Transcript

cabinet meeting, the usual drill about fire alarms and filming in the meeting, something you need further fabrication, let JAL or whoever know, more than Jack know, we were more than happy to assist. Can we move the agenda, please? I believe there's no question from members of public. I believe there's a question from Councillor Chirag. Thank you for the opportunity to speak and ask a question. My question related to cabinet report 6.4, public space protection order tackling dog-related ASB. Since the publication of this cabinet paper, I've been receiving messages from dog owners and dog walkers in respect of this particular report. I just start off by reading a message from a dog owner and I quote, We're a population especially impacted by responsible owners as our dogs suffer their effects. Despite this, the following option seems incredibly likely to make our lives and lives of dogs significantly harder. In the opinion of dog owners and dog walkers, two parts of this proposal will really harm well-trained dogs. Dogs on leads in all public spaces and the cabinet report said dogs should be on lead in all parks and open spaces. Access-specified dogs on lead areas, entire amlets. Secondly, dog exclusion prohibition. In particular, dogs should be excluded from all ungated children's play areas and sporting areas in use such as football, cricket pitches, outdoor gyms in the borough. The RSPCA stands on this issue and I quote,Ensure that responsible dog owners are still able to meet the needs of their dogs and that PSPOs do not unwittingly compromise dog welfare by placing undue restrictions on dogs." And I understand in 2018, Cardiff Council had to reverse a similar proposal and I saw last night. In Hackney Park, another proposal was reversed. So the other important part of this proposal is charging for dog walkers and according to dog owners, the cost is quite high. In E1, reputable dog walker is 30 to 50 pound walk and a daycare is 4 to 60 pounds which is a good undue financial pressure on dog owners. So my questions are, firstly, how the council plans to enforce many of these proposals when the existing dog laws are not currently enforced well and secondly, can the mayor reassure me that a full public consultation will be carried out before these proposals are considered, especially with dog owners. And I also remind that government advice is to consult the Camel Club as the dog organisation in respect of PSPOs and I understand the Camel Club formally objected to the proposals outlined in tonight's cabinet report. Thank you. Since I met you, it's the first time I've heard you take so much interest in dogs. You have progressed so far in life. Well done. Thank you. I know you are. You did it for seven years and you looked after the dogs very well. They've been biting people around the borough a lot. We're going to put a stop to it. Councillor Shafi, do you want to respond to that, please? Yes? Let's respond to it. Thank you. Thank you. If I could ask Richard to come along and respond to that. We will further discuss on the paper once. Let's address those questions. I'll address the two points that Councillor Islam has raised. In terms of the actual proposal and the law, we plan to enforce any final agreed dog control orders using our existing enforcement resources. This will be done through the enforcement work that was carried out by the town's enforcement officers, through the environmental services officers and the animal wardens. Any final plans will be developed and informed by the public consultation and engagements that these proposals are going to go through. The second part of the questions that Councillor has raised is about whether the public consultation... This is actually a paper that's coming in to go to the public consultation. The report is seeking approval to go to the public consultation on this proposal that's been laid out in the paper today. Thank you very much, Councillor Shilash. Thank you for coming. Thank you for your comments and the questions. Can we now move on to the formal part of the agenda, please? Thank you. Apologies to all members here, officers Paul Patterson, also leave, Julie Lorraine, Simon Baxter is on leave and Ashraf is in his place. Other than that, all our officers are here. Linda Walker sends her apologies and I'm attending in her place, Mr Mayor. Richard, always a pleasure to have you here and I see John. Where were you John, early on? You've got to see more of you. Nice to see you. Yes, no, I was there, Mr Mayor. I enjoyed all of it. Ok, great. Nice to see you online. Thank you very much. Good. Any declarations of interest? Any member? None? Ok, great. Minutes of the 10th of July. Are we ok? Ok. Nice to see Councillor Nattoli over there. Sorry, regarding the minutes of 10th of July, can I just make a slight correction? The item for the homelessness accommodation policy that was referenced to me, reasons for urgency being agreed, in fact there were no reasons for urgency necessary, so I'll amend those minutes if you're happy, Mayor. Having spoken to the Chief Executive and the Corporate Director and given the importance of this report, this is report 6.3, the Recycling Reduction Plan, I have decided to draw this paper from this session, from today, to allow for further enhancement and consideration. I thought it would return to a future cabinet meeting, if that's ok? Ok, thank you. Steve, do you have any announcements? No. Ok, no other announcements. We have the chair of the Over-Inscrutiny Committee, Mr Jaid Chaudhary, thank you for coming, sir. Over to you. Thank you, good afternoon, thank you for the opportunity to feedback the views of the Over-Inscrutiny Committee. We consider this strategic assessment management plan 2024-29 as part of our pre-decision scrutiny. I would like to thank Councillor Saeed Ahmad Kamina, Member for Resource and Cost of Living, for presenting the report to the committee. We were pleased to hear that the comprehensive asset strategy has been developed for the first time in five years. It provides an opportunity to set out longer term goals for the council property assets and ensure alignment with key