the greatly anticipated disabled focus group, which has never materialised. And turning to the EQIA document. The whole premise of this qualification criteria is flawed. Essentially, the council introduced a road policy, making it more difficult for disabled people to function in everyday life, and then offered the crumbs of equality by an exemption policy. And the currency of this policy is pain. If you suffer psychological distress or agony for sitting too long, the council will, after an arduous application process, consider allowing you to go about your everyday life. The council have successfully shrink-wrapped the vast array of disabilities into just two. This does mean that the disabled person with no arms and no legs is potentially ineligible for this exemption. And let's remember what the policy says. We can't have disabled people going around their daily life. It may dilute the benefits of low traffic neighbourhoods. Too much air and noise pollution. I shall not apologise for being a noise pollutant this evening. Because after 18 months of my reasonable adjustment being ignored, and only acknowledged when I issued proceedings against the council, it is quite refreshing to actually have a voice. And I thank the council taxpayers here this evening for underwriting the actions of the council. You will note the impact on disabled workers has been negligently omitted. Not a single paragraph detailing consultation with disabled employees and business owners. There is reference to 16% of disabled residents in Islington, but no record of how many disabled people work in Islington. Do the council not consider disabled people worthy of the local economy? Because you've made no provision for it. Now it is also carers who have been affected. The policy allows one vehicle to be nominated. Does the mum who has three children who care for her now have to pick a favourite child? Because this is the consequence of your policy. In summary, it is too little. It has taken far too long and it's too cruel. And with only 79 exemptions allowed out of 9,000 blue-batch holders, it is clear that this was a deliberate attempt to exclude more than include. I now urge the council to free the disabled and rethink their policies. [Applause] Thank you Mr Martin. We will now move on to the substantive item, item B8, people friendly, three individual exemption policy. Councilor Champion will you please introduce the report? Thank you Mr Martin. I'll pick up some of the points that you make when I address that so hopefully I'll explain. I think as we know, an attempt to change our streets is incredibly important. We need to enable more walking, cycling, wheeling and that has a massive and significant benefit to the health and well being of local people. Help children with their independence and also to help people lead healthy lives into their old age. And we know that's really vital because there are a lot of health challenges that we face at the moment and that will only become exacerbated by climate change as it gets hotter. And we know that people with chronic illnesses, disabilities, the young and the old will significantly be impacted by that. In order to try and change our streets we do need to significantly reduce traffic going through them to turn them back to where they were probably about 60 years ago into neighbourhoods. And that also means reallocating road space to make them greener, more absorbent and cooler as it gets hotter. But we absolutely also know that for some people they need to use their vehicles and particularly for some people with disabilities and chronic conditions actually they're very important. And that's why we have given this an awful lot of thought going over the years and we started off bringing in the home LTN policy. So if anyone who lives within an LTN who has a blue badge automatically gets exempted from the filters. We looked at that because historically the other filters across Islington that's not been the case. And I think those low traffic neighbourhoods for example in Waltham Forest didn't have exemptions with them. But when we were looking at it we absolutely thought well actually it's a fair point that if you're doing short journeys you can be required to spend more time in the car. We are asking people to change their behaviour, we are asking people to make some accommodation for the fact that we actually have to, we have to change our streets. And that is really also for the benefit of people like children, people with disabilities, for older people, because we know they are disproportionately impacted by road danger. And we also know they benefit from the ability to walk, cycle and wheel more. We are also looking at how you support things through seating, public toilets, everything that we're looking at is trying to allow people to come out onto the streets. But as I say we do accept the fact that for some people it is important. And as a council as always we look at a range of circumstances. We did also think that for some people, for whom sitting in the vehicle for the reasons set out in the policy is very, very substantially difficult. We ought to make some accommodation. So as I said for the LTN, the home LTN is within your own home LTN as you know. But for this category, the individual exemption category it is for all filters and you don't have to live in Edmonton. I mean I completely accept that we will have disagreements about what we do. I do think having gone through the journey, having spoken about it, this actually is a policy which does take into account all the circumstances and that does include our legal duties under the Equality Act. And I put that forward to the UN Executive tonight. Thank you. Is there any other questions or comments from Executive members? No? Are there any questions from