Transcript

It's for normal you are reminded that this meeting is being filmed and recorded for webcasting. Please remember to use your microphone if you speak and turn it off when you are finished. If there is any disturbance or disruption, I resolve the right to adjourn the meeting and clear the chamber, and I will do so without notice. Number 1, apologies for absence. I have received apologies for absence from the following counsellors. (Conferring of Degrees) Apologies for lateness, I received from Councillors Dave Sullivan and Dennis McNamara. Apologies for living orally, received from the Councillors Marzia Learning, Sammy Bacon, Sandra Bauer, and Sarah Merrill. Are there any other apologies for the meeting, please? Apologies for leaving early, Mr Mayor. Thank you, Mr Mayor. It's not about apologies for leaving early, it's about that the link, the earphones aren't working. We've got three sets here and they're not working. Okay. We'll get this sorted. Thank you. So, same thing. Sandra, please say something here, please. Thank you, Mr Mayor. Apologies for leaving early, thank you. Thank you, Mr Mayor. Apologies from Councillor Rochanhanan. Okay. Thank you. Thank you, Councillor Rajic. Item 2, our members happy to agree the minutes of 27th March, 2024 meeting, the annual meeting held on 22nd of May, and the special meeting of the Council on 26th of June, 2024. Item 3, mayor's announcement. I'm very pleased to announce that children's services have been created outstanding after our recent off-stage inspection. This is a fantastic achievement and we extend our congratulations and thanks to all the staff for their commitment, hard work and dedications to improving the lives of all children in the world. [ Applause ] Thank you. Similarly, our adult and community learning services has been judged as good across all areas. Congratulations to all the staff working to improve the lives of our residents. [ Applause ] Thank you very much. [ Pause ] Sarah, is he okay with you? Sorry, can I add something else, Mr. Mayor? I couldn't hear the start of the meeting, so I wasn't sure of the appropriate point to bring it up. But still, I'm not listed as being-- after 10 years as being on the board of Woodlands Farm Trust, I'm still not listed even though I brought it up at the AGN. And three weeks ago, the Woodlands Farm Trust got a letter informing them that the two councilors were going to be Councilor Ives Williams and Councilor Danny Thorpe in spite of me raising it. And it has now been a decade. And I go to all the meetings and I'm there and the board, you know, lists me as the member. But I'm still not down. It's still Councilor Danny Thorpe. So, I would like that please put on record because I haven't got the minutes of the AGN. They're not available tonight. So, I don't know whether it was minuted then. But thank you. Thank you, Sarah. [ Pause ] Okay. Yeah. Thank you. We'll look into it and that's been noted. Item four, Declaration of Interest. Do any members or officers have any declarations of interest tonight? [ Pause ] As you know. [ Pause ] Item five, five minutes rule. I have received no request to exceed the five minutes rule. Item six, submission of petitions. I have been notified that some councillors wish to submit a petition. After I call your name, please stand and briefly summarize the substance of the petition. Firstly, I will ask Councillor Rosa Chester. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I have a petition signed by 48 residents of West Hallows in Motternham calling on the council to take action on the continued traffic problems in their road. This is a follow-up petition to the previous one which was submitted in February 2022. So, this is a chase-up as there seem to have been two years of delays in implementing the solutions promised last time. Thank you. [ Pause ] Similarly, Councillor Sam Lueb. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. This is a petition from parents of Foxcroft Primary School and local residents requesting the road markings on Brinson Road are reviewed to improve safety and traffic flow. Thank you. [ Pause ] Thank you, Councillor Lidlow. The next one, Councillor Rachel Kallavoyne. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I have a petition on behalf of residents of Cedarhurst Drive in my ward of Middle Park and Horn Park. Cedarhurst Drive is quite unique 'cause it's not quite Middle Park and it's not quite Horn Park and it's right in the middle. And it's a lovely street which has a communal green in the middle and about 40 houses. But it has recently been completely blighted by excessive speed and park-- rail commuter parking and parking for Sutcliffe Park which has means reduced access for residents to their own street and the danger of people going down this very small residential street at speeds of excess of 40 miles an hour. So, it is calling upon the council to introduce a 20-mile-an-hour zone along Cedarhurst Drive and also to introduce residents-only parking. And to my knowledge, it's signed by every single house on this street which has around 47 households. [ Pause ] Thank you, Councillor Rachel Kallavoyne. Do any other members have a petition to submit? [ Pause ] I see none. Item 7, petition responses. There are responses to petitions submitted to previous meetings. Petitioners, if present, may address council. You must make your address to the chamber and keep your comments to the subject matter of the petition. Its petitioner has up to two minutes to speak. I will be strict with time. With the Appendix 1, is William Cogerdier here? [ Pause ] I don't see any-- Does any councillor want to comment? [ Pause ] I see none. [ Pause ] Can I ask the cabinet member for equality, culture and communities to respond on this, please? [ Pause ] Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I'm happy for the residents raising the question and I think it does put on the agenda generally the work that the council is doing to upgrade the tennis courts. Yes, we're bringing in charges but they have to be maintained and I think for those areas where the pay for use outside of the free period 'cause they're also free, it's demonstrating that the courts are being used and they're better maintained and the security and so on associated with them, people using it for dog exercise and all sorts of other activities have reduced. And I think-- yeah, so, you know, so I think I'm happy for the response from our officers and that's it since the questioner isn't here. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Thank you, Councillor Closet, cabinet member for equality, culture and communities responding to this petition. I now would like to ask the council if it agrees to note this report. [ Inaudible Remark ] Thank you very much. Item 8, public deputation on matters not otherwise on the agenda. There are no public deputations. Item 9, public questions. There are five public questions for this meeting tonight. The questions together with the written responses had been published to the website. Can I remind everyone of the procedure of-- procedure under the council's constitution, part 4A1.26 and A1.33. There is a maximum time of 30 minutes for public questions and one supplementary question can be made for clarification, proposed one. Please make your supplementary question as concise as possible. Can those asking supplementary questions please move to the microphone, press the button to speak, remain standing and speak directly into the microphone when addressing the meeting. The first from the public for the question. Question 1, Fiona Moore. Thanks for the answer. Before I ask a supplementary, could I just clarify something which is when I said-- asked you to let us know how you'd make your views known on the Silbertan tolling consultation. I actually meant known to the public. Will you do that before the consultation closes or will you make your response to the consultation public? Thank you, Fiona. Cabinet member, Councillor [inaudible] I thank Fiona for her supplementary-- or the question, the clarification thereof. I would like to say that the consultation is a public document so whatever I respond there, I would be made public anyway. But I am quite happy to let residents know what I've responded to. Thanks very much for the clarification. My supplementary was just to ask if you could say anything more about the fact that in the proposals there will be no tolling of the tunnels at night. So there's quite some concern arising among residents who live either side of the A1-I2 approach road that this could be a nightmare. And I wondered if you'd be able to say anything at this stage that might make them feel a little more-- a little less worried about it. Councillor McKelvie. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. What I have to say is one, I would not want to preempt the considered response that we are suggesting we would like to give. And of course, in that response, we will be taking all the concerns into account but also having to be very clear on certain areas that we can respond to versus areas we can't. But I will make that very clear and make it available to you. Thanks. Thank you, Fiona, and thank you, Councillor Little, for the response. Next, we go to George Argyle. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I'd like to thank Councillor Smith for his response to my question and, although sadly in his absence, to say that I've appreciated his openness and his willingness to engage over his time as cabinet member for planning estate renewal and development, Councillor Smith said that over half the section 106 funds held by the council have been committed or earmarked. Does this mean that there is around £25 million of section 106 funds which is unspent and unallocated? And is it possible to say something about what the plans are for allocating and for using those? And if I may just ask for a very small clarification on another part of the answer, Councillor Smith also referred to 1,000 new affordable homes to be, and I quote, brought forward by 2026. Is it possible to clarify, please, which affordability criterion that refers to and what exactly brought forward means in this context? Thank you. Thank you, George Argyle. Can I ask the leader of the council, Councillor Carricky, for a very small description. Thank you very much, Mr Mayor. I'd like to thank you, Edgar, for his question. Now, first, Mr Mayor, just one thing to note. Under the AGM, one of the first things we, on the last AGM, one of the things we did was share the responsibility of section 106 and still with the cabinet member for finance and planning so we can start to be more strategic about how we use the fund. As the report notes, we're currently looking at it further. Obviously, with section 106 and things like seal, it comes in in parts as a result of development and completion dates, so therefore, the amount allocated sometimes is not the same amount allocated in the bank. Now, with that, there are some things that are allocated, but we have set up an opportunity for the cabinet member for finance to be looking into it further against how we use it during our budget process. So, our financial eyes, should I say, are really cast on this issue to make sure we use it to the best of what is appropriate for its use in what is described in the section 106 agreement that is agreed between the developer and the council. Now, obviously, with that, we have to follow those agreements and make sure we implement them, and that there details that. This is also reported in the annual report that comes forward through our seal and section 106 annual report. Now, lastly, on the part of affordable homes, it goes towards our council house building programme, Greenwich builds, and other things like that. Thank you very much.

• Thank you. I'd like to thank George Edgar for the questions and the leader of the council for his response. Next, I'll invite Corinne Teoh.
• Thank you, Mr. Mayor, and thank you for answering my question, except it wasn't, my particular specific question wasn't answered. Did the council refer to environment agency guidance which said this site, given the location, it should be fully enclosed, and does the council carry out regular inspections?
• Thank you. Cabinet member Ritz, Councillor Rachel Teoh, one please.
• Thank you, Mr. Mayor, and I'd like to thank Corinne for her question. Firstly, I'd like to say that the riverside, both as our walkway and as a place of industry, is very important and a major asset to our borough, and we will always work very closely with the environmental agency to ensure that any problems along our river walk are addressed. With regards to the licensing of Silver Transport, the licensing comes under the environmental agency, so it would be for the environmental agency to carry out inspections if there were any violations regarding its license and its operation. We will, of course, take any concerns seriously, and we'll raise them with the environmental agency if they are a concern to our residents. So thank you very much for your question.
• Thank you very much. Corinne has the next question, next follow-up that will go to the leader of the council again for Councillor Slattery. Please, your question, please.
• Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I asked for a copy of the 2024 report that Councillor Slattery referred to back in March. Does this document exist? And if so, please, may I have a copy?
• Leader of the council.
• Mr. Mayor, and obviously we're looking to see what we can do with the estate. We don't make a normal tradition of giving details of estates to residents who probably don't live on the estate, but Councillor Slattery's focus on how she supports residents at the estate and makes sure that she delivers the changes that are needed there. Thank you.
• Thank you very much to both of you. Next, I will invite Stacey Smith.
• Stacey's not here, may I speak on her behalf?
• Yes, fine, please, go ahead.
• Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Yes, given that this council does not meet again until late October, who do residents contact in the meantime if these electrical works are not completed in September? And how do these works fit into the long-discussed forthcoming programme on work on the Orchard Estate high-rise blocks? Thank you.
• Thank you. Can I ask the leader of council to respond that on behalf of Councillor Slattery, please?
• Thank you, Mr. Mayor. First of all, just worth noting that we have a £430 million capital programme of the largest housing capital programme that this council has ever delivered. So obviously, we're accelerating that, making sure that we can bring forward capital works as quickly as possible for our residents. We will constantly, Mr. Mayor, be in communication with residents. Whenever we do any work, we have people that go and engage with residents. Councillors are on hand to be able to contact it with any issues that may arise. So there's an opportunity there for, Mr. Mayor, where residents can continue to speak with the council for any works that happen on their estates. Thank you.
• Thank you very much. From the members current here, I am the representative for your questions and response. Item 10, members' questions. There are 24 written members' questions, and these, together with the responses, have been published to the website. Are these questions and responses received?
• Yes.
• Are they received, everyone? Members?
• Yes.
• Thank you. I'll call out the number of each question in turn. Can any member who wishes to ask a supplementary question please indicate priority will be given to the original questioner? One supplementary question is allowed on each of these matters. The first question from Councillor Cagney.
• Thank you, Mr. Mayor, and good evening. Can I just start by offering Labour councillors my sincere commiserations on the results of the general election? My commiserations because no more Tory government to blame for every failure, no more finger-pointing at Westminster, no more excuses for your own decisions. It must be a very difficult time to be a Labour councillor, Mr. Mayor. And on that very note of difficult times, can I thank the leader of the council for his answer to this first question, which was about the other major election result of the summer, the Greenwich Conservative victory in the Nottingham, Coldharbour and New Eltham by-election. It was a local election about local issues and on so many of those issues, Mr. Mayor, on the council's delays in responding to traffic problems in the south of the borough, on their plans to impose controlled parking zones even where they're not needed, on their continued waste of taxpayers' money on vanity projects like political assistance, our residents use that by-election to send a resounding message that a change in approach is needed. So I'm concerned, I'd thank the leader of the council for his answer, but I'm concerned to read in his answer that Councillor O'Caroque is seemingly taking no lessons from this 4.7% swing away from Greenwich Labour to Greenwich Conservatives just two years in. Councillor Hartley, can I remind you to go to the question, please? I'm one of the few Tories who's won an election in this year, Mr. Mayor, so you're gonna, and so is Councillor Tespa, so you're gonna forgive me, but I will accept your advice. I'm gonna milk it a while. Because this was the administration's first electoral test, my supplementary is, is he seriously saying he hasn't reflected on that council by-election result and that he'll be making no changes to his administration's policy and approach? Thank you.
• The leader of the council, Councillor O'Caroque.
• Thank you, Mr. Mayor, and I do first of all welcome the new Labour government that we have elected. (audience applauds) Mr. Mayor, the public saw the Tories for what they were and kicked them out of government. (audience applauds) Now, Mr. Mayor, one thing I will say is I have reflected and we'll keep going until we get rid of all three of them. Thank you.
• Question two, leader of the opposition, Councillor Attingen.
• We're gonna see about that in two, less than two short years, Mr. Mayor. Roll on 2026. Can I thank the deputy leader of the council for her answer to this question on another issue where I feel the council needs to change approach. It's about the TFL consultation which residents have raised this evening on the tolling of Silvertown and Blackwall Tunnel. She knows it's our longstanding view there should be a full exemption and the council should make the case for a full exemption from local residents and small businesses. So now, can I ask, now that she's seen the consultation, is she at least prepared to reconsider her position and the council's position on that? Because if the council doesn't make the case for that exemption, who else will?
• Deputy leader, Councillor Attingen, please.
• Thank you, Mr. Mayor, and I thank Councillor Hartley for his supplementary here. I think I did answer the question. I said that once I've completed my response, I'll make that available. You don't expect me to then, having said to a member of the public that I am not at liberty to do that at this stage, that I would then be telling you exactly what it is I'm considering. Once I have made those considerations, you'll be the first to find out. Thank you.