corporate strategy as the strategic plan, medium term financial strategy and lock-in plan. The committee questioned how the council will improve its communication with organisations using its assets and be a more responsive corporate landlord. We are pleased to hear that there will be more regular rent renew and reviews and a focus on becoming more diligent in its relationship management and organisation. We also discussed how the plan will align with the council's ambition to become a net zero council and how realistic financially viable the option to retrofit our assets. Furthermore, we discussed how the disposal of assets would meet the council's best value duty and co-action the timeline for the review of the condition of all our assets as this will impact other strategies. We noted that whilst the plan will aim to support income generation, it must also ensure that we maintain heritage buildings and the community benefit from these assets. The committee has requested further information to understand how this plan will be put into practice and the level of investment needed. And how the council will decide which asset to re-chain and which to make further investment in and which to repurpose for other uses. We also held a spotlight on the council's recycling performance. I would like to thank Councilor Shafi Ahmad, cabinet member for Environment and Climate Emergency for presenting this to the committee. We are encouraged by the initiatives set out in the recycling and reduction plan. However, our committee has repeatedly identified recycling as an area needed for significant improvement and we are disappointed we are still underperforming. We are pleased to hear that there will be refocused communication campaign to leverage more community engagement and behaviour change. However, we question what metrics will be in place to understand the success of this campaign. We have requested a breakdown of how much of the 5 million investment will be spent on communication. We also discussed the additional enforcement will be in place and endorse the emphasis placed on being tougher on the endorsed with poor waste management practices. Furthermore, we noted significant operational issues and ongoing issues in green waste collection, availability of recycling bags and food contamination. We highlighted the impact of industrial action and stressed the need to ensure staff are engaged in this journey and delivery of the plan to ensure we do not see a repeat of the issues of the past. Our final item considered the council's new target operating model. This provided the committee with valuable insight into how the council will be reshaping its provisions to achieve strategic priorities and ultimately better serve the community. Members noted that this is an important piece of work and requested further information on the wider feedback from staff and the community. We also raised concern from residents that no disabled people or advocates have been engaged in the consultation. We were reassured that the council community disabled network was engaged and we will be providing some additional organisation that could be consulted. We also questioned how the wider consultation was delivered and how the council reached out beyond the often hard voices to ensure a wide range of views were considered. We submitted some pre-decision scrutiny questions on the cabinet agenda items, items 6.1 and 6.4. Our rate answered to this question but if you could briefly comment on each item on item 6.1, which was the most strategic plan performance target before the targets were agreed. The committee would have liked to have been engaged in setting these targets. The committee is concerned that with such target we are losing sight of what our real targets are. We also note that many targets are slowly focused on output and creation. If this is best indicator whether this intervention are having an impact on our residents and if they are delivering best value for the council. On item 6.4, public space protection order, tackling dog related anti-seismic behaviour. The committee has submitted several questions and would like the opportunity to be engaged in the consultation outlined in the report. Thank you very much. Thank you chair, thank you for your statement and thank you and your committee for the invaluable work that you do in scrutinising executive decisions and calling us to account. Thank you very much for your gratitude to members of your team and we as the executive, we are in attendance before you and your committee whenever you need us. I know members of your committee have called in the homelessness accommodation placement strategy item 6.6 and the date needs to be fixed. It is quite important to us that we get the call in Steve dealt with as soon as possible. There are important implications and consequences and costs elements arises from that. So it is very important that we deal with it rather than September at a very sooner meeting rather than later on. If you can look at that please and set a date. OK chair, we will need your help to fix a convenient date. Is that OK lead member? And the questions that you have submitted, I have not had a chance to have been very busy today and not had a chance to look at them. We will come back to you if a written answer may be published. Is that OK? Thank you very much. Thanks Mr Mayor. Just a clarification that members of the OSC were not involved in the call in on the homelessness policy but we will be considering it I believe on the 2nd September. The chair and the chief executive just look at that and address it please. Is that OK? Agenda 6.1 Tarrant's Council's strategic plan performance targets for 24/25 and annual delivery plan. Sayeed. Thank you Mayor. So this is the strategic annual delivery plan for 24/25. The Council's plan sets out in detail how the Council will progress the delivery of the strategic plan priorities in this third year of the administration. This paper presents the targets set against the performance indicators for the 24/25 financial year. Services have set ambitious targets against 49 of the 56 performance measures considering factors