members? Thank you. And thank you Rowena for kind of doing this piece of work to try and make the low traffic neighbourhood exemptions work better for disabled people. I think actually by chance happened to be in a meeting this afternoon with Transport for All and we were talking about the importance of co-design of policies with disabled people's groups and groups representing disabled people. And I note that Transport for All are one of the groups that contributed and fed back on this policy. So I suppose my question is just, do you think that are you confident that the processes for applying for the LTN exemptions by disabled people, that those processes are appropriate? Are you confident that you've co-designed them with organisations representing disabled people? And it's the, I mean, the kind of feedback that I've had as a counsellor from some people has been that the application process has felt very complicated, quite intrusive. And that the kind of medical evidence piece is quite a high bar. And so I just wonder if you can comment on those points. So absolutely one of the points that were made by the disability groups that we spoke to and people with disabilities was actually to make it as simple as possible. And that's one of the reasons in respect to the home LTN we took the view that actually we shouldn't be asking people to apply for that. So it's automatic exemption. When you are looking at something which does have criteria like the individual exemption policy, it is always the case that we would need some evidence. My understanding is, and following on from the discussions we had, we tried to make it as simple as possible. But I think we can always learn and we can always look at our processes. If there are any particular issues that you've got, please do feed into me. But I can always go back and ask the team to look again to make sure that we are making it as simple as possible. I think sometimes it is difficult. I know we have some very committed people in the Blue Badge team who will try and help people and talk them through. But I'm always happy to look again and to ask officers to look again at how we do things. The quote about low traffic neighbourhoods, the whole ones being automatic, they're not. You need to apply for them. They are not automatic. I know because I'm a disabled person who has had to apply for one, so I can tell you they are not automatic. You have to go through an application process. Mine expires in March 2025. I just think because it's a public record it should be accurate. Now we will open up for public questions. Rebecca, do you want to? Just sort of relates to, I would like to thank the council and Executive Memplers finally admitting that disabled people need exemptions to go through the LTM because I think it took a number of years to get to that point. I would like to reiterate Councillor Russell's point of the application process is very stressful. It's a lot of admin work on disabled people that already have a lot of commitment regarding admin and applications for different things. And I would like to know what qualifies the council officers who judge these applications, what qualifies them to look at medical evidence and make these decisions. I think that is something that officers do in many circumstances, like the blue badge team for example. And they do have training to do that. Sorry, hold on, this is not a public meeting. Let us be very clear about that. If you want to raise a point, please indicate with your hand and I can chair this meeting. The gentleman at the back. Council Champion. That is not the system that we use. I have explained why we do that. It is just to make sure we take everybody's needs into account. I completely understand that people feel that we are too restrictive, but when we look at everything, I think this is the scheme we have come up with. It is obviously the case that we will continue to look at it and I am sure there will be some amendments over time. An example of that is the amendment that is coming forward tonight, which is to allow an exemption for a shorter period than previously had been the case. It is not going to go down. Please note that this was just the point of order that you raised in regard to the blue badge team assessing the eligibility. They do not need any medical knowledge for that. It is a letter that comes from the DWP that confirms you are in receipt of specific benefits. If you have any questions, please feel free to respond. The microphone is on.

Is there any questions from members of the public? If I may. Out of all of these documents, I declare that I am a disabled business owner living in Islington. It feels that I have been completely overlooked. This does not usurp the obligations that you have under the Equality Act. Is there a particular reason why me as a disabled person, has my earning ability capped purely because I am disabled? I understand that there has been an assessment of your rights under the Equality Act. My understanding is that as far as my understanding is, we have discharged the Brodishton employer's Act to you. That is my understanding. But I can take it away. Is there any question from anyone who has not answered yet? In which case, can I take that item to a vote? Agreed? Thank you. We will now be moving onto item B1, the medium financial strategy. Councillor would we introduce? If anyone was in any doubt about the financial challenges that the council faces over the next few years, then table two in this document says it all. We have a huge uphill journey to make. And that is on top of the very, very hard choices that we have made, frankly, over the last decade, a decade of austerity. Additionally, Chair, I would draw the meeting's attention to figure one on page 15, which is a very good kind of