• Thank you. The supplementary to the third question, Councillor Hartley again.
• Thank you, Mr. Mayor, and can I thank the deputy leader for her answer to this question? She hasn't provided the data I've asked for on the emissions-based parking scheme. She has previously provided much of this data to an earlier date in an answer, so I'm not really sure I understand why it hasn't been provided in response to this member's question. So could I just ask, could she perhaps save me the freedom of information request and send me these figures which are readily available and factual information about this council service? Could she perhaps agree to provide these to me after the meeting? Thank you.
• Councillor Miguel.
• I had said in my response I'm going to give you a full report once that has come out, and I think that's what you'll get.
• Supplementary for question four, Councillor Hartley again.
• Thank you, Mr. Mayor, and can I thank the deputy leader for her answer to this question on this new methodology for street sweeping frequency. She said in the answer it will be implemented in early 2025. Can I ask, will details be made available to ward councillors before then so that we can assess, all of us, the likely impact on our wards and hopefully input into the process?
• Councillor Miguel again.
• Thank you, Councillor Hartley, for your supplementary. And yes, of course, as I said, there will be a consultation, and part of that consultation with the public would also include talking to ward councillors and getting a sense of what they feel about the way forward.
• Thank you. Supplementary to question five, Councillor Hartley again.
• Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Can I thank Councillor Hyland for her answer to this question about the medium-term financial strategy savings proposal? She's given me an update. Can I just ask her, without any detail, if her level of confidence that those 33 million pounds in savings will be achieved has increased, decreased, or stayed the same since our last exchange?
• Councillor Hyland, cabinet member. Thank you, Mr. Mayor, and thank you for your supplementary. Please excuse my voice. I would say that my level of confidence is the same. As you know, we over-programmed of savings because we knew that not all 118 would go flying through. For example, the old government, yeah. (audience laughing) They haven't actually brought in the new recommended levels for penalty charge notices, so that puts 300K at risk. We've also got assistive technology-enabled care services, 200,000 pounds, which has been delayed with the new scheme commencing. And with regard to children's services and centres, worth up to two million, there have been delays due to the impact on the consultation period, which has been brought about by two extended pre-election periods. So we always knew that there would be some that wouldn't race home to the finish line. Our job now is to make sure that as many of those are delivered as possible, and we remain confident that that will be the case. Thank you.
• Thank you. Now supplementary to question six, Councillor Hadley again. Thank you. Now supplementary to question seven, Councillor Hadley.
• Thank you, Mr. Mayor, and can I thank Councillor Lallivar for her answer to this question, and welcome her to her new, very important role as Cabinet Member for Health, Adult Social Care, and Borough of Sanctuary. So thanks for the very comprehensive update. The figures show that flu vaccinations have decreased year on year, so I'm pleased that the suggestion of a change in approach has been taken up. Can I just ask, have we looked at what other public sector organisations have done on this, so that we can hopefully learn from what works elsewhere, and not just local authorities, but the NHS as well?
• Cabinet Member, Councillor Mary Lallivar.
• Thank you, Mr. Mayor, and thank you, Councillor Hadley, for your supplementary. I think the one thing to point out is that the other, as we've listed in the response, is that individuals can go and have their vaccine directly. So even though there might be a drop in people who are individually taking it, it doesn't mean that people aren't going directly and making that booking themselves. So I just think we have to be careful when we're comparing those figures to make sure we're taking that into account. As you can see, I think from the proposal here, there have been discussions about how we can improve and what more we can do to reach as many staff as possible with that message and make it as easy as possible for them to have the vaccine. More than I know the officers have been in discussion with counterparts or whatnot, but I'm more than happy, if you have any suggestions, to hear from you as well. But I do think the plan that is put down here is comprehensive, and as it says here, we do choose to pay for a free vaccine, which I think is really important, rather than something we continue to commit to.
• Thank you. Supplementary to question number eight, Councillor Hadley to the leader for Councillor Slattery.
• Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Can I thank Councillor Slattery for her answer to this question? And the leader is well-placed to answer it as her predecessor, the supplementary, because I entirely agree with what Councillor Slattery said, that the current pay arrangements in the repair service cannot continue. But can I ask the leader, if a review has taken place into the apparent failure of controls over many years, that gave rise to the situation where we've got unsustainable pay arrangements and industrial action in the first place?
• Leader?
• Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Just first to note, obviously, my role as former cabinet member of housing was constantly reviewing how we work with our operatives to make sure they deliver services for residents. So continuously through that process, Mr. Mayor, we've always kept a keen eye on our pay and reward scheme, which we have and which supports through our DLO. And just lastly to say, Mr. Mayor, we continue to negotiate with the trade unions and the operatives to make sure we get the best deal for residents, to make sure we get repairs sorted and a system that works. Thank you.
• Sovereign manager to question nine, Councillor Hadley again.
• Thank you, he's very good at answering the question, Mr. Mayor, isn't he? I mean, I just wanted to know if there would be a review. So I'll pick that up with him. It was dancing around it, thank you. Can I thank Councillor Smith and welcome Councillor Smith back to the cabinet. I think she resumes her status as the longest serving cabinet member across London, perhaps by her return. So congratulations on that. Can I just ask for a supplementary? Her predecessor kindly agreed to discuss this issue around the consultation that's planned on the council tax support scheme with me. And I wonder if the new cabinet member would be prepared to have a conversation about that before it's finalised. She knows I'm very concerned about it and if she'll allow it, if she'd be gracious enough to allow it, I would appreciate the opportunity to input.
• Cabinet member, Councillor Jackie Smith, please.
• Thank you, Mr. Mayor and thank you Councillor Hartley for your supplementary. Look, I'm gonna take the opportunity, you may not welcome me back after this, 'cause you took a bit of a cheeky opportunity to make a speech. And I would say that given that the Conservative government until its dying breath was still blaming Gordon Brown for the state of the economy, I think we got a bit of a way to go before we give up on blaming your last government. But yes, I will answer 'cause you took the same opportunity. So yeah, I'm just reciprocating. Yes, of course, Councillor Hartley. I was gonna contact you in order to talk about the consultation on the anti-poverty strategy as well, which I knew that you participated and asked you to share some ideas. So happy to meet with you to discuss.
• Question 10, Councillor Hartley.
• Very great, I'm very grateful and we can have a chat about Gordon Brown as well. Thank you. Could I thank Councillor Cousens for her answer to this question and welcome her to her new portfolio. Could I ask about this implementation, this transfer of charges to park cafe operators, could I just ask her to confirm, will charges, utility charges only be transferred to a park cafe operator after transitional relief and business support has been put in place?
• Council member, Councillor Cousens.
• Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Oh, yes, I'm grateful to Councillor Hartley for the question. I think in terms of the response there, you can see that although early discussions have started, nothing concrete has done yet, it really just would not be the right thing to turn around and try and give any sort of, off the top of my head assumptions about what will be done or how it will be done. We unfortunately will have to wait. The CAF owners need to be spoken to, talk to what's their issues, how are they operating. There are issues that have yet to be delved into. We cannot make the decision first and then go in and speak to them. I don't think that will go down too well. But thank you for the question.
• Thank you. A supplementary to question 11, Councillor Hartley. Thank you. Question 12, Councillor Hartley. Question 13, Councillor Hartley.
• Thank you, Mr. Mayor. And can I thank and welcome Councillor Kyra to his new portfolio as well, getting tired of all this. Could I just ask him as a supplementary, when will that consultation be launched? We've heard about the understandable delay because of the PODA period. Could you just give any further details rather than later this year? Thank you.
• Cabinet member, Councillor.
• Thank you, Mr. Mayor. And thank you, Councillor Hartley. I can say it's anytime soon. We're in the process of finalising the last bits and bobs and crossing the T's and dotting the I's. But you'll definitely find out once it's out and you can feed into it. Thank you.
• Thank you. Last, we have a question from the leader of the opposition, Councillor Hartley, for question 14.
• Thank you, Mr. Mayor. And finally, can I thank and welcome Councillor Taggart-Ryan to the cabinet and wish her well in the community safety role. Thank you for the update on the Rethinking CCTV programme, which I think she knows I'm a big fan of. Could I just ask, as she's come into the cabinet role, is she intending any changes based on what she's seen or is she content that the arrangements are going in the right way?
• Can we go to Councillor Taggart-Ryan, please?
• Thank you, Mr. Mayor. And I thank Councillor Hartley for his question. And I agree with him that we have a very premier service across our borough in terms of our CCTV operation. We're one of the few London boroughs that operate 24/7, 365 days a year, camera service across both our public spaces and our estates, and we're now in the second phase of updating the software and the hardware across our estates, as you can see in my answer. We will be going through a Rethinking CCTV process with officers, looking at ways in which we can maximise its efficiency and cost savings. That's going to be an ongoing process over this next year. And I've given you some of the answer to that in my main answer, we'll be looking at how we can bring in income from this very valuable asset. Thank you.
• Thank you, both. Next question, question 15, Councillor Sammy Beckham.
• Thank you very much, Mr. Mayor. And I thank Councillor locale very much for answering my question. And she'll know this has been a long standing bugbear of mine. So thank you very much for advocating on behalf of residents here. I'm still not convinced that residents are aware that they can get refunds or extensions to their visitor's permit. So I just like, in the answer it refers to, you're kindly asked for service to better inform residents of these conditions. But I just like to explore how that will be done. Thank you.
• Deputy leader, Councillor Adriaan Le Cowell, please.
• Thank you, Mr. Mayor. And I thank Councillor Beckham for his supplementary. You know, I've kind of walked this journey with you. And so I understand your frustrations. It's just unfortunate that the tech that we have that operates this system hasn't got the sort of flexibility to be able to do what seems to make sense to us. We have asked IT, and IT is looking at how we can improve on this. But one of the things that we're suggesting is that we put something on the, as people are purchasing, that if they're not using, if there are any that are about before they expire, you can submit them back. But I'll let you know once that's done, yeah. Thanks.
• Thank you.
• And that again, Councillor Simon Beckham for supplementary to question 16.
• Thank you again, Mr. Mayor. And I'd like to thank Councillor Smith for answering my question. This is something we received quite a lot of correspondence from residents about. And I'd just like to know if there's an approximate time frame for the strategic asset review. 'Cause I think this building and the residents about in town in Avery Hill would agree that it could be put to much better use than it is currently. Thank you.
• Can I invite leader for Edensmith for this one.
• Thank you, Mr. Mayor. And I'd like to thank Councillor Beckham for his question. No, totally agree with you in terms of looking at strategic asset review. We are accelerating it as much as possible as quickly as I can. Obviously, when we come back after some refresh, I will work with my cabinet to make sure that we give some indication of time scales. Thank you.
• Question 18, Councillor Jennifer.
• Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I would like to thank Councillor Le Cowell for her answer. But on this occasion, I'm not sure that the response is completely what I was looking for. So I'll withhold and see where we'll get to. The fact is that the King Street, whilst we all love them very much and enjoy seeing them parade around and then take part in national events, are a partner of ours. And actually, in terms of how partners behave, I think we would accept that in the examples we've got from residents, that it really isn't good enough so far. We've had people's vehicles damaged, waiting more than a year to be resolved. And certainly, I wrote to the treat commander on the 8th of June. I hadn't even had an acknowledgement for that email, let alone a reply. So all I wanted to add was, whilst I'm grateful to offices, and for Councillor Cowell for letting me know that offices are trying to convene a meeting, I think we would hope that you would personally be involved and really add that extra element of your influence to get to a resolution. That means that we can continue to enjoy the horses as we do, but that people who've had their vehicles damaged are recompensed immediately, and that we make plans to prevent any such damage, well, reduce the likelihood of any damage happening in the future. Thank you.
• Thank you, Councillor Abigail. To the spoon, please.
• I thank Councillor Thorpe for his supplementary. Obviously, this is something that we all take really seriously. The fact, I mean, I'm saying here that there are certain powers we have and others that we don't have, but we will be using. And I'm flattered to hear that you think I might have some influence, but I'll use whatever that influence is as a partner to have conversations on behalf of our residents on this matter. But I think it's important for us to have as much information as possible and some kind of evidence so that we can take that to the table. Thank you.
• Thank you.
• Point of order, please, Mr. Mayor. Point of order.
• Yep.
• My question was missed. I've been told by officers that it won't be till the last question. I do hope that there will be sufficient time for my question.
• Yeah, this will be plenty of time, and your question is at the end.
• Thank you, Mr. Mayor.
• Thank you. Question 19, can I invite Councillor Pat Prunewald, please?
• Thank you, Mr. Mayor, and I thank the cabinet member, Councillor Cousins, for her response, and congratulations to your new role. I am sure that I am correcting saying that allotment owners are sent a notice to remedy if they fail to upkeep their plot. A fence that borders the west side of Pippin Hall allotments, Bexley Road, has been reported many times, as it is in such a state of disrepair. Can an appropriate officer please visit this health and safety risk to establish whether or not the council are responsible? It's a difficult one, and I think it needs an officer, and I'm quite happy to go along with them to solve the issue there. A large tree has fallen down with the fence as well, and it's blocking the pathway that the public go along with the perimeter of the allotments. Thank you.
• Thank you. Cabinet member, Councillor, I've got a question, please.
• Thank you very much, Mr. Mayor, and thank you, Councillor Greenwell, for the question, and obviously to yourself, and also, Councillor Hartley, for congratulating me. I forgot to do that, very remiss of me. So thank you very much for that, appreciate it. To be honest, I am glad about the question about the allotments. I think the council have a lovely asset of green spaces which the community have access to. Unfortunately, there is always a weight in this, to grow food, for leisure, for their health, for mental health, and I think it is important that we remind people about these assets. They are there, and they are being used. I am sorry to hear that there is a fallen tree causing a problem, and I do wonder whether that's already been raised as casework, but nevertheless, one of the things I have asked in taking over this new portfolio is for me to have a ride-along with officers to look at certain sites. So what I can do is to ask for that to be what included. My previous criteria was that it had to represent some of the worst, not just the best, some of those that are privately run, because they're not all, although the asset still belongs to the council, they're run by the users. They have an association, and they run it. So I want to see some of those that are operating well. So the idea is to go along, have a look, so that I can then review what's going on overall, and then hopefully come up with a good model of what works, how we encourage other allotment owners to look after the site more, rely on the council less if they are doing resources, et cetera. So thank you for that, I will see, get this site included in one of those, thanks.
• Thank you, and I invite Councillor Greenwell again for question 20.