such as historic performance, budgets increasing or decreasing, staffing levels, changes in legislation and the wider impact of national context as well. The rationale for all targets is provided within Appendix A of the report and the remaining seven performance measures are data only measures for monitoring important contextual information. In addition from next year onwards we will be moving the target setting process earlier in the year so it has been scheduled for mid-year approval for some time but early target setting approval would be improvement from an accountability perspective and the report also takes into consideration of new cabinet members taking charge of different areas. That's an overview Mr Mayor. Thank you. A very important paper for approval and for noting sets out how we're doing as a Council going forward and where we're not doing so well, what are the mitigations in place to make sure it's in line and we deal with any issues. Please officers feel free to comment very briefly please. Sure. This paper is just a target setting paper so it's not looking at performance, we're just setting the targets, we're not refreshing the measures either. So we have been through as a Council a thorough process to set these targets and services have been working hard to think through these targets and have involved everyone who needs to be. The lead members have also had a chance to look at these so yes, this is the paper and the targets are set and good to go. Target setting paper. Any comments from Councillor Tuller please. Thank you Mr Mayor. In regards to setting targets I can say that I have been involved with the service to push and challenge officers. So for example the number of uniform patrols we're expecting on our streets has somewhat quadrupled from last year's target of 3750 to nearly 12,000 hours that we're expecting from the various teams. Some of our targets within the community safety space are government driven so funding means that we need to have a certain percentage. So for example, adults with substance misuse treatment who need to engage with treatment services is dictated by OHID. And the third target that we've set has been pushed once again to more than 90% from where it was around 75% and that's based on a strong track record of delivery over the last year. So we are pushing where we can and performance has been good but we want to carry on the good work. As a Council we must continue to be ambitious, to stretch ourselves and not just be a Council sapper with averages. We want to exceed averages. We want to certainly comply with government targets but at the same time we want to set our own targets and be a top performing Council. Members like Councilor Talaat, community safety's lead member, all of you, you must take ownership of your respective portfolios and your respective areas of work and work with your corporate directors and with our officers to make sure that we are performing, meeting the targets and surpassing the targets in respective areas. The mitigation, you must agree with the mitigations, work on the mitigations because our residents expect first last services from us. That's very important. Anyone else? Please, Deputy Mayor. Thank you Mr Mayor. I welcome this, I think it's a very good document so we can see where we are. In terms of free school meals, I know the universal where roughly 38,000 young people are benefiting from it but I think it would be good to put some numbers in there as well. I've spoken to Steve, I think it will give us an idea in terms of numbers. At the moment we've got the percentage but if we put some numbers I think it will be so people can read in terms of the numbers. So someone average ward like me, it's easier to have the numbers than percentages. Please put the numbers in too. There's four KPIs altogether around FSM, so two of them do give you the numbers for primary and secondary and then the next two give you the percentages. So when the performance report comes out for Q1, when we look at that we'll see the numbers then. But in this target setting report we don't have the numbers, we're just setting the targets. We will have the numbers for you soon. Okay, Steve. Thank you, Mayor. The only point I would make is, I don't often do this, but I would refer members to section 7 of the report, which are the comments provided by legal services. And that is just to remind you, and I know you're much more aware as we move forward, that over the last 12 months great strides have been made by the council to comply with its best value duty from not particularly the best start over the last few years. And the comments make it clear that when you are establishing your performance indicators that you have account of not just the financial elements of them or the performance elements of them purely, but the economic, environmental and social impact of the targets that you're setting. And I've been really comforted and I think it's fantastic news that corporate directors have reported back that cabinet members are taking an interest, they're getting involved and it's a team effort in taking these things forward and I just wanted to comment on that. Thank you, grateful to you. With those comments, please, can we agree with the recommendation? Agree. Approve the targets and note the targets set in rational for each performance measure. Is that done? Thank you very much. Now we move on to another extremely, extremely piece of paper, a document. Can I say, legal member, I'm going to ask you to come in, I just want to make a statement in that. Because we've worked very hard, it's about the future of our borough and it's about our aspiration about place shaping and setting the scene for the next 10, 15 years. Is that okay? Then I'll ask you and Dave to come in. Thank you. And Sri and the team, please, the planners have done fantastic work. Maurice and the team have done good work around this. Thank you. Thank you very much. Ladies and gentlemen, the place shaping, the environment we live in, the homes we provide and the overcrowding in the borough, our children and their future education, education, health and equality is extremely