illustration of our reserves position. Frequently, the question we get as a council is, well, why don't you just spend your reserves? And there are sometimes appropriate ways to spend reserves, for example, on investors to see if items, things like that. But in order to safeguard public money and make sure that we can keep on delivering for the residents of Islington and providing vital services, we do need to keep a very, very close eye on this and make sure we have adequate reserves for all unforeseen occasions. And that's why this table is very, very important. But there will be very, very hard choices in this year's budget and very, very hard choices in the years ahead. But if we don't make those hard choices, we won't be able to keep delivering vital services for the people of the borough. Thank you. Thank you very much, Councillor Ward. Is there any question from the Executive on that item? No? Questions from other councillors? Yes, I mean, this is a really, really worrying position to be in. It's particularly worrying to be in this position just two months into this new financial year. Or two or three months in. I think, yes, I suppose I'd just like to know what's the thing done that keeps you up at night in terms of what do you think of all the risks that you're facing with this budget? Which do you think is the one that is most worrying to you? I know they all are, but... So, there isn't anything that keeps me up at night, because that would be a waste of my time. I'd much rather come into the council and work with all of our officers and all of our members to make sure that we work at this every single day. So there isn't anything that keeps me up at night. It's a strange question, because, you know, obviously, ideally, we'd have been properly funded over the past decade. It really wouldn't be fair of me to say this service is more important than that service. So, no, I'm not sure that... I don't think I was clear with my question. I think what I mean is which of the risks is the risk that you are most concerned may materialise? I mean, again, I don't have a kind of hierarchy of risk on this. I think the most important thing is that we keep on making our savings, keep on making these choices, and keep on delivering. I'd certainly be very, very loathe to produce up the hierarchy of risks, I have to say. And, Mayor Andres, I think it's really important that we recognise that we have an audit committee, a scrutiny committee, that we have, you know, our experts within the corporate team that are monitoring every part of the budget, as well as the executive members around this council, to make sure that we are aware of the risks, we are aware of the mitigations, and we're delivering on those mitigations. It's a question that journalists very often ask, and very often it's kind of a way of getting a headline, so genuinely, I think all of the risks are important. Sorry, I certainly was not trying to ask a journalist question to get a headline. You should, I hope, know me better than that. Wasn't suggesting that question, Russell. Can we desist? Is there any further questions? No? Any questions from members of the public on this item? No? In which case is that item agreed? Thank you. I understand that the members of the public are here on item, on the Finsbury Leisure, is that correct? Right, okay. In which case, I will move that item forward, so item B5, the redevelopment of the Finsbury Leisure Centre, Councillor Halloran, will you please introduce? Thank you, Chair. A year ago we had committed to bring back an update to this committee. The purpose of this report is to update the exec on the viability of this scheme and how we're managing risk. Tonight's paper is not about the scheme itself, that is a matter for the planning committee at a much later date. On balance, the scheme still has significant benefits. To summarise, as you will see the costs have gone up, primarily extreme pressures include the cost of concrete, professional fees associated with the new safety requirements due to the Safety Act, which we would never compromise. However, as the report shows, we have a degree of construction cost certainty at this stage, as well as a number of risk mitigations including a contingency of 32 million in which 26% of the total scheme cost supported through pre-construction service agreement, which provides the council independent construction advice sector. A series of prudence assumptions on interest rates, inflation and sales values and any improvement on these with the costing of borrowing. To confirm, subject to the planning permission, a further report will come to the executive to seek approval to move to the construction stage. Thank you. Is there any question from executive members on this item? No? Any questions from other councils? Yes, just briefly, has Sport England fed back on these proposals? On the costing proposal? Yes. Hi Councillor Russell, so we've had initial consultation and feedback from Sport England as part of the pre-application process and then as a statutory consultee, they will consult when we move forward with the planning application. Any further questions? Questions from members of the public, sorry. So the council will sacrifice one of the last open communal spaces at the Finsborough Leisure Centre in one of the second most densely populated areas in the country. Most of the 51 mature trees in the site, a place where children and youth actually spend time and play, will get into enormous financial risk and this is a moment, you know, where budgets are tight. All that to alleviate 0.66% of the housing registrar, not even 1% of the problem. How are you planning to solve the housing crisis? I wouldn't call 100 homes, a much 100 needed homes for social housing a small thing. Every single councillor, it