• Thank you, Mr. Mayor, and just very quickly, it was Councillor Cousin's offence, offence as well, that would cause the treaty to fall. Yes, thank you, Councillor Rachel Taggart-Ryan for your response, and congratulations on your new role. And I am looking forward to working with you regarding these bikes. I have brought the question of the delivery bikes to council many times over the years. In fact, two years ago, when it was Councillor Thorpe, who was in chief role, he actually said that he was prepared to come along with me, and perhaps we could have a ride on one of these bikes. But of course, that, together, but that didn't happen, because the administration changed. So yes, and I did sort of, again, last year, I did meet with Councillor the Cow, and we did discuss these bikes, which are a massive, massive problem, they're getting worse. A few weeks ago, there were 16 parked outside the Kentucky Fried Chicken, and then a little bit further down, there were another 16. And believe you me, I go on the high street nearly every day, and it is a nightmare. And I welcome the opportunity. I would just like to say, please, please make sure that you keep councillors involved with anything that you are doing. And can I just ask you, have you thought about talking to other councils to find out how they're dealing with this situation? Because I know that it's across the piecework. Thank you.
• Can't remember Councillor Rachel Taggart-Rine, I think Councillor Fulk wants to add something at the end as well, do you? Yes, so here.
• Thank you, Mr. Mayor, and I thank Councillor Greenwell for her question. I will, of course, be delighted to do a site visit with you and a walk around on Alton High Street to see this problem in situ at times when it's at its worst. I would not be comfortable on a motorbike myself, I don't have a license, but I will walk there and I'll get the bus. The first thing I want to say is we have been doing a lot on this issue and it has come up a lot because it's a very serious issue, but we have officers, we've spoken with restaurants about managing their bikes that are coming in and out as part of their service. We have spoken to Uber and we've spoken to Deliveroo about enforcing codes of behavior amongst their bikers. And we have also used our community enforcement team and as you can see, I refer to my answer, we have issued 21 fixed penalty notices to bikers behaving inappropriately in that area. So we will continue to enforce and we will continue to find ways in which we can escalate our enforcement if it continues to be a problem. I am happy to meet with her on this issue and with the other two Councillors in the ward. And we will discuss ways if this continues to be a problem to escalate it further with our enforcement teams. Thank you very much.
• Thank you. Councillor O'Donoghoe.
• Thank you so much, Mr. Mayor, for a quick right of reply, just to say how sorry I was that I did not get to experience that ride along with Councillor Greenwell. But for the benefit of the Chamber, I did enjoy a rather lovely ride with Councillor Greenwell last night, who dropped me home after planning board. Councillor Gardner will be pleased to know it was a car-sharing experience. And actually, just for the benefit of those who don't know, Councillor Greenwell did indulge me in a few of her favourite tipples, and I know that she's been keeping our local high street in very good measure. So I'm sure she'll be in great hands with Councillor Taggart-Ryan, and make sure you use all of your enforcement powers so she gets home safely and doesn't cause any trouble on the high street.
• Thank you. Can I invite Councillor Greenwell for question 21?
• Thank you, Mr. Mayor, and I thank Councillor Cousins for her response. I read that you, plans have been made to have a sparkle in the park again this coming year. Again, this is a question that has come up by me and some of my predecessors in the council many times, what plans have been made for Eltham High Street light up. In the past, we used to have parades, and now we have a tree and people congregate and there are stalls around Passy Place. I would ask Councillor Cousins if she is prepared to come along to an Eltham Town Centre partnership meeting and possibly we can ask the town centre manager to come along as well because they are concerned, we are concerned as a partnership about the fact that more could be done to involve the businesses. This is an excellent time. We could involve the businesses within this Eltham lights up, even if it is restricted to Passy Place, there is room for working with our businesses to produce something bigger and better. So yes, I will leave that request with you. Thank you.
• Thank you, Councillor Cosson.
• Thank you, Mr. Mayor and thank you, Councillor Greenwell for that. I think what I just that my new cabinet name is that I'm the cabinet member for fun, follics and festivities. And so yes, in terms of working with partnership to achieve possibilities, I'm quite happy to come along as long as nobody thinks they're going to put me on a bike. I'll happily use the transport system but certainly not and definitely not a two-wheeler, four-wheeler possibly. So I'm happy to come along. I think some of the handover discussions, which is just discussions at the moment and I think is in concrete so officers don't panic. It was already raised about the fact that there used to be a parade, there used to be this, but obviously the cost and the mounting cost means it's had to dwindle. And also concerns that why is it happening when the shops are closed, which I think that doesn't make sense and why the business is involved. So I think you've said certain things that Councillor Keir has already been talking to me about. And so there definitely are possibilities but we would need greater business and community engagement. So if that's on the card, I'm quite happy to come up there. Lovely. So that's what we'll make the date, so to speak. Thank you.
• Thank you both. And now can I invite Councillor Rosa Testa for supplementary to question number 22.
• Thank you, Mr. Mayor. And can I thank Councillor locale for the answer? However, Councillor locale, our residents need a clear timetable for each road and have waited long enough. Can you please provide such a timetable so we can update our residents urgently?
• Councillor Lugo.
• I thank Councillor Testa for his supplementary. In the scheme of congratulations, I know I should be saying congratulations, but it doesn't flow so easily. (laughing) I have to say. I think I have a language blip. Residents will be informed as and when with the decisions. I think I started to say and I certainly said when I was planning to implement some of these things and once that happens, you'll be the first to find out. Okay?
• Yeah.
• Thank you. Question supplementary for question 23. Can I invite again, Councillor Rose Chester.
• Thank you, Mr. Mayor. And thank you again, Councillor locale for your answer. Just a quick follow-up. You mentioned a small-scale pilot as part of the answer. Can she tell me which roads are in the pilot and when will the results of this trial be published?
• Councillor Legere.
• I can tell you that, but I can't remember off-head. There are many streets in the borough, I have to say. But it's in the Blackheath Ward where the residents had requested. So there were quite a few residents that were keen to do that. And so we thought we would use that as a pilot. Because of the pre-election period, there were difficulties in us kick-starting. But I know that the members of that street met with my officers. So I've been looking forward to having discussions with them as soon as possible so that we can kick this off. And once we've kicked it off and once we can see how it's working and how workable it is, then I'm sure the residents and I will be happy to feed back to members.
• Thank you. Can I invite Councillor Testa again for supplementary to question 24, please? Oh, thank you. And I will go back to Councillor Magellani asking a question to our chair of committee, Councillor Barb Girona. Your question, please. Supplementary.
• Thank you very much, Mr. Mayor. First of all, could I thank Councillor Babutola for his very detailed response to my question. There is an error, though, in the response. The error refers to the Economic Activity of Public Bodies Overseas Matters Bill, which would preclude any pension fund or government body from boycotting or divesting. That bill is dead. That bill did not go through Parliament before the election. And as a result, all bills that are in process after a change of government fall. So that bill does not exist. So that's just a clarification. Secondly, the context for my question has changed dramatically in the last four days. The context is that the International Court of Justice, the UN's highest court, ruled last Friday that Israel's occupation of the Palestinian territories is illegal. It's the first time the court has officially ruled this. It also ruled that all Israeli settlers in the West Bank and East Jerusalem should be removed. And here comes my question. You have said in your answer that the Greenwich Pension Fund has passive funds, so you can't choose what you invest in and what you divest from. However, the combined pension funds of local governments in England and Wales is 354 billion. So you do have a collective ability to influence these passive funds and indexes. So my question to you is, given the urgent nature of the ICJ ruling, what steps are you going to take now, as a matter of urgency, to consult the local authority pension fund forum, to present the case for divestment of a number of firms? I mean, these are the list in Greenwich. You know, 18 million worth that are invested in the occupied, illegally occupied territories. So are you going to, as a matter of urgency, put a presentation to the forum which oversees the collective policies? Because with that large buying power, you can make a difference, and it is also now not just a moral obligation, it's now a legal obligation.
• Thank you, Councillor Babasola.
• Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I'd like to thank you, Councillor Arning, for understanding and appreciating the response that I've given. And thank you very much for more enlightenment onto this development, which I'm aware of, but not until we have a full briefing of it, then I can go into this. Having said that, we in the panel, we have listened in the past. That is why we are able to divert 210 million from Fujifilm to a more recognisable and more climate change investment. And that is one of those things that we have done. In that, I am prepared and I will seek more advice. I have always represented this borough in every forum of the London Association of Pension Fund. And my question is, regarding the ESG, that I'm always focused on what we do, why do we invest in this? Can you not look into that? And surely, I will be escalating your concern today with the necessary authority within the London Pension Association. Can I just say now that as far as the residents of this borough is concerned, and those who are members of the pension fund, your pension is secured and is growing. More information will come out in the next few days when we agreed on the last meeting we had on Monday to put that to public. At the same time, I will remind you that where the information is necessary, that I know is not going to contradict the Local Government Act of 1972, schedule 12, I have emailed all councillors of certain information. When that is ready, I will let you know. And I will speak to you privately for further advice. Thank you, Mr. Mayor.
• Thank you, Councillor Babu Tola, chair of the pension board. Next, I have oral questions to member of cabinets. And up to 10 minutes in total is allowed. Could you please indicate by raising your hand if you wish to ask a question? Sorry. Okay. Chris Lloyd.
• Thank you very much, Mr. Mayor. I'll keep my remarks brief because I've been struggling with heat exhaustion all day at Farnborough Air Show. We're now seven years since the tragic events of Grenfell Tower, and thousands of residents across this borough, a thousand in Royal Artillery Quays in West Thamesmead, and tens of thousands, nine hundreds of thousands across the whole country are still living in limbo about fire safety rating of their building. A B1 rating means that residents sometimes cannot sell secure mortgages and pay thousands of pounds more in additional service charge. Now, back to Royal Artillery Quays in particular, and my first oral question. The manufacturer of the cladding in question at Royal Artillery Quays says that their product was not properly originally installed in 2003, and the current combination and the proposed solution by leaving aspects of it in situ has not been tested. So, in the absence of the cabinet member for regeneration, my question is to the leader of the council. Would he agree with me that those responsible for fixing their own work at Royal Artillery Quays cannot know with 100% certainty that their solution is safe, and thus, the work to remediate to a B1 should be abandoned, and that the work should be done indeed to an A1 rating and hopefully set a precedent which will improve the lives of the 1,000 in Royal Artillery Quays and hopefully tens of thousands more across the country. Thank you, Mr Mayor. Thank you. I'll leave it at the council. Thank you, Mr Mayor. The member brings a serious matter to the chamber, recognising the journey this country has gone through post-Grenfell, and I thank him for bringing that matter, as well as the residents that join us in this chamber today who are here to lend a voice to their own issues that they're currently going through in regard to the development that they live in. Now, I'm getting closer to the matter, and obviously, I want to look closely with you. I've spoken to some of the residents that are here today, and we'll work with ward councillors to make sure we look at all details. Now, obviously, the council has particular powers in which it can take, as well as the opportunity to continuously speak to government about what developers do, what contractors do as well, because I know the responsibility varies depending on the specific details on how you deal with the development. So, I think it's important that we collectively work with ward councillors alongside the cabinet member responsible, and myself, to pull these matters together to think about how we advocate for residents through this issue. Thank you. -Thank you, leader. Let's finish all questions, then we'll come back to you. Is that all right? Our next Councillor, Sheriff Mary. -Thank you, Mr Mayor. It's not quite such a pressing matter, but it's something that always troubles me. I wondered if, going back to the issue of the delivery bikes in Eltham High Street, if the cabinet member might give some considerations for the fact that, actually, this is market-led, and they are delivering takeaways to the population of Eltham, and that people have made representations to me, but they are the same people who have deliveries made to their houses by those delivery bikes, and, actually, those delivery bikes wouldn't be there if there weren't a huge demand, and, actually, there is no reason to park on Eltham High Street because there are four huge car parks lying behind it, and the only people, really, that should be trying to park on Eltham High Street are blue-badge holders or people that really need it, so I understand it's a bit of a problem, but I just wondered if the cabinet member might give some consideration to the fact that, actually, it's not quite as straightforward as just whipping the delivery bike riders who are actually trying to make a living, and there is a huge demand, and that's why they're there. -Thank you. Deb, do you have the last one? -Thank you, Mr. Mayers. -Okay. Okay. Please, yes. -I thank Councillor Merrill for her question. Yes, we are a labour council, and we need to strike a balance between protecting some of our most vulnerable workers in the borough who are in some of the most insecure work but, at the same time, ensuring that these bikes do park in the designated zones, which they are meant to, and that they are not causing antisocial behaviour or noise complaints. Now, those two things are not mutually exclusive and can be managed through escalation of our enforcement action where enforcement needs to be taken, but none of that should undermine the fact that these bikers are delivering a service. It's good for our economy, and there are some high street. It's good for our restaurants, and we do see people in the most insecure employment, and we do not wish to be overburdensome, but there is not a conflict between being overburdensome and enforcing the rules, which are quite clearly in place. -Thank you. Next, Councillor M'Lang. -Thanks, Mr Mayor. My question is directed to the health lead, and this is about the cyber attack. We know that it has affected Southeast badly. Our patients, places, and GPs, procedures that are planned and that of services, especially blood donations and the rest. Over the weekend or before the weekend, I happened to go to Queen Elizabeth Hospital, and this was when I contacted 111. They responded quickly and effectively and ended up sending me back to the GP, and bloods were supposed to be tested, so that was ordered, and when I got there, unfortunately, because it wasn't, they didn't put agent there. I couldn't -- I had to go back to the GP again. So, the question or the assurance I want is, I saw that the place was almost empty, and a lot of the phlebotomists were actually at post, nearly about seven days that had two each, and I just wanted the assurance because I know a lot of places are getting near to normal service. The assurance that at least we are able to get these lines open, but when I called, it was that it was -- lines were suspended. Can you please just give us the assurance? Thank you very much. -Thank you, Councillor Mabang. Cabinet member, Marianne Rolanda. -Thank you, Mr. Mayor, and thank you, Councillor Mabang, for your question. I'm more than happy to look into it. I think my -- from my understanding, there's slightly different contracts for the pathology that might explain some of the complexities that I think that you're referring to. So, what I would say is that the NHS and our partners have all been working really hard to bring services in as quickly. I think the huge focus for them is prioritizing the most need, and obviously, I want to reassure, as well, for anyone that is, you know, in this room here, that emergency services are very much functioning and people should still present if there are issues, so to not be put off by that in any way whatsoever, and continue using 999 as normal. It is a serious issue, and again, I can look into it because I think, for example, QE is somewhat separate and has, in a different kind of contract, separate from the Synovus one, so that might explain. I do know, though, that QE has been providing a lot of mutual support and support across, so when everyone needs it, they are able to help prioritize, and again, that's being done across all of the trusts and everyone where they can possibly do it, but more than happy to look into that specific situation and try and provide a little bit more reassurances to you. And I guess, while I have the opportunity, I would encourage everyone to donate blood, particularly if you are a positive or negative. Because of the attack that Councillor Babang mentions, having blood that can be universally used is even more important than ever, so if you haven't donated already, please consider doing so.