important to me. In the view of that, this document that we're going to agree today lays out the future development vision and regeneration of this borough. I'm making a following statement in support of this document. I'm incredibly proud, we are, all of us, to present the next stage in the journey of the Council's local plan 23, 24, 28 strategic document. Incorporating changes received by our statutory consultation with residents, developers, governmental stakeholders and other groups represents another step towards the transformation of how this authority approaches development, planning and place making. This plan presents more than bricks and mortar, ladies and gentlemen. It represents a new holistic and revolutionary approach, approach to planning and place making, built on foundations, put in regeneration that works for our residents, put in our residents first. It aligns with our ambitious new agenda, outlined by the current new government to revolutionise planning law, unlock Council's ability to deliver comprehensive new housing schemes faster and with less red tape. And it represents an ambitious and expensive step change, pushing boundaries and adopting creative and innovative new methodologies to address some of the key issues that we face as a Council and there are many. Overcrowding and the associated health, social, economic inequalities and education inequalities that are born out of such conditions remains one of the biggest challenges that our borough faces and what we've inherited in 2022. We witnessed first hand the damage that these conditions impose on families, children and vulnerable residents across our hamlets. We know that it affects attainment educationally, we know it stunts creativity, hinders economic progression and causes issues for family relationships. We have seen the physical consequences that such living conditions have on our residents' health, children developing asthma, eczema, allergies and worse. The mental health issues caused and exacerbated by the despair that is associated with the lack of a bedroom, the lack of a space to reflect, escape and find some peace. This merit to the rapidly growing population in our borough has exposed the shortcomings in previous approaches to planning and development in this Council. With over 23,000 residents on our waiting list, nearly 14,000 of whom are acutely overcrowded, a radical transformation of how we plan and develop is urgently needed. A step change has long been overdue and today we are proud to announce that the measures and policies contained within this document will go a long way to addressing some of these issues and to providing the generally affordable, comfortable and predominantly family sized homes that our residents so desperately need. There are three elements of this strategy and we are proud of some of the key policies that we hope to implement as part of this Fresh Local Plan includes. One, we are increasing our generally affordable housing offer to 40%. We have seen what gentrification and unaffordable rents have done to large parts of London, including our hamlets. Our communities have been driven out because they cannot afford to stay in very areas where they grew up. This plan will further strengthen this Council's commitment to keep residents and communities together, regardless of their monthly income. We will raise the affordable homes required from every development by 5%, from 35 to 40%, cementing our commitment to delivering generally affordable homes across our hamlets. Number two, we are delivering real affordable homes, not intermediate or shared ownership and of this 40%, at least 85% of this 40% of homes must be for social rent. This is up 15% from the previous plan, which had a 70/30 split between social rent and intermediate and shared ownership. Our residents are priced out of shared ownership of intermediate housing. They are not truly intermediate. For them, intermediate housing might as well be private homes for sale, ladies and gentlemen, and we want to change that. We are not blind to the fact that most working people cannot afford shared or intermediate ownership and that these are simply watchwords for back door gentrification. This plan will ensure that the lion's share of affordable homes built are generally affordable, protecting our working communities from elaborate ways of moving them out of their homes. Number three, we are incorporating community facilities into our developments. As a council, we understand the importance of a focal point for communities to congregate around. Since we've been here in each and every development, I and the lead member have asked for community facilities in private developments. We want a presence. We want a little piece of Tower Hamlets to be in the new private developments. Community space that we can manage, we can own, and we can decide who and what kind of activities are run from that facility. In the previous local plan, there weren't such facilities. We are insisting this in the current local plan so that developers and officers of this council, planners, can work with developers, the private landowners, to make sure there's a little piece of Tower Hamlets in every corner of our borough. We're not excluded from gated communities. That's important to us. We are looking skyward, ladies and gentlemen, pushing the limits of tall buildings. Tower Hamlets has a proud history of delivering ground-breaking buildings. We now only need to look at Isle of Docks and its iconic skyline, defined by one calendar square for evidence of this. However, as an authority, we recognise the physical challenges that we face as the most densely populated borough in the country, contained within seven and a half square miles. We don't have the space to always build out, but we can build up. If other parts of the world have built up to provide the benefits to their communities, we can do the same, ladies and gentlemen. This plan does. We cannot keep looking to the past when planning and placemaking, and we must not look for new ways. We must look for new ways to address the housing issues we face. And to be told as the mayor that one calendar