is our number one priority to build homes, homes, homes. We have inboxes of people living in overcrowding, you know, and it is our priority and this scheme, when it goes through process, not only will have homes, we'll have a new medical centre and a new updated, graded sports facility, which I think is much needed. Thank you. Any other questions? Hi there. Yeah, I have a question about cost. As you've been talking about cost and this gentleman here has already told us that the council is in dire financial trouble. I understand this project is going to cost 160 million pounds from the document that's been released. This is predicated on selling private flats at a certain price. I don't think, and anyone who knows the property market in Bunhill will tell you, the market is falling. You're making these assumptions on very, very shaky financial grounds which could end up with you holding the baby of a very, very unprofitable project. So my question to you is, have you really, shouldn't you just take a step back and look at this again, given the economics of housing in the area, given the scale of opposition to the project, when you're in a hole, stop digging. Councillor Hillary. We're committed to bringing this report tonight and this scheme is still viable. Like I said, we need the new homes, the new leisure facility and the new doctor's surgery. That's not what I asked. The scheme is still viable. Councillor, our questions have not been answered. There's none in the chequesha indicated. I just want to know that our questions have not been answered. I ask, how are you going to resolve the housing crisis? Councillor Halloran mentioned new build, but we can also talk about what we're doing to buy back. Do you want to add on those and the flow of…? So this council has already bought, has already had money from deluxe and the mayor of London and we've already bought back 257 homes, I think in the last year. We are committed to doing all we can to keep building on small sites wherever we can. We are a small borough and we have 15,000 people on the waiting list. Can I ask about the funding also? Because whereas the documentation that's been released by the project kind of implies that it's going to be paid, the project will be paid for by the sale of private flats. Except the documentation only says it will be partly paid. But it seems to me from this document here that only something like 50% of it in fact will be paid from the sale of private flats which, as Geoff just mentioned, is potentially open to some doubt. It seems there's a lot of other borrowing going against that, some 9 million of which is even unfunded. This doesn't seem to be a very solid basis upon which to fund the project. Could you give me your comments on that, please? Stephen Biggs. Yeah, good evening. I mean, coming back to the sales values you'll see in the report that we've taken a prudent assumption of sales values in the areas. And you'll see towards the end of the report there's, what's referred to as the sensitivity analysis, shows that if those sales values increase, then that will increase the level of income. But the 79 million pounds that you quote is based on what we consider to be a prudent assessment of sales values as of today. You can see all the detail which has been validated by external experts. In terms of the overall scheme and the borrowing, you'll see again in the report that all of the borrowing in the report is funded, either from the Ettering and General Fund, so you have to cancel out bye. Comment and response at the moment the scheme is viable and fully funded. Can I just ask about the private homes that are for sale? There's nothing in the documentation that's been released to the community which indicates the nature of these. Well there are 98 of them, but are they one bed, two bed, three bed, what? Because the estimate, if you divide the 76 million by 98, it's about 765,000 per unit. Now that would be very expensive for a one bedroom unit and still expensive for a two bedroom unit. Can you tell us what the makeup of these houses is? So there are a mix of one and two bedroom units, and as I said earlier on they reflect sales values in the area. I think you'd find it difficult to achieve 765,000 for a one bedroom unit. Is that item agreed? Thank you. We will now move back to Item B2, Islington Together, Next Steps. This is an item that I'm introducing. We all know the Islington Together corporate plan that we agreed to years ago on the back of our manifesto. A year in, almost nine months into having a new chief exec in Victoria Lawson, the chief exec has undertaken a review of where we are in terms of the delivery of that plan and the next steps we need to continue to deliver on our priorities and our five missions. Is there any questions from members of the exec on that item? No. Any questions from other Councillors? No. Any questions from members of the public? No. In which case does that item agree? Thank you very much. We move on to Item B3, which in Councillor Ngongo's absence I will also be introducing. The mayor's item looks at the extremely important issue of food insecurity for families. I present a paper proposing to amalgamate free funds that we currently have in the household support fund, the mayor's funding for food and other fund to amalgamate that so that we can have great escape to support families with food insecurity. Is there any questions on that item? Any questions from other Councillors? Thank you. In which case, on sensibility, is that item agreed? No. Okay. Great. Item B4, Major Work Payment Option Review. Councillor Hallivan will you please introduce? Thank you, Chair. I'm really pleased to be bringing this paper tonight. As a Council, we're always looking at being a fairer Council. And this will definitely give