• Thank you, cabinet member. Can I give time to Councillor Lloyd for your very brief supplementary, please?
• Very brief supplementary, thank you very much, Mr Mayor, and I thank the leader for his answer to my earlier question, and thank you indeed for recognizing and acknowledging the dozens of residents from Royal Artillery Quays that have given up their Wednesday evening to join us on this hot Wednesday evening. My supplementary question is this. Will the leader and his new cabinet member agree to meet with me and, if necessary, be joined by the Labour Member of Parliament for Erith and Temer's meeting, anyone else that can help resolve this problem for my constituents in West Hemesmead? I really don't care if I take any credit for this or not. The important thing is getting it done for my residents, and that's why they're here tonight, to show their support for trying to get something moving sooner rather than later, so something over the summer would be very much appreciated, and I will be bringing back my motion to the next full council meeting.
• Thank you, Councillor Lloyd. Leader, you have responded.
• Thank you, Mr Mayor, and just to make it clear for everyone in the chamber here, myself and my cabinet will make themselves available to work with ward councillors, all ward councillors, and oppositional members as well. Thank you.
• Thank you very much, leader. We have just over the time, so I'm not able to take any more questions. Sorry, Olu. We'll save your question for the next meeting. Now we are on item 11, matters for only debate. I have received a request to vary the order of business this evening under A1.46 of the constitution, and so I will be taking item 19 first. Item 19, appointment of cabinet member for planning, stretch, renewal, and development. Can I ask the leader of the council to introduce the report, please?
• Thank you, Mr Mayor, and the report before you is about the appointment of a cabinet member for planning, a state renewal, and development. I just want to put on the record my thanks, goodness, just want to put on the record my thanks to Councillor Aiden Smith, who has worked in this role and really understood the vision and the mission that we set out as a cabinet for this particular portfolio. He's been really dedicated to making sure that we get our British Builds programme delivered. He's been very dedicated to make sure we have a 10-year regeneration plan for this borough. He's been accelerating the process of making sure we can get the local plan delivered by 2025, and more importantly, he has always thought about how we think about regenerating, restitching, creating new spaces and communities for this borough so that we can tackle the housing crisis. That's all I can ask of my cabinet member, Mr Mayor, and I wanna pay tribute to him as he stands down to take up a senior role as a director of a, can I call it libraries or what? But a director in a senior role, and we wish him and thank him for his work. And I would also like to welcome Councillor Ramamaje to join us at the cabinet bench today as he takes up his role. (audience applauds) Mr Mayor, he's smiling now. (audience laughs) He's smiling now, but the work that needs to be delivered is great, it's immense, and you have a task ahead of you, and I and my cabinet, and along with other members, look forward to working with you. I know you're a diligent member. You speak quite frequently on items. You're a hard worker, ambitious for this borough, pro-prisoners, pro-growth, and that's exactly what this council needs, so I welcome you to the role, and I wish you all the very best because what you achieve isn't for you, but it's for our residents. Thank you. (audience applauds)
• And we've got some, Councillor Matt Hadley, want to say something?
• Thank you, Mr Mayor, and yeah, can I just add my congratulations to Councillor Raman? That was all very dramatic coming down to the front bench. Very good, bit of drama. Bit of drama is what we need sometimes. Congratulations on your appointment, and I also wanted to take the opportunity to likewise thank Councillor Aiden Smith for his work as cabinet member for regeneration. He's not here, so he's gonna have to forgive me for running the risk of tarnishing his reputation in this place with a few compliments from me because I have observed that he approached his cabinet role with a hell of a lot of hard work, a lot of focus, and a lot of grip, particularly on the sill review, which we're considering later in the meeting. And I think when that, if that's approved, that increased sill income comes through, as we all hope it will be, Councillor Smith can rightly be proud of the actions he took as the cabinet member with the Director of Dres as well, who I also thank for her work on it, to make it happen. So we in the opposition group wish Councillor Smith all the best in his new exciting professional role that the leader mentioned, and we'd like to thank him for setting Councillor Raman a very hard act to follow. Thank you, Mr. Mayor.
• Thank you. Does any member wish to speak? I see none. Thank you. Can I ask Councillor O'Connor, the leader of the council, to close the debate?
• Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Close it for me.
• I would now like to ask the council if it notes the report. Thank you. I'd like to thank Councillor Smith for his hard work and congratulate Councillor Masi Raman to take the new role. Thank you. Item 12, annual audit later, 2022-23. This report was organised, oh sorry, considered by the audit and risk management panel on 22nd July. Comments from the panel have been published. Can I ask Councillor Denis Hyland, cabinet member for finance, resources and social value to formally move the recommendations and to respond to the comments of the audit and risk management panel?
• Thank you very much indeed, Mr. Mayor. I suppose really what I would like to say is to thank Grant Thornton and particular Paul Jacqueline for being here today and for the report as well as the inspection and the hours spent looking at the Royal Borough of Greenwich. You know, this relates to 2022-23 and things have moved on significantly since then but I'll wait to hear from Paul as to whether he agrees. We have made significant progress, in particular tackled the financial challenge from last year and we've agreed savings worth in excess of 33 million. Of course, there is always more to do. This is Grant Thornton's swan song before we get into working with Mazars and please thank your colleagues who've been truly wonderful working with us but at the same time really constructive challenge. The ARM panel, as you know, has requested that a tracker report be submitted to the panel on progress taken on the implementation of the external auditors recommendations from 21-22 and 22-23. And the panel has also recommended that the council consider appointing a second non-voting independent member with the necessary financial expertise with regard to ARM panel, subject of course to any financial implications. And I'd like to thank Councillor Gardner as chair of ARM and all the panel members, including Councillor Hartley who made that suggestion. I'm very happy having spoken to the leader and the director of finance and chief exec to go along with that. Absolutely not a problem, could only help. Thank you, formally move and with your forbearance and permission, perhaps Paul would like to now speak, thanks.
• Thank you, Councillor Highlands. Can I now invite Paul Jacklin from the external auditor to address the council and the auditor later, please?
• Thank you. So this is our auditors annual report for 2022-23. It's the final year at Granthorn and I'll bring you this as your auditors. Following the full council in January, we gave an unqualified opinion on the council's 2022-23 financial statements. We've since gone through the required handover arrangements with your new auditors, Mazars. This process has gone smoothly. So the council is not in a position of many others that face potential disclaimer opinions on prior year accounts and several years without having any value for money work undertaken. So you're in a good position here. Our value for money work, including this report, covers three areas of financial sustainability, governance and improving economy efficiency and effectiveness, which is known as the three E's. Our work looks at the arrangements the council had in place in '22-23 to deliver value for money, not whether the council services actually delivered value for money across its services. In undertaking our '22-23 work across the three criteria, we have identified two significant weaknesses. One in the financial sustainability criteria and one in the three E's. We have raised key recommendations for the council to strengthen arrangements in these areas. For the governance criteria, we have not identified any significant weaknesses. We have raised some improvement recommendations to strengthen arrangements further. As a firm, it's worth noting that we are seeing many more significant weaknesses being identified across the local governance sector, particularly within the financial sustainability criteria, as increased demands placed on councils are stretching financial positions even further. The report contains a lot of detail, but I will just draw out the two areas where we have raised key recommendations. The first one is the council, like many others, face financial challenges due to significant increased demands and complexity of service provision. Councils have been grappling with high inflation, the cost of living crisis and uncertainty over future funding levels. As a consequence, significant saving programs have been needed to deliver balanced budget positions. Our key recommendations in this area are centred around strengthening the processes of identification, challenge, implementation and monitoring of savings programs going forward. This will avoid the need for one-off measures and use of reserves to balance positions. The second significant weakness was in the three E's category, which was brought to our attention by the council, who had self-referred itself to the regulator of social housing regarding delays in carrying out safety inspections to weddings, meaning that the council were not meeting required standards. The council has put action plans in place to return to full compliance, but where there are statutory notices on services, we are required to report a significant weakness in this area. Finally, and importantly, I want to emphasise that this report is fairly old. It covers arrangements that were present in the '22/'23 financial year, so with the passing of time, things have moved on and arrangements have been updated between '23/'24 and into '24/'25, which your next auditors would obviously comment on. The council's response to the key recommendations in this report detail the progress being made. The audit and risk management panel have also requested that the recommendations in the report be inserted into a tracker, so that management members and your future auditors and bazaars contract their process of implementation. This should help assist ensuring prior year recommendations in the '22/'23 recommendations made in this report are implemented on a more timely basis. And so that's all I wanted to say for the '22/'23 report, and just to say thank you also to management for your help throughout the process. -Thank you, Paul. Are there any questions to the external auditor from the members? We are not debating the item 8. Just questions for the auditor, please. I can see a hand from David Gardner. -Thank you, Mr Mayor. It wasn't a question. I just wanted to comment on the audit and risk management panel if that's the right moment to do so. I just wanted to say that since the various elections, we have been very busy. We've had two meetings, the audit and risk management panel and one training session, so we want to be as equipped as possible. You can see we have a recommendation here that the Council consider, and presumably this will be for the next municipal year, having a second non-voting independent member who we hope will do it on a voluntary basis, who has got the necessary qualifications in terms of audit and/or accountancy, and to join the panel. And we think we've already got Dr Blackhall, who's got a long experience and adds great value. She's got a business and academic background that we feel it would be good, going along with the recommendations from Grant Thornton, to have a second independent member, which we think is practised in many local authorities. I'd also like to say, as well as the tracker, that we are also recommending at another meeting that we have a tracker also for the internal audit review recommendations and how well they have been implemented by management or a good reason why they may not have been implemented or may have been delayed for whatever reason. And, Mr Mayor, if you read the, as I'm sure members all have read the audit letter, if you read it word for word, I think there is great cause for concern for the 22/23 audit letter in terms of the sustainability and measures that need to be taken. But we were reassured at our meeting that under the cabinet member and the director, there's been significant improvement in the new approach taken in 23/24, which is why we've asked for the tracker and while obviously we'll be keeping a very watchful eye on the next, as we come to the next audit report and indeed progress in terms of these recommendations. Thank you, Mr Mayor. Thank you, David, Chair of Audrey Landryk's Management Panel. Now can I ask the leader of our position, Matt Hadley, to speak on this? Is there a question for the auditor, please? Thank you, Mr Mayor. Yes, I have a question for the auditor and also some comments which I know is coming up next. But my question for the auditor is, obviously I've asked my detailed questions at arm with colleagues. I just want to ask one question and I've discussed this with Councillor Hyland, but I think it's really important to get on the record here at full council. So as Councillor Gardner just said, members will have seen the annual audit letter uses very serious language, the most serious we have yet seen. And in particular, its key recommendation one says that the council's members and senior officers must acknowledge the gravity of the medium-term financial outlook and take effective fire-reaching action to restore a sustainable financial position. So as we've discussed here and at Arm Panel, this relates to their judgement at the end of the 2022-23 year. And as the auditor has said, it's important to stress that time has moved on, progress has been made, as the cabinet member said. But my question is, on this central point about the auditor's assessment at that point in time, that the council had not yet acknowledged the gravity of the situation, could I ask the auditor to clarify your view on those actions since? So my question is, based on what you have seen of the actions taken since 2022-23, are you now of the view that the gravity of the situation is now being sufficiently acknowledged? I think it is, but I think it's a very important question that should be put on the record in the minutes of the meeting. Thank you. Can I ask an external auditor for exactly... Yes. So from discussions with management reading the papers, we are satisfied that the council is taking it seriously and our implemented international savings programmes are implemented and monitored and work properly. Obviously, we are not a number of the auditors of the council, so for 23-24, yeah. We can't, we won't be able to comment on 23-24, but we are satisfied with the arrangements the council are putting in place to strengthen arrangements. Thank you. Does any member wish to speak on this report? Before it was a question, but now you want to speak more. OK, I'll hand it to you, please. Yes, thank you, Mr Mayor. So, again, I've had my chance to comment on the report in detail. I do just want to raise a few things, because it is such a serious report. I'd like to add my thanks as well to, and those of the opposition group, to Grant Thornton for their work this year, but also over the years, now that this is their last year with RBG, and also to the finance team, as ever. I just have a few points to make. Because this annual audit letter is so strongly worded with areas of significant weakness in arrangements identified, I just want to draw out members' attention to one important element that I think really needs attention, which is that this annual audit letter, again, based on that judgement at the end of 22-23, is what I would describe having scrutinised about 10 of these now in a row, quietly and politely damning of the performance at that point of the council's Rethinking Services transformation programme, and in particular the digital strategy. So, on page 37, the letter notes, and I quote, Significant reliance on the work of the digital team to produce savings and efficiencies, and the letter finds that the outcome of financial benefits from transformation in general, and from the digital element in particular, has been disappointing. The letter goes on to state that the effectiveness and speed of delivery of the digital strategy in providing realisable cost savings should be reviewed. Elsewhere, it talks about reform. It uses the word reform of the digital function being needed, and they raise concerns on page 14 that the Rethinking Services programme and the digital strategy have received a significant level of investment in resources, but have reached a mature stage without delivering the significant savings that were intended for it. So, I do just want to draw out that theme, which runs out throughout the annual audit letter, this thread about Rethinking Services, and I do that not because it should come as any news to us. It shouldn't. We've talked about it here. I've raised concerns about it here and elsewhere. We've discussed it in scrutiny at length, the slipping back of timetables, but I am highlighting it here because we know, from the NTFS that has been passed in March, that Council's plans are so reliant on Rethinking Services working and coming up with the goods, which at this point, the auditor is suggesting it happens. So, it really is critical that the Council addresses that significant weakness that has been found, and I want to just raise the management response, the Council's management response on this particular issue on page 8 of point 6. It states that the work of the digital team is tilted towards ensuring that it is value-add and enabling savings delivery, and that's the kind of language that we have heard for the last several years, and without being critical, you know, it is in all honesty, I was expecting more in the management response given what we've read in the annual audit letter on this particular issue. So, that's my chief concern, and I wonder if I could just give the opportunity, when she speaks next, the cabinet member for finance. I know that Councillor Hyland is highly focused on this issue of Rethinking Services. Could she just offer some reassurance over the strength of the Council's response to the Rethinking Services findings in this annual audit letter specifically? Because I would value that reassurance, and I just want to make sure it gets the absolute attention from all members and the public that it deserves, and I'm very pleased that those two recommendations from the ARM panel have been accepted. I think they're both very good recommendations, and, you know, having read this report and scrutinised it, that independent expertise that we are adding to the panel, we hope on a pro bono basis, is certainly going to be needed because the strength of this report, as I say, is something that we all need to take note of. Thank you, Mr Mayor. Thank you, Councillor Hadley. Does Councillor Hyland wish to close the tickets? Thank you very much, Mr Mayor, and appreciate your comments, and absolutely recognise the good intentions which they're raised. I mean, I would say, of course, we've been through COVID. We know that this is 21, 22, 23, and so on, and the savings have been delayed but not negated, so there has been a lag due to putting the team together, COVID, et cetera, but we are confident that the whole organisation, as you say, rightly puts a priority on making savings through doing things, the three E's, as you were saying, Paul, and more efficiently and effectively and so on, and those initial savings will be made, and I would hope actually exceeded, although I'd rather under-promise than over-deliver, because after all, 30 of those 118 savings performers are to do with rethinking savings, and if you don't mind me saying, Chief Executive, they are a very bright and able team, and they are very focused, and I am absolutely confident that these savings will be delivered, but we will also be monitoring. I think somebody used, We will be keeping a watchful eye, and I think that's a very good expression, because we will all be doing that, because we know how important it is, and with that, Mr Mayor, I'll formally close that item. Thank you.
• Thank you very much, Councillor Hyland. Our members are happy to note the annual audit letter 2022-23. Thank you very much. I declare that the annual audit letter has been noted. On behalf of Council, I would like to thank the external auditor for the report tonight, and their years of service to the Council in their work, and in particular, in providing timely audits. It has been very much appreciated. Item 13, Medium-Term Financial Strategy 2025-26+ Update. This report provides an update on the Medium-Term Financial Strategy for the authority for the next four years, 2025-26 to 2028-29. The MTF has balances the financial implications of objectives and policies against constraints in resources, and provides the basis for decision-making. The report was considered by the Cabinet earlier today, and they had no comment on that. Can I invite Councillor James Hyland, Cabinet Member for Finance, Resources and Social Values, to introduce the report?
• Thank you very much indeed, Mr Mayor. I mean, what I would say, actually, is something that we all know, and that is, it's good news and it's bad news. And the bad news is that public services, whilst they're extremely valued by the public, are actually structurally underfunded. And we have very little way of reducing demand for those services, and we have statutory responsibilities to deliver them. We think that we need an uplift of at least 7% to try and bridge the gap that is needed. But we're not alone. You know, we have a gap this coming year, '25-26, of 27 million. But that is very similar to many other London boroughs of all political shades. Everyone is struggling to deliver SCN transport, temporary accommodation, and deliver quality social care for children and adults that are deserving of the people who need those services desperately. We've also seen explosion in the cost of living, and that has meant that Greenwich has needed to support its residents even more. Just this month, we've been faced with a charge for secure accommodation for just one young person at £20,000 a week, which is over a million pound a year for this individual. Now, given that if we put the council tax up by 1%, that brings in 1.2 million, you can see that that one young person's care is pretty much 1% on everybody's council tax. So, we have some very, very difficult choices, and very often those choices are actually removed from us. I would say that Wes Streeting says that the NHS is broken. Well, I think local government is broken too, in terms of its finances, and it is definitely punching above its weight. But as I say, I'm not certain that a new Labour government will actually be able to give us the 7% uplift that we so desperately need, given the state and the country's finances. We can only hope that inflation remains low, that Keir Starmer's vision for growth continues to make sure that it's delivered for businesses, to improve the prosperity of our residents and our businesses in this borough, and that we are able to benefit from that and keep the council tax as low as we possibly can. Thank you, and I commend this report to you, Mr Mayor.
• Thank you, Councillor Hammond. Does any member wish to speak on the report? I've seen a hand from Councillor Hadley-Obrunich. One last. Councillor Mack Hadley, please.
• Thank you, Mr Mayor. Can I thank the cabinet member for introducing the report? Can I also thank the Director of Finance and his brilliant team for producing this update on the medium-term financial strategy, as always? I see that its updates to assumptions in section 7 contain a very important shift in this council's budgeting approach, and actually this is acting on a previous auditor recommendation on how we set a budget. So this change makes sure we're accounting as a council a lot more realistically for demographic pressures at the forecasting and budgeting stage, rather than the practice of continuingly and knowingly producing budgets that we know, in reality, are going to lead to overspends. At 7.4, we learn that that change in approach has increased the total budgeted figure for demographic demand increases from 3.9 million to 15 million, so it's a significant change in approach. And I welcome that. I think that having those more realistic figures firmly on the table at the outset will help the council to plan in a much more effective way. It's a much healthier and more useful approach to take, so I welcome that, and I wanted to say that. I also note that the report confirms at 7.12 that the significant increase we saw in central government funding under the previous government's announcements last year was actually even higher than we thought, with an additional 3.9 million being able to be included in poor spending power in 2025-26 as a result. So, to touch on something the cabinet member introduced in her remarks, the question of what approach the new Labour government will take, both on two things, the level of funding for local authorities, the quantum, and on multi-year certainty, those two questions are now on everybody's minds, Mr Mayor, across local government, and both issues, as she said, remain a matter of cross-party consensus across local government more widely, and in this Council Chamber too, as a matter of fact. But my reflection, Mr Mayor, is that from what we have seen so far, I suppose I'm agreeing with the cabinet member, in that anyone in the Labour Party who was looking forward to some magic overnight step change in central government funding is clearly going to be disappointed, and I think that the new Labour government finds that these decisions aren't actually as easy as they've been pretending all these years in opposition in central government in Westminster, that public spending restraint isn't, after all, a political choice for an economic necessity, as I've been saying in this Chamber for years, and that this mythology, that Labour members have been fed for 14 years suggesting otherwise, was just a politically contrived fiction all along. And I note a very subtle but significant change in tone from the cabinet member for finance introducing this report, if I may. All of a sudden, we're being very understanding of central government and the difficulty of decision-making, and, well, they may not be able to increase funding. And I think that change in tone has been noted and noticed. It is clear that there is going to be no major increase. Anybody who's been following what Rachel Reeves has been saying, the Chancellor has been saying, or indeed reading the Labour manifesto, can see that. To be honest, my first hope, and the hope of us as the opposition group in all realism, is that this Labour government actually does at least continue the huge increase in central government funding for Greenwich that the last Conservative government delivered since 2019, an increase of more than 55 million. I hope they at least continue those increases which the previous government delivered. I hope that they do, and I hope that it's more than that. I hope that that's possible, but I've recognised, not just since whatever the date was in May when we had a Labour government, but for years, that these decisions are more difficult than many here have pretended. So I hope they deliver more. I certainly hope, to close, Mr Mayor, that this administration, that the cabinet member and the leader of the council, will be as vocal in lobbying for that under the public spending restraint of a Labour government as they were under the public spending restraint of a Conservative one. Thank you, Mr Mayor. Thank you, Councillor Hadley. May I just respond to that, Mr Mayor? I think that at the end, probably, because there are some other questions as well. Thank you. Councillor Thorne. Thanks, Mr Mayor. Obviously, whilst I think all sensible Labour members and indeed members of the public may completely understand the magic money tree that was used as a term previously by those who have been chucked out might not be appearing, what we can all agree is after two weeks in office, the fundamental change that we've already seen is a respect and a decency for public sector workers that has been fundamentally missing for 14 years in terms of change in tone and approach. And that hasn't cost anyone a penny, actually. That has been a choice about how you speak to people. So I think that's very welcome. And I also think that in terms of what we ask in, you know, the Conservatives used to laud it to us that, you know, they were the party of fiscal responsibility, blah, blah, blah. You know, £700 million on four volunteers to Rwanda. Four volunteers. And that money, could you imagine what we could have done with £700 million? And I'm so sorry, Councillor Greenwell, after a little loving that you're shrugging your shoulders, but it's a disgrace. And actually, it is the worst abuse of public sector money I think any of us have ever seen. All based on assessments from people who knew that no one was going anywhere and it was just a political gimmick. And actually, it is entirely right that money on those sorts of schemes is stopped so that we can put money back into our public services, which are completely broken. There was a shocking report out yesterday from the National Audit Office about homelessness. And actually, it shows... Don't worry, it's not a missive from Keir Starmer. She's listening to something. But actually, the National Audit Office yesterday made it clear that in 2010, well, since 2010, we're now spending more than double the amount of money on homelessness as councils in this country, rising from 1.6 billion to 2.4 billion, which is an absolute scandal. And again, you know, cuts have consequences and so do choices. And if you tell everyone that we don't have to build any homes and then get rid of the targets because it's all too difficult, this is why people are living their lives in travel lodges rather than in their own homes. And that is the reality of the situation and we hope that we'll see a change there. So if Council Highland has no chance to read that report yet, add it to the summer reading list because it is genuinely shocking. I did wonder, based on what has been outlined in terms of potentially significant risks, whether we are at the point or when the point might come where we'd have to consider additional spending controls or potentially reviewing other projects if things continue to be volatile. I wonder whether the cabinet member might say something about that. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. -Thank you, Councillor Diamantrop. -I'll leave it off you, Anthony. -Thank you, Mr. Mayor. And chambers, it's quite shocking tonight. The Leader of the Opposition finally wants to talk about national issues. So I do know the change in tone in how he's going to be approaching the chamber, but please note, maybe there's a real recognition from the Leader of the Opposition that actually local government does work in hand with central government, and we will lend our voices to the issues that we have to overcome in this chamber and how we relate that to central government. We'll continue to do so. But, Mr. Mayor, one thing that is -- which I really want to put on the record -- nobody in the Labour Party ever thought this would be easy. Cleaning up the Conservative mess was never going to be easy. When Liz Truss crushed the economy and people's mortgage rates went up, no one ever thought that was going to be easy. It's why our residents, it's why residents across the country voted out this Tory government to get a Labour government in there to make sure we get a really great tone, as we heard from Councillor Fulpo over there, but get a government that's really serious about delivery. That government that will work towards tackling poverty and focused on growth and getting people into work. That's what this new Labour government will be doing, and as they're on that journey, we will stand with them in solidarity, lending our thoughts to the policies that they release and how we make sure that local government is safe. And I'm just going to go on this point. It's particularly about how much the Conservative government gave us. Has he ever spoken about how much they cut since 2010 from this Council, taken 150 million out of our budget? Has he spoken to the issues of the inflation that increased from Liz Truss crushing the budget? Have they spoken to that? Have they spoken to the increase in services that we do and the demand that we get for a growing population, but yet still that's not reflected from the budgets they set out under the Tory government? Did they speak to the 3% cut that Jeremy Hun and Rishis Unak inflicted on local governments? I don't think so. Mr Mayor, we've just made up to 35 million cuts in the MTFS, showing how this Council is responding to these issues. These were tough decisions for all of us in this chamber to make. And as the MTFS update states, more potential tough decisions to come. But as the Labour government finds their way, and I'm glad that Rachel Reeves has commissioned the review of all public spending to understand what this Tory government left for us, as we go down that journey, Mr Mayor, we'll continue to safeguard and protect the Council's finances and work towards delivering good services for residents. Thank you. [Applause] Now, can I ask the cabinet member for Finance Resources and Social Values, Councillor Dennis Herlant, if you want to respond to any of the queries, you can respond. And finally, close the debate, if you want. Yes, thank you. I'd like to close the debate formally, Mr Mayor. Thank you for your forbearance. And in answer, the Councillor thought that was exactly what I was thinking. 700 million pounds could have provided all our services for two years, instead of sending four volunteers to Rwanda. But I suppose it's good donations to international development, which the Tories never seem to really ever want to do much towards. So in that sense, perhaps we need to have the more generous of spirit. Thank you, Mr Mayor. Thank you, Councillor Herlant. Does Council note the report? No, thank you. Thank you very much. Item 14, Treasury Management and Capital Outturn, 2023-24. This report provides a position statement for the 2023-24 financial year and reflects the Treasury Management and Capital activities on the table in accordance with previous decisions. It was considered by the Oddick and Ricks Management Panel on 22 July and Cabinet earlier today, and again, they had no further comment. Can I ask Councillor Dennis Herlant, cabinet member for finance, resources and social value, to move the recommendation? Thank you, Mr Mayor. I'll be brief. The one substantive decision here is around extra contingency for the Future High Streets Fund, specifically Woolwich Town Centre. As we know, the original contractor became bankrupt, went into administration, and the contract was re-let, and that meant that we had to invest more finance into that project, and we've put slightly more in than is needed because it's important to have that contingency in place, because it's a wonderful, wonderful scheme, and we need to see it being brought to conclusion. There's an 80% increase in investment year-on-year from 177 to 318 million, which is summarised in paragraph 1.2 with examples and more detail in 11.1 with our Greenwich missions referenced in the latter. And that is important because of this administration, their efforts to actually build more houses to deal with the awful waiting list of people without homes and with the shortage of private accommodation. So, I commend this report to you, Mr Mayor. Thank you. Thank you, Councillor Herlant. Does any member wish to speak on this report? I can see David. Councillor Delgado. Thank you very much, Mr Mayor, and thank the cabinet member and the director for this report. I wasn't actually going to speak about the arm panel because we have no comment, but Councillor Williams and I today visited new residents, council tenants, in Hearn House and Bartley House in our ward. And we met a number of tenants, and I've never met people whose lives have been so transformed by getting a new, wonderful council flat in each case, where they and their families have a permanent and secure future to build their lives and build opportunity. They were so thankful, so grateful. At least two of the families we saw had spent time in hotels. The other one had a whole family of three or four, I think, in an HMO in Plumstead way, which was apparently not very nice, no reflection on Plumstead. And it's just amazing. And when I looked at the arm panel, at the level of capital financing requirements, CFR and how that escalated and projected to escalate more, I am concerned, and clearly it's something we do have to keep an eye on, that we are not overborrowing and the position is sustainable. But at the same time, when we see what it's done for ordinary people, prioritising that spending on housing for our residents and for their life opportunities and those of their children, it is absolutely fantastic. If it's costing us £100 a night and more to keep someone in a hotel, then we are paying for this, and obviously we're getting GLA grants and so forth, we're paying for this when you take the rent away and so forth. In some seven years. This is a tremendously good investment for the Council and I applaud the work that the Leader and the cabinet members have done in order to really accelerate the level of acquisition and Greenwich Builds to give people a proper chance in our borough. Thank you, Councillor Gardner. Does Council note the recommendations? Thank you. The recommendations are noted. Now, item 15, Community Infrastructure and Lady Adoption. This report provides an update on progress of the Community Infrastructure and Lady Charging Schedule following examination by an independent examiner and six approval to adopt the CIL charging schedule. Can I ask the Leader of the Council to introduce the report, please? Thank you, Mr Mayor. And first of all, I'd just like to note the report that we plan to adopt a new still charging schedule that allows us to charge higher rates, particularly for residential development. This helps fund infrastructure and improvements to deal with the demands that new development place on our existing communities, facilities and the new residents that will be joining our communities. The CIL rates capture more forms of development, including co-living schemes and others uses like industrial that weren't captured in our previous still charging schedule. The new rates will bring in an extra five million of funding for infrastructure over the next five years. In setting these new rates, we'll struck an appropriate balance between funding infrastructure and continuing to encourage development. This was confirmed by the independent examiner. The examiner could have also reduced our rates if there was not considered appropriate evidence or if our evidence wasn't based on robust evidence. Some developers challenged our approach during the examination, but the examiner agreed with our approach. And if we adopt this CIL review today, that we will implement these new rates to be able to deliver a greater investment into our communities. That said, Mr Mayor, I want to thank everyone for all their work on this. This report has gone on a real journey, one that we had to place on pause when there was a real trouble during the economy and we wanted to make the best case for the council in making sure they get the CIL rates that we need to deliver for infrastructure in our community. But I want to thank all cabinet members, previous and current, who have worked to deliver this because it's a good thing for the borough. And just lastly, all the communities that spoke up and fed into the review and encouraged us to keep reviewing it, one thing now that we're going to be doing, Mr Mayor, is making sure that we undertake regular reviews and keeping our eyes on this so to make sure that we can deliver more infrastructure and more support for the council as we deliver for our communities. Thank you.