fairer options to leaseholders in a time when we know prices of things are going up, so it's more affordable. So if you look at 2.1, to offer a five-year interest-free option to both resident and non-resident leaseholders, to reduce the threshold for 10-year payment plans from 10K to 6K, making bills more affordable for resident leaseholders, to introduce a longer payment term, up to 25 years, for resident leaseholders, with invoices of at least 15K, and to continue offering voluntary charges for bills of at least 3K to resident leaseholders who are elderly or vulnerable or can't afford any other payment option. So I really think this is the right thing to do this time. Thank you. Can I ask if there are any questions from Executive Members on that? Any questions from other Councillors? Yes. Apologies, because I have not had time to read this paper in detail, or hardly at all. But I do welcome the fact that you are addressing the issue of leaseholders struggling with bills for major works, because these costs are going up so hugely, it is realistic to be trying to help people to manage those bills. And so I welcome that. I just wonder, is there a risk to the Council that for some people these bills will never be payable? And is the assumption that the last resort is that the property is sold and these debts are realised at that point? It's like you've got the five years interest free. What happens if they're not able to start paying after that five years? That's just the bit that I haven't been able to get from skimming. It's definitely laid out there, but Councillor Hel death. It is laid out and every case will be case by case. And there will always be those that may be the case where people can't pay. But we will definitely recuperate it even if it is after death because we have a duty to our tenants as well. But we really are, I mean our options were really reasonable than other councils we've looked at. But these are even more reasonable. Thank you. No questions from members of the public. In which case is that paper agreed? We move on to item B6, the renewal of the lease of Units 9 and 10 Bush Industrial Estate. Councillor Ward. Would you introduce? Has everyone here been to our brilliant joinery and workshop and training centre? Anyone who hasn't been to our joinery or training centre? Councillor Williamson, have you been Caroline? You've got to go, let's read the trip. Off to. It's one of the things I am most proud of in this council is the fact that we're making window frames, we're making doors. So few councils do this and we're training staff at the same time. And also I mean there was staff from the town hall who went up to the training centre to do some kind of simple DIY training. There's just so many brilliant things going on. We take on apprentices who do some of their apprenticeships at the training centre. It's just brilliant. This is not about all that brilliant work, it's just about the lease. But we do need to have a lease to continue doing that brilliant work. So it's a 10 year lease, 3 year break cause. Thanks chair. Are there any questions? Councillor Halleran. Yeah just to offer Councillor Russell because I thought she did come with us in 2014. It's offered as a tour for new councils but we can always arrange it. I think some of your colleagues have been but it is worth going. Councillor Chapman I hope this is a question. It's a very important question. Can I learn to do basic DIY on the Bush Industrial Estate? Absolutely. Can you come on the same course as me, so I'm not embarrassed? It's absolutely a course that they offer to members of the public. Okay, questions for other councillors? Councillor Russell. Any further questions on this one? Okay, thank you. In which case is that item agreed? Thank you. Item B7 the extension of the Parking Enforcement Service contract. Councillor Champion, will you introduce? Yes, it's a very simple report and as it says it's really just seeking the approval to extend the existing parking services contract from September 24 to 31st of March 25. We are going out for procurement and the actual substantive report went through this executive I think in November 2023. Obviously it's really important that when we go out of procurement to something as important as the parking enforcement contract, that everything is right. There has been some delay because we were looking at some options around coming into, working together with another London borough but we've concluded that's not an option so we just want to move forward. But we need an extension to do that. Okay, thank you. Are there any questions from Executive Members on this item? Any questions from other councillors? Just one small one, which is, is this an opportunity to add in the enforcement against engine idling? It's one of the things that has always been very difficult to get enforcement of and I just wondered if that had been considered. Councillor Champion. I can take that away. I think it is, as you say, quite difficult but I can take away an ask. Any addition from officers on that point? Not directly. So the extension as well as providing us with the opportunity to explore potential joint public procurement for efficiency does allow us to align some ancillary contracts. That does include some of the other things which weren't previously within the overall parking enforcement umbrella, which should improve slightly value for money and coordination through the contract. I don't know specifically whether the measures in there around engine idling so I'll have to take that back and check. Okay, thank you. Unless there's any other questions? No? Is that item agreed? It's agreed. Thank you. That means that we'd consider all items and the meeting is concluded. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. [BLANK_AUDIO]