• Thank you, leader of the council. Does any member wish to speak on the report? I can say, leader of opposition, Councillor Huddly.
• Thank you, Mr Mayor. The opposition group will be voting for the adoption of this new CIL charging schedule. Certainly echo the leader's words in everything he said. We are certainly satisfied with the independent examiner's conclusion that this new schedule achieves that difficult balance to strike between maximising revenue from developers and also attracting investment to make sure that we get the growth that we need in the borough and that private sector investment continues. So I know there will be some who will be disappointed at the comparatively modest increase in CIL income that's being forecast, the £5 million increase the leader mentioned, and that's set out in the viability report. But we do have to live in the real world and achieving that difficult balance between income for the infrastructure we need and investment does require that pragmatism and that balance. So clearly that's been achieved in this charging schedule. We will all, as members of the council, want to continue to scrutinise the use of CIL levy funds and we can continue to do that as ward members and also through the scrutiny system. That's going to be even more important now we're going to, we hope, be collecting more funds. That's a separate issue, but we'll return to all of us, I'm sure. So we'd like to again, as earlier placed on record, our thanks to everybody involved, including Councillor Smith. It's a real legacy, actually, for him in his previous cabinet role. And also, in particular, thank the director of DRES and her team for her work on it. And for now, we'll be happy to vote for this change. Thank you.
• Thank you. Can I ask the leader of the council, Councillor Kirkie, to close the meeting.
• Thank you, Mr. Mayor, and I'd like to close it formally.
• Thank you. I now ask council if it agrees the recommendations in the report. Those in favour, we need to get a vote. Thank you. Against? Any abstentions? Those recommendations have been agreed. Thank you. Item 16, modification of composition of membership of the health and wellbeing vote. Council is asked to agree the proposed changes to the composition of the membership of the vote. Can I ask the leader of the council, Councillor Kirkie, to move the report?
• Thank you, Mr. Mayor, and I'd like to move the report for me, thank you.
• Thank you. Does any member wish to speak on this report? Cabinet member Mariam Lullabaugh.
• Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I very much welcome this report. I just wanted to make a comment as the new healthy, but also the new chair for the health and wellbeing board. So the changes are to the membership only, and it's specifically about increasing the representation on the board from the community and voluntary sector. So we think that's something really important. We're proposing an additional, two additional members, and something that's likely to be on an annual rotating basis so the board has input from more BCS voices and the sector has better representation. So we think this is a really important change that I think will help the voluntary sector to be better involved with our health and wellbeing board. Thank you very much.
• Thank you very much, Councillor Lullabaugh. Can I ask Councillor Kirkie to close the debate now?
• Thank you, Mr. Mayor, and I'll close the report for me.
• Thank you. And I ask the council if it agrees the recommendations in the report. Those in favour, when you're voting, leader, yes. Those against, any abstentions? Those recommendations have been agreed. Now item 17, appointment of political assistance. Council is asked to consider the principle of political groups appointing political assistance. Can I ask the leader of the council to move the recommendations, please?
• Thank you, Mr. Mayor. And I would like to move the report. Following our external peer review conducted by the LJ and a panel of experts from local government, we are bringing several recommendations to improvements across the council. The one before us today is a matter of political assistance. Now the peer review report states that the effectiveness of joint working between elected members and officers support councilors and political groups appropriately and effectively, aid the work of Kavanagh, facilitate collective responsibility politically and corporately, and enhance involvement and engagement amongst elected members. But these key aspects of this do not feel to be working effectively in Greenwich. Mr. Mayor, because of this external peer review, it gave us a recommendation one in the peer review report, which also states that the council should urgently address the ways of working and arrangements in Greenwich in order to aid decision making, maximize effectiveness of joint working between elected members and officers at senior level, support councilors and political groups appropriately and effectively, and aid the work of Kavanagh. Mr. Mayor, today's decision is central to ensuring good governance is upheld and the administration's ambitions are realized for our residents. So that is what we are here to rectify today, and the decision to appoint political assistance is here to help do that. The LGA peer review recommendations will see us investing in local democracy as local government has a key role to play as we continue to build our local communities. Mr. Mayor, we believe in the principles of our country before party. That is why we are investing in the opposition councilors as we believe in the value of having a good opposition. As we also, Mr. Mayor, believe that in transform, there is power in the transformation of local government. Now, Mr. Mayor, I mentioned this decision was just one of a host of recommendations made to us by the LGA in the peer review, and I'm pleased to say we have made good progress on the implementation of these recommendations. Just one example I'll draw members' attention to is the better ways of working between the political leaders and the corporate leadership team through the council setting up the Greenwich Strategic Leadership Team, a new meeting that allows us to dive deep into the areas and challenges and deliver collective solutions. So, Mr. Mayor, while this is also a journey that we are going on in making sure that we implement the LGA recommendations, this today, this decision before us, Chamber, is a step in making sure we can implement all recommendations and get an effective council that works for our residents. Thank you, Mr. Mayor.
• Thank you, Councillor Cote. I understand the leader of the opposition, Councillor Hartley, wishes to propose an amendment.
• Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Yes, I'm rising to propose our amendment. I really regret that this item is being brought forward by the leader of the council and this administration. I'm rising to propose our amendment because this proposal, to accept the principle of introducing a political assistance system, comes with an 83,000 pound price tag for the taxpayer. And the report itself notes that the council budget for this year was set without any reference to this long-planned proposal from the leader of the council. The report says, and I quote, That compensatory savings will need to be found from elsewhere within the council's budget to pay for this. And as we've heard this very evening, there are substantial pressures on the council. 33 million pounds of savings being made, of which six million pounds are cuts which will affect children's centres, library opening hours, school crossing patrols, and Labour's proposed cuts to council tax support for this borough's most vulnerable people. That's the context for this proposal, to increase the cost of local politics. So despite all of those things, the leader of the council has brought this report on this idea to increase the cost of the taxpayer burdens of our local democracy. Passing it unamended tonight would mean another 83,000 pounds of savings or cuts from somewhere on top of that 33 million having to be made. So our amendment tonight seeks to defer a decision on this until those unbudgeted compensatory savings are brought to us all as members at full council, so we can see for ourselves. And I wanna set out why we brought this amendment in proposing it, Mr. Mayor. For the record, I think this idea of a taxpayer-funded political assistance system is completely unjustified. The leader of the council knows I disagree strongly with the principle. I think it's politically inept. I've thought that since it was first proposed by the leader back in May 2022, and I'll come back to the issue of timing later. It is, in my view, an egregious lapse in judgment to bring it forward now, given that difficult context. I've urged him not to do this publicly and privately. I've felt at times like I've been acting as his political assistant, giving him some very good political advice, which is not to go anywhere near increasing the cost of local politics in the political situation that it is in. Good political advice from me, freely given, and that he's chosen to ignore. We've just been warned tonight by the auditor that the council has not yet established a track record of success in rethinking services, that transformation program that contributes so heavily to the £33 million savings target. So the idea that at a time like this, the priority of this Labour administration is to further increase the cost of local politics astounds me. It will astound local taxpayers as they become aware of it, and they will become aware of it. On the timing and rationale, the idea that this is being brought forward in response to the LGA peer challenge is an insult. Every single person in this room knows that that is a falsehood. This document in my hand is the leader of the council's pitch to become the leader of the Labour group back in May 2022. Several people back then shared this document with me privately in my role as leader of the opposition. It's this document that I urged him, if he remembers, to publish two years ago in the interests of transparency, and he refused. It wasn't my document to publish, so I didn't. But I'm not going to let the leader of the council get away with this idea that he's only introducing the political assistant role in response to the recent LGA peer challenge. I'm not going to let him get away with that, when on page 2 of this document in my hand from two years ago, he wrote, I will recruit a political advisor accountable to group to help with policy and political messaging." He's been doing this for two years. So I really do think that what you've claimed publicly in the press release that accompanied this paper, what you've claimed in this council chamber tonight, is false. And I actually think that's a very serious matter, and the proof is here in my hand. He spent two years trying to introduce this. We all know it's caused eruptions in Labour group. It's caused me to publicly harangue him for two years for wanting to spend all this political capital on his aim of recruiting a special advisor. And I've heard the argument on his behalf, as this has been discussed around the town hall, that he needs a political assistant because other Labour Council leaders in London have one. Not good enough, not nearly good enough. And I've also looked at the job description for the proposed political assistant role, which hasn't been published alongside this paper. It's marked final. I haven't been consulted on it, just like I haven't been consulted on any of the details of this. And the job description lists four purposes of the role-- to provide expert policy advice, to help maintain group cohesion. It's clearly going to be a tough gig, this job, Mr. Mayor, in the Labour group. I can't believe that was put in writing. Thirdly, to research and analyze issues, and fourthly, to offer support to councillors. Basically, comm support. Now, it's my view that all of these things-- they're looking very embarrassing, Mr. Mayor. All these things are things that the leader of the council should be getting from the 50 other Labour councillors he has in his group. And that is the point. He's got 50 councillors, 5-0, Labour councillors to draw on. So if the leader of the council thinks he needs help with political advice, political research, group cohesion, political comms, why doesn't he just draw on the skills, and experience, and talents of his 50 Labour colleagues who are already funded and paid for through the allowances scheme? Instead, he wants to charge the taxpayer more. Again, it's his answer to everything-- a bigger communications team, one of his first decisions as leader, more communication spending on all those glossy videos and consultations, consultations about consultations, and now taxpayer-funded political advice. It's always the Greenwich taxpayer that pays for this style over substance administration. So those are my views on this proposal, but there will be other views on its benefits and its disbenefits. Whatever anyone thinks of the value of this idea that the leader is proposing, I don't think we're able to actually make a judgment on it tonight from this paper in front of us. And it's that central point about assessing value for the taxpayer, the value of the proposal, that is at the heart of our amendment. Because we're being asked tonight to approve the principle of a political assistance system without being able to weigh up the supposed value it will bring against that 83,000 pounds of compensatory savings or cuts needed to pay for it. So I think it's a very reasonable approach to take that we should all, as full council, as members of this council, before making a decision on this, have clear sight and visibility of what 83,000 pounds in savings or cuts the leader of the council intends to make to make way for his political assistance system policy. I think it's only right that every member here knows, so they can make an informed decision one way or another, about what this policy actually means. So that's what our amendment does. I could have gone further. I've put a motion forward that you rejected previously. I could have gone further. We could have just voted against it. But I'm instead proposing that we defer this decision until that information is available to us all, so we can weigh up the benefits against what's being lost. And this is the middle way, really, that I'm putting a challenge to the leader of the council. If he will stand by the 83,000 pounds a year in cuts he wants to make to pay for political assistance, why won't he tell us what those cuts are first? Thank you, Mr. Mayor. (audience applauding)
• Is the amendment seconded? Thank you. Before we debate on the amendment, can I ask Councillor O'Cokey if he accepts the amendment?
• Yes, the mayor will not be accepting the amendment. Thank you.
• Do members wish to debate on the amendment? Yep, leader of the council.
• Thank you, Mr. Mayor. First of all, I wanna start by saying I'm glad the leader of position has concerns over the issue of finance. I mean, in the last budget, Mr. Mayor, this council made tough decisions about how we reduce spend and how we balance our books. We made up to 55 million in savings and decisions to safeguard the finances of this council. So I can assure him that the following countless conservative decisions that were made over the last 14 years, it is the labour councillors and working with our officers working together to keep this council running and safeguarding residents from their austerity. Like when this trust crushed the economy and inflation went up, the cost of providing services for residents dramatically increased and we had to deal with that. Like when Jeremy Hunt set his budget and there was a 3% cut in the overall allocation for local authorities and we had to deal with that. So while I hear his argument about this council, while I hear his argument that this council, this council works to safeguard our services for residents while still delivering the outcomes that we need for our residents remaining sustainable because of how prudent we are in managing our financial resources. Now, Mr. Mayor, the decision today is not about finances. It's about working solely. It is about working towards implementing the peer review recommendations. The decision we seek today is about giving the authority permission to do this and implement political systems and the space to work out how it does it. And it is a decision that is that legally the council can make in line with legislation. Once we take today's decision, the authority will set out the how. So I ask all councillors here to vote down this amendment from Councillor Arnie, but of my most important point that I ask you to do it, it is for the reasons that is spoken about in our external auditor's report by Grant Thornton on item 12, appendix A of our agenda pack. The audits report, which covers a number of reasons for which to do it, is a number of reasons the audits report, which covers the '22 to '23 financial year states that the council has a history of being relatively devolved and directorate led with varying management structures developing over time rather than having a strong corporate organisational culture. This was identified as part of the LGA corporate peer review. The auditor goes on to say when we consider the findings of the LGA alongside our analysis of the council's difficulty in delivering sustainable savings and transformation, there is a risk that the leadership culture and the level of bureaucracy may become a barrier to the fast pace of change that is required to resolve the council's financial challenges. That is what our auditor says. It recognises the work of the LGA peer review. It states the council has a history of being relatively devolved and directorate led with varying management cultures developing over time. Now, Mr. Mayor, this is what I'm working to change as leader of the council. This is why we commissioned the LGA peer review. Over the last two years, we have been doing this work. Now, Councillor Hartley might not want to acknowledge the auditor's comments, but let it be said that the Labour group will be unapologetically ambitious about achieving our missions and challenging the cultures that hold us back. Importantly, the auditor says, and I quote, There is a risk that the leadership culture and the level of bureaucracy may become a barrier to the fast pace of change that is required to resolve the council's financial position." That is the risk that I and Greenwich Labour Party councillors will not take for granted. All of the peer review recommendations will be implemented to mitigate that risk. This decision will support us in making this council sharper and more able to deliver. And more importantly, Mr. Mayor, this isn't just welcomed by the Labour Party, it's welcomed by other oppositional parties, too, who do not sit in this council because they realise that to deliver for our residents, local government must be supported. Now, Mr. Mayor, I'm not going to support this delay, delay, delay tactic from Councillor Hartley. We've got a council to run and residents to deliver for. I am leading a reforming agenda, and let it be clear, I am leading a reforming agenda in Greenwich. That has seen us start the work to become the first council to open up eight wellbeing hubs in the country for all school children. That has seen us achieve an outstanding offset rating for children's services. That has seen us invest 1.8 million into opening up a 10-year regeneration strategy, a new housing agenda, and more new homes, a green investment scheme for residents to tackle the climate emergency with us, a 7 million sustainable transport fund to make sure that we continue to invest in our environment, organisational changes by setting up the Greenwich Strategic Leadership Team, and a refreshed truly function making this council, our critical friends, even stronger, and most importantly, Mr. Mayor, a balanced budget, a reforming agenda in Greenwich that seeks to achieve our vision and missions set out in our Greenwich. That is why today's step takes us further to implementing the peer review recommendations and a reforming agenda. Mr. Mayor, I can't speak for any document that Councillor Hartley has, but what I can say is that when I came into my role, I knew exactly what I wanted to achieve, and I'm grateful for the recommendations of the peer review because it has allowed us to really shine a light on ourselves and think about how we reform this council to continue to deliver for our residents. Colleagues, vote this amendment down tonight because we are here to reform this council. (audience applauding)
• Councillor Oren, one more.
• Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I mean, there's a saying that don't interrupt your opponent if you think they're making a mistake, and yet we hear the Leader from Leader of Opposition again, and your exact 12-page speech there, Matt. Good luck with finding the one clip for your social media from that. And look, let's be honest. This is not actually a vast amount of money. If we look at the cost, if we look at job adverts on the council website right now, there are 25 at the rate that would be for the part-time opposition assistant, 16 for the full-time role, and 25 in between, nine and above. I don't need a review to pause any hiring to reorganise to explain some of that. The LGA review that has been conducted confirmed the value that a political assistant can bring. In my time as a councillor, I've been truly shocked at the lack of support and direction that comes for the Leader, cabinet members, and to us as members of this council from a political perspective in particular. And this, having a political advisor can help us to cut through the bureaucracy and deliver value for money. And it has been made clear, the Leader of the Opposition doesn't want to hire a political assistant. Nobody's forcing him to. So I would like to urge colleagues to please reject this amendment, which is politics. And look, I welcome the contributions of the Leader of the Opposition. I think it helps make us a better council. And I think extra support for you will help us be a better council, as well as extra support for the Leader and cabinet will help us all to be a better council. That is how we deliver value for money for our residents and improve as a council at pace. Thank you.
• Thank you. Does Councillor O'Keegan, as mover of the recommendation, wish to close the debate on that amendment? (muffled speaking) Sorry, my apologies. Just the Leader of the Opposition, Matt Hartley. Councillor Matt Hartley would like to close the debate on the amendment.
• Yes, and can I come back to the responses?
• In this?
• Yes. - Yeah, you can.
• See, I've worked it out without a political assistant.
• There you go, thank you, Mr. Mayor, for your help. I mean, I'd start with the Leader of the Council and his remarks. Is he for real? I mean, that is seriously the only thing that first comes to mind. I sometimes think we're sat through different meetings, he and I. Is he seriously trying to blame Liz Truss for his decision to introduce political assistance? It's absurd. How can he possibly stand up with a straight face and continue to claim that this is a result of the peer challenge after what I've said? He said that he can't speak to the document I waived. He wrote it, he doesn't have to speak to it. He wrote it two years ago. It's been gestating for two years, him trying to get this proposal through. So to continue to claim that this is a response to the peer challenge is a falsehood, and I think, as I said earlier, that is actually a very serious matter for a leader of a council. I think it is actually skirting very close to not being in line with the Nolan principles that we are all signed up to. People can make their own judgment about what has happened here and what's about to happen because the statements you've made are false. So let me come to Councillor Burn Mulligan's points. He oh so predictably challenged, with his speech, challenged me not to appoint a political assistant that the law says has to be allocated to the Conservative group if the Labour group insists on allocating a political assistant. He knows full well, the leader of the council knows full well that the Local Government and Housing Act requires that, listen to me, that if, you know, some free advice, he knows full well that the Local Government and Housing Act requires that if the majority group is allocated a political assistant, this has been checked with the interim director of legal, Councillor Okereke, then the next largest group must be allocated one, two. And there is the general principle that political groups on any council have access to resources on an equitable basis. So make no mistake, if the leader of the council insists on pushing this proposal through, there will have to be political assistants for both groups. Now what I can tell him, what I can tell Councillor Burn Mulligan is that if a political assistant is effectively forced on us by the vote tonight, then we will use that role to defend and advance the interests of the Greenwich taxpayer every single day they are in post. That's what we are here to do as opposition councillors. It seems we're the only ones here doing that, as you can see from this absurd proposal tonight. And I saw on Twitter, and I heard in the debate today, that Councillor Okereke had the absolute gall to say he was investing in the opposition, the absolute gall of it, given that Labour have spent the last two elections, and the by-election for that matter, trying to wipe out every bit of opposition left in this borough. He said earlier in this meeting, we're gonna get rid of all three of you. So the absolute gall to talk about investing in opposition, and the absolute gall of it, we've seen tonight how this Labour group treated the other opposition council as motion on a very serious ward issue, with political games to stop that being debated. And so don't give me that about investing in the opposition. Do me a favour, do us a favour. I think it's very clear what's happened here, Mr. Mayor. The leader made this pledge two years ago to hire a Labour political assistant. He said that to his group in getting elected as leader of the Labour group. He became leader of the council. He was then given the legal advice, to his surprise I'm sure, that says the law requires the allocation of a political assistant to the Conservative group, if he insists on having one for Labour group. So he's pressed ahead anyway against my advice. And now he tries to dress it up as some kind of magnanimous gesture. Do me a favour. We will be voting against, when we get to the main debate, Mr. Mayor, because it's absolutely the wrong priority to be increasing the cost of local politics. It's an astonishing lapse of political judgement for the leader of the council. I think it's very interesting whose hands went up, and whose hands clapped, and whose hands didn't, when the round of applause, the kind of staged round of applause, they didn't even need a political assistant for that, occurred earlier. I think the leader will come to regret this decision. I think it's vanity. I think it's the wrong thing to do. And I think when those 2026 local elections come around, he's going to feel that. Labour councillors are going to feel that at the ballot box, as he's already felt it at Mottingham, Coldar, and New Eltham in that by-election. And to hear from Councillor O'Byrne Mulligan, who's smirking in the back row, it's not a vast amount of money. £83,000 a year is not a vast amount of money, according to Labour councillors. And that says it all, Mr. Mayor, about the Labour councillors' approach to public money. He said he was shocked. He said he was shocked. Taxpayers will be shocked at that statement, Mr. Mayor. So it's very interesting who's applauded and who's not. It's very interesting who's spoken and who's not. And the vast quantity of Labour councillors who didn't want to get up and defend this absurd proposal. So I urge members to vote for the amendment so we can defer. And if they vote the amendment down, we'll be voting against. And I urge every member here to do the same. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. (audience applauding)
• We have an amendment. And I would like to ask the council to vote on the amendment. All those in favour? (audience laughing) All those against? (audience laughing) Any abstentions? The amendment has not been agreed. Does any member wish to speak on the report, original report? (audience chattering) Councillor Nick Williams.
• Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I'll be voting for this proposal. It will be no surprise to Councillor Hartley. But I would say it's not the first time we've seen the opposition in the weeds this evening, is it? Councillor Tester's question earlier about the weed programme and glyphosate. But really, to wait and delay and delay, to wait for the costs, we have made a statement that we will try and make it cost neutral. Let's leave it to the council to deliver that. We do not need to delay to do that. And on that, Councillor Hartley talks about costs and costs, but not the benefits that this will bring. It will bring a more effective local government here. Our liaison with officers will be more efficient if you read the peer review. And the subject's of good political advice, the leader. Is he serious? This is the man that backed Liz Truss in her leadership campaign. I will bring her up again and talk about that as an error of judgement. And he has the audacity to question the leader on errors of judgement. So there we have it. And the final question I'll have for Councillor Hartley is is he accusing the LGA peer review team of some sort of collusion with Councillor O'Karake's plans? Or is it just a coincidence that this mythical document you wave around seems to match their findings as well? Can you explain that? Is it Councillor O'Karake's plan by this paper you've got or is it the LGA recommendation that you have issue with? Thank you.
• Thank you. Next, Councillor O'Karake.
• Thank you, Mr Mayor. The leader of the opposition has come to this chamber and made some serious accusations. One on emotion, which I don't know what he refers to. But I will just ask him, if anyone's breaking the nullness principles, when you bring matters to this chamber, you make sure it's correct. Don't bring matters to this chamber on the basis of hearsay, what people have sent to you, or make accusations, because there are serious consequences for what we place on the public record. So I want you to be cautious in the way you address this chamber around what you seek to present as mine or others or other things. But be very cautious in the way you place matters in the public debate. You have a responsibility as leader of the opposition to evidence things, right? You have a responsibility to evidence things. So when you bring matters to this chamber, you make sure it's clear and clear. And then come into the chamber to make accusations. Be very, very cautious in the way you do that and ask that you respect that, because it's really important that when we speak to our residents, they understand that you've made an accusation today that I'm breaking the nulling principles. That's why, that is that you did, you suggested that and eluded that. Also, I'd like to place on the record, Mr. Mayor, when I gave my speech, when I said, I didn't say I was making the decision of political citizens 'cause I live trust. So that's a falsehood that he's placed on the record. What I said is that Liz trust crushed the economy and this Labour Council has been here picking up the pieces ever since. So Mr. Mayor, maybe the leader of the opposition needs further, maybe the leader of the opposition didn't hear me, but I'd like him to correct the record. Thank you.
• Thank you. Councillor Lullabaugh.
• Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I'm speaking in favour of the proposals tonight. And the main reason being that I reject the opposition's attempt to make this, make an investment in the local government something to be ashamed of. And I really do not appreciate this extreme binary argument that we're being pushed into here, pitting residents against politicians. That rhetoric has been shown to have very, you know, serious consequences. People are losing trust in politics, but it is this binary argument that is constantly being used that erodes it. All of us in this chamber, yourselves included, are all working hard for residents. And I really think that we should respect the work that all councillors do. And it's something that really frustrates me 'cause I think it is kind of a very simplistic and kind of binary argument which isn't helpful. It also comes back to the age old differences in our politics. As a Labour politician, I believe in the public sector. And I think you made it clear earlier tonight that you do not, and you do not see the value of it, you do not believe in the value of it, and you do not believe in investing in it. So I believe in investing in teachers, in nurses, and I believe in investing in local councils and our local government. And I've also seen the huge impact of failing to invest in it, which has taken place over the last 14 years with the Conservative government. And voters agree they wanted change. That is why they voted for a Labour government. Their public services have been run into the ground. It is not working. So again, keep pushing this binary, this very simplistic view that everything that is public sector is inefficient. Everything that is public sector is wasteful. I reject that. I genuinely believe in the transformed informative power of local government and of local council. And I will continue to fight for that every day while I am a councillor. And I think the other thing that frustrates me about this simplistic view that everything that the public sector does is wasteful, it's inefficient. Again, why don't we look at-- again, I don't want to go into simplistic binary arguments again. But let's look at Thames Water, a private company. Is that working really well? I don't think it is. We're seeing the bonuses are being extracted, sewage is being dumped. So again, let's move away from this concept that everything that takes place in the public sector is inefficient and wasteful. At the end of the day, you do not believe in it. That is the problem, and there is the issue that we have. To me, I will continue to make the case for it. I see the huge impact that councillors in this room can have on people's lives of the huge impact of how hard council officers and the machine work to, I guess, hold that front line in, as Councillor Okereke has said, really difficult times. The Conservatives have failed to invest in this country. We've seen 14 years of our public sector just being ground into the ground. There is huge amounts of work that needs to be done. And I think for me, the other thing that I really take issue with is this constant rhetoric about greedy, selfish politicians and vanity projects. Again, it is really emotive and, I think, destructive language to be using. Can I ask Councillor Linn about this? Sorry, I am going on a bit. It's something I feel very passionately about. And I will continue to fight for local government. I believe in it. And as a Labour politician, I will continue to fight for it. And I think the issue here is that you do not believe in it. And I genuinely believe in the principles of to govern is to serve. Thank you. Thank you. Councillor Abboudi? Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I think politics is getting-- the world of politics and local government is getting more and more complex, more and more challenging. And I think you'd accept that many councillors here-- this is not a profession. It's a service. These councillors, a lot of our councillors, have got their own full-time jobs. But they're dealing with very complex and increasingly complex issues. The need for a political assistant, in my view, is not a nicety, but I think becoming more and more a necessity in order to equip us to deal with these challenges. I think there's a lot of personalisation in this debate, which is not very helpful. I think the leader of the opposition has been making his personal campaign between him and the leader of the council. But I do think that all members in this room will benefit from the support that they would get from a political assistant. And I think it will help make better judgments and better decision-making. So I'm supporting. Oh. Councillor Mad Haddish. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. So I'm going to take those contributions in turn. Councillor Nick Williams talked about costs and benefits. The problem is you've got a view on the benefits. None of us have got any visibility on the costs. So you've walked straight into articulating exactly what the problem is on the costs of that, but not what savings, what compensatory savings, are going to be made to pay for them. So to make jokes about weeds, actually a very important issue that Councillor Tester raised. So it's fine, but that's the contribution you've made, and that's my response. Thank you. He asked me if he's accusing-- yeah, he's asked me if I'm accusing anybody of collusion. Don't put words in my mouth, no. I'm very careful about my wording. I've been here a long time. But I will say that as soon as I saw the LGA-- I'll answer his point. As soon as I saw the LGA peer challenge, as I said publicly, Mr. Mayor, at the time, when I saw the wording about increased political support, I said publicly that that wording would be jumped on to try and claim that this long-running proposal that I've got documentary evidence of right here with me, that wording would be jumped on. I make no accusations. Don't try and-- you know, it's a pretty low tactic, to be honest, putting words in my mouth. I am not making any accusation about the LGA peer challenge, which I engaged with constructively and was a good exercise. But I am saying that, as I said at the time, that those words would be jumped on by the administration to try and retroactively justify this proposal. So I think that has comprehensively addressed Councillor Williams' points. Let me just go to Councillor locale. Councillor locale, thank you, made her case for why a political assistant is needed. Fair enough. That's your view. But again, we are not able to weigh up that view, those benefits, against the savings or cuts that are going to follow that are certainly not minimal in the way that Councillor O'Byrne Mulligan implied in his remarks. So I respect the fact that you've put forward your view for the benefits. All I'm saying is that we can't weigh that up against the costs and what's going to be lost elsewhere, because we don't have that information. Councillor locale, the deputy leader said I was making it personal. And I think that is an attempt to stop me from raising the issue. And I think that's very unfortunate. I'm not going to be silenced on any issue. We have an opposition in this borough, despite multiple attempts to remove all opposition. I am the leader of that opposition. And it is my job to call things out. I am doing my job. And as I've said to the leader, do you seriously think I want to be spending my time here talking about this? There's much more important things to be talking about. That's why I never wanted this debate to happen. I never wanted the proposal to come forward. Let me go to the leader of the council next, as he was next up after Councillor Williams. Everything I have said is factually correct. As I just said to Councillor Williams, I've been here a long time, longer than he has. And I'm very careful in my wording. And I would not be as careless as to do what you've described. He's accused me of entering into the public record documents, the document that I showed, his private document. I haven't entered it into the public record. I haven't entered anything into the public record. No, no. If he would let me finish, Mr. Mayor, I'm not entering it into the public record because it was reported. It was reported at the time by Greenwich Wire. It was in the public domain. When I was past these documents, I could have published them. I didn't. It's not my document to publish. So I'm being careful with my wording. He's advised me caution. I think caution is advisable all around because that fact that that was in the document was already in the public domain. But again, it's an attempt to stop me from raising this. I'm not going to have it. When I hear a false hood, a repeated false hood from the leader of the council or anybody, I am going to call it out. That is what I'm here for as leader of the opposition. I'm sorry you don't like it. I'm sorry that the leader of the council has put you all in this position to be listening to this. But it's not personal. It is my job as leader of the opposition. Councillor Lullivar made a valiant attempt to make this into a wider issue about my views on the public sector. My father worked for the NHS most of his career. It saved his life twice. My mum was a teacher. Most of my family work in the public sector. I'm not going to take any lectures, any assumed position that you're assigning to me, while criticising me for making binary options. In your argument that you gave tonight, Tory's bad, Labour good. That was a binary argument that you made. You know, the public sector means a lot to me. And when I come and talk about efficiencies and transformation, it's because I want the public sector to succeed. So I just want to do you the courtesy of coming back directly on that issue because I think that was another attempt, a third attempt, to stop me from raising this, to try and paint me as some ideologue who's against the public sector when my family background, my career, everybody, almost everybody in my family, would suggest otherwise. And I don't, I just want to put that on record. So I think that covers everything that everybody has said. And you know, one more thing that Councillor Lullivar said is that voters agreed they wanted change. And I would ask all Labour councillors to consider, is this really what they think members of the public voted for? An increase in the cost of politics being put forward without full sight of the costs involved. And you know, I'll end on the ludicrous claim that the leader of the council has made, that he is investing in the opposition in the same meeting that he said he wanted to get rid of all of us. It's going to be residents who are in, if he carries on like this, it's going to be residents investing in the opposition when those 2026 elections come around, when we will come back with more numbers, and those 2026 elections cannot come soon enough. Thank you, Mr. Mayor.
• Thank you. Councillor Abboud-Kerrio.
• Thank you, Mr. Mayor. A lot of the stuff that I was going to say has already been said, but I'll keep it short, Mr. Mayor. The thing here, we're talking about change and the speed of change. This administration, when they came in, it was clear that we needed to make change quickly to take everybody on the same journey and connect all the dots up. And this proposal will help us there. You know, Councillor Hartley talks about he's been here long enough. He's been here long enough and he's been standstill, everything. Everything is being cut down, stopped, slowed down, delayed, delayed, and more delayed. We are saying we want to move fast, we want to change the front that we're doing here, we want to make sure that all of us are connected for the benefit for our residents. You know, our residents are going to support us on this, Mr. Hartley, on the 26th, I mean in 2026. You can say it, you're probably going to regret it. I'll put that on the record right now. But this council will continue to be a labour council and you will see that in 2026.
• Thank you, Councillor Mazza-Dramon.
• Thank you, Mr. Mayor. And just to go back to, just to say my appreciation and thank you to the council leader for this opportunity to take on the role in the cabinet and take over from Councillor Aiden-Smith who did an immense job and has done big shoes to fill and I look forward to kind of working on what he's done and kind of improving on that where I can as well. And thank you to the leader of the opposition for your congratulations and Mr. Mayor for your congratulations as well.
• I just wanted to make a point about why having a political assistant is really important. In 2022, when I was able to win my seat in East Greenwich, one of the important things that I learned very fast is how important it is to be able to break down the political messaging to your residents and how receptive they are to it and how much they appreciate that. I did the hustings, I was able to dispel any myths 'cause I was able to explain the kind of the political messages and the differences in what the reality versus what the myth was or the kind of smokescreen. So, and Councillor Hartley, all with respect, you did mention that there are 50 of us we should be advising each other. There are 50 of us in 50 separate seats in almost 27, 25, 26 wards. So we have a lot of work on our plates. So what's important for us is to be able to understand the political landscape and we are working cohesively but we're also working very hard for our residents. So it's important to understand what the messaging is that needs to be sent to our residents and each part of the borough is very different. So for that reason, and again touching on what Councillor a lot of us said about kind of not seeing this as binary, I think that is very important that politicians aren't bad, Tories aren't bad, Labour aren't bad but there is a reason why we are red Labour and why Matt Hartley and his colleagues are Tories. There are different values and it's important that our residents understand the differences in those values and understand why we are doing what we do here and how it relates back to how it's gonna benefit them and take away any kind of myth or dispel any miss messaging and also understand the difference between why they vote for Labour and not a Tory candidate. So that's it really. So I will be voting for this proposal. Thank you.
• Thank you. Chancellor Angarika Zim.
• Thank you Mr. Mayor. Just want to say a few brief points because I sat here and I'm thinking, gosh if any residents are going to plug in and listen to this or if they are listening, they're probably wondering what all the kerfuffle is about. But I think the opposition's vehemence to this proposal is partly fear because I can imagine they're thinking, if we are so good with what we're doing at the moment, can you imagine how much more powerful and effective we'll be if the 51 of us are working in the same direction, are brought up to speed with the same level of understanding and that our residents out there are getting the same message from all of us. The three will not be running the 51. But the 51 will have a more strategic, supportive, especially in picking up on the points that our new member to the cabinet, Councillor Majida's just said. You know, there are so many of us with different priorities. We're doing case work, we're doing other things. Then we have to get together. Then we have to get together with the managers. That's what we need the political assistance support for, to bring us up to speed very quickly. We're not all from the same background. We've not all got the same experiences, okay? We are very diverse on this side and we need to be steered very quickly. Some might need more support than another. Everything cannot be up to just the leader, okay? So that's what I believe. And also I wanted to take the opportunity to clarify one of the, I'm not too sure whether I should be saying, misinformation. But if you look at paragraph, the decisions required, 1.3 I think it is. Or is it 1.2? Sorry, I'm just having a look at it there. I was looking at it a minute ago. And it makes it clear that it is up to the group to decide whether or not they want to appoint. So that's in paragraph 1.3, and it says, should either group wish to make an appointment? And so since you're so opposed to it, we will obviously acknowledge the fact, but I wanted to make it clear where it was. You're not the only one who could bring up documents and wave them about. This is, it's in here. You are not compulsory. You do not have to go ahead with this. You don't need it. The three of you can happily hold hands, skip along, and support each other easier than the 51 of us. Everything is, look how many of us, okay? So we need it because we are a very diverse group of people that need to be working together in a more cohesive way, and in a way that is of benefit to our residents much more quickly, much more effectively than we already are. Thank you. I will be voting for this. Thank you.
• Thank you. Councilor Russell-Tarrant-Wynne.
• Sorry, I've got to go. I'm coming down the cold. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I would say Mr. Hartley is always very careful with his words and has not cast accusations across this chamber. However, I would say I think there is a conflation in some of the views in which he's put forward. So I'd say the first in saying that this is not investing in the opposition. There is a fundamental difference between opposition in this chamber and electoral opposition. So it is good for democracy that the opposition in this chamber hold us to account. It is good that they have support when drafting their questions and bringing motions and in basically ensuring that there isn't group think. And if you've ever spoken to a Lewisham council, and I speak to many quite often, they would say that in their chambers they regret the fact that they do not have strong opposition to challenge them. That's very different to saying we don't want to win seats at the polls. And this is a politically restricted role. So it cannot be used for electioneering. And it cannot be used to bolster your campaigning. So I don't think there's a fundamental discrepancy between saying we would like to win seats that we do not hold and saying actually we'd like to invest in the democratic principles in this chamber. Those are two different things. The second thing I'd like to sort of say is going back to the GLA peer review. Again, I think we're conflating two things. It is quite possible to have a longstanding opinion on what you think is missing from your council or in your chamber and from your local authority. And then to recognise once the evidence base in a peer review by the local, the LGA comes along that shows you the empirical evidence behind the view that you have held, then it is possible that there's... Well, you may not, but I think this is a very valid point. You can hold a longstanding view. It is a very glaring admission. All of us know that this is a glaring admission, that most other councils in London, in other regions, have this kind of support. So it is very possible to know and understand your council very well and areas which this is failing and then to reach out to a peer review, which we tend to consider to be the gold standard in which we acquire knowledge and which we justify our opinions and our views. And then, once we have an evidence base, the peer review has come back to then support it. So I do not think that this argument, which you have put forward with this paper that says that the two things are not mutually exclusive. We can have longstanding views and we have empirical evidence that support them. And thank you very much.
• Thank you. Councillor Daniel Daniel.
• Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I rise to support the motion, the report, sorry. And I must say that I have always supported political assistance and always been in favour. And there is this sort of, and I can see the huge advantages when I was head of local government for the Labour Party, when I was involved in the establishment of the LGA, and so forth. And there is this sort of myth going around that somehow political assistance are a Labour idea, but actually the current type of political assistance came out around the 1989 Local Government Act. And that was under Margaret Thatcher as Prime Minister that set out the regulations for political assistance, which have been updated since. And it's not something just with Labour councillors. So Lib Dem Sutton has political assistance, Conservative Harrow has political assistance, the Mayor of Croydon has a political advisor. This is not a Labour Party political thing. Political assistance actually help the political and democratic functioning of the council and lead, I think, to better decisions. I, as a councillor, am quite good at research, and quite resourceful, and I've been around a long time as well, so I know my way around. But not every councillor has that. They may be working full-time, they've got huge responsibilities and so forth, and to have that sort of support and assistance, particularly on research and messaging, I think is really important. This is not about centralisation. This is not about imposing a monolith. This is about enabling us, as councillors, to do our job better, and most importantly, to serve, champion, and speak up for our residents better.
• Thank you. Can I, I think, Anthony, Leader of the Council, you were indicated to speak. As you are the last speaker, at the end, can you also close the debate as you are the mover of the recommendation.
• Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Mr. Mayor, I hold, I usually hold Councillor Hartley in high regard, but the way he's approached this debate today has been quite disappointing. And it's really sad that he's approached it in this way, and I do find it quite disappointing, because any document he comes into this chamber, I waves and accuses me of using, I have to say, he was not there when I gave my bid to be leader, nor in the room, so you can't confirm that is a true and accurate record. You can't confirm that's a true and accurate record of what went out, or what version even went out, right? So, with respect, with respect, when you come into this chamber and make and place things in the public domain, make sure you know it's a true and accurate record, Mr. Mayor, because he wasn't there when I made my leadership bid. But more important, Mr. Mayor, echo the words of Councillor Taggart-Ryan about we all stood candidates against each other in the election. Our job is to win political seats and get candidates in place. You stood, the Conservatives stood people in the general election, because we believe in different values, you, Conservative values, Labour values, so when we stand in elections, because we stand on a set of principles and values, and my job, Mr. Mayor, is to make sure that Labour is represented in every single ward in this borough, but when we're in this chamber, every single Councillor deserves the respect and support to deliver for their residents, from ward level, to challenging in this chamber, to scrutiny, and that's why you have scrutiny support officers. That's why you have member support officers. That's why the leader's office has support in there, because for us to do our roles when we're not full time is a recognition that we need support. Now, Mr. Mayor, as I said, we want this council to be a reforming council, and when we reflect on everything this council has done over the last 10 years, you really do think this council has had great, fantastic stewardship, from officers to those who were in my seats even before I came along as leader. Mr. Mayor, I wanna build on that work, and that's really important to recognise. I wanna build on the great stewardship that this council has had in previous years, and go even further, because all of us are hungry for our residents to be able to make sure we deliver. So members, as we go to vote on these recommendations, please be guided. I know Councillor Hartley wants to make the point that he doesn't need to appoint to the role. In four points here, it's quite clear, and I'll read it for him. If the council approves the principle of the appointment of political assistance, then the following procedural arrangements would apply to the appointments. The relevant group leader would formally advise the Director of Communities, Environment and Central that the group seek to appoint a political assistant, and this group will. Now, the provision is there in outlining the statutory guidance. The provision is there to say that we must create that same equal provision to the opposition, but they can decide whether they point to it or not, but the provision exists to give them that same access, and that same access to do that. But Councillor Hartley will paint another picture. It was forced on me. It was forced on me, and that's not the case in any way, shape or form. I'll place it on record. He will accept the support, and quite rightly so, because we require a good opposition in this authority, and whilst they're in their roles, they should fulfil the role that they're elected to do as the oppositional group on this chamber. Now, Mr. Mayor, I'd like to thank all officers that have worked on this proposal, and the LGA for their recommendations. Taking a mirror and shining yourself at the Council can sometimes be, it reveals things that you need to change, and that requires a lot of cultural changes, and that's what we're trying to do with the peer review recommendations, and as I stated earlier, this is a step and part of that step. Thank you.
• Thank you. I'd like now to ask the Council to vote on the recommendations in the report. All those in favour? All those against? Any offenses? The recommendations are agreed. Item 18, decision on executive functions taken under urgency procedures. This is an information report for noting. Does any member wish to speak on this report? I see none. Just Council, note the report. The report is noted. That concludes tonight's meeting. We'll meet again on 30 October, and I would like to wish all members and officers a happy and restful day over the summer. Thank you. (speaking in foreign language)