building must be the only iconic building in Tower Hamlets, must be the tallest building in Tower Hamlets, I find that quite offensive and insulting. As a borough, our planners should be, and you are, we should be, and as a council, we should be much more challenging, much more robust, creative in designs, in height, and be enabling to invert investment in the borough. If developers want to come in, they want to build up, give us iconic buildings, give us 40% affordable homes, give us other public benefits for a borough and for our residents, we should welcome that, we should encourage that, we should fight for that, and we should not restrict ourselves by making one calendar square the tallest building in Tower Hamlets. If they can do, Ken Livingston could do it 15 years ago, an iconic building in Southwark, I don't see we can't have those kind of buildings if people want to invest and people want to do it on their land in Tower Hamlets, or in our land, and we should welcome tall buildings, more tall buildings in our borough. This is why on 10 key sites, ladies and gentlemen, we have removed height restrictions to encourage the development and maximisation of schemes that push for more affordable units. This, underpinned by a new 40% affordable housing threshold, will enable us to accelerate the delivery of affordable family sized homes, all while keeping communities together in our borough. We are also proud of our heritage, and we do want to protect our heritage and the cultural significance of scores of our buildings within our borough. This is why these sites have been carefully picked, so not to impact on the integrity of our cultural and heritage landmarks. These sites will complement what else we have in our borough. I would also like to add the following, I recognise the risks that withdrawing height restrictions from these specific key sites may bring into the viability of this plan. However, the new government announcing and acknowledging that restrictiveness of our planning laws nationally, and the need to deliver generally affordable homes for residents across the country, and to relax in them to deliver more homes across the UK, is something that is welcome. The government's desire to deliver 300 homes each and every year until 2029 is very much welcome, and in the past we have played a pivotal role in providing more homes for rent than any other borough in the country. This is what we want to return to as a local authority, not only for necessity, but also because this council can aid and deliver that, and we want to take advantage of what this new government offers in terms of the opportunities that will come with the 300 new homes that is proposed to be delivered across the country per year. We want to capture that and be welcoming of those sentiments and those policies. That's very important to us. There's so much more that I could speak about in this document, from delivering affordable workspaces to greening and our buildings with a focus on net zero and carbon neutrality. But I would like to end with this. Option A, ladies and gentlemen, in this cabinet report provides this council with a fantastic opportunity to push the boundaries of regeneration and development for the future of this borough. It gives us the tools with which to deliver community-orientated planning and developments so that our residents are placed first, and that can make Tower Hamlets a trailblazer in building and regeneration. I recommend this option to the cabinet and urge all members to support Option A and its progress into Regulation 19 stage of the process. Thank you. Sorry, lead member, if I stole your funder. Sorry, can we bring in the lead member? Can we just agree the reasons for urgency for this late report? The reasons for the urgency set out in the body of the report. Are we okay to agree this? Thank you. Please, Councillor Ahmed. Thank you, Mayor. I won't go presenting the report, but I just want to highlight a couple of areas regarding our approach to the local plan. Now, I've done a bit of research, and if you look at the most expensive residential tower in the world, it's in New York. It's called the Central Park Tower, and currently floors 129 to 131 is going for half a billion dollars. That's 250 million dollars. Now, why would people want to buy a property so high, yet residents living in tall properties won't provide good quality life for our social housing residents? I'm not saying we make buildings as tall as that, but what I am saying is living high up doesn't necessarily mean it's a bad quality of life. What people need is space. What people need is rooms for their children, for themselves, a bit of intimacy, a bit of privacy. Now, by going up, we can create that space going up. So, living in tall buildings isn't necessarily a bad thing if we can deliver good quality homes, and that's the key. For us to deliver good quality homes, and for our planning team, I am assured that the materials used, the designs produced, will be of excellent quality. In addition to that, I just want to flag up, technology's moved on. Now, it's in 1931 that the Empire State Building went up, and within that, there's over 100 floors there. Here in Tower Hamlets, the UK, we are nearly 100 years behind places like Manhattan, places, you know, a number of districts in New York. If you look at Kuala Lumpur, in Malaysia, Singapore, Dubai, Abu Dhabi, all over the world, technology's moved on. We have tall buildings. We have some of the most expensive residential tall buildings all over the world, yet we have been constraining ourselves in this country. Living in tall buildings doesn't immediately equate to a bad standard of living, because billionaires want to live on top of skyscrapers. It's about the immunities we provide, it's about the quality, the design, and we want to ensure that our residents, who are social housing residents, get the same opportunity as those billionaires living in these skyscrapers. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Thank you. I'm very grateful, Sri. You and your team have done fantastic work. I know you joined quite later on, but Marisa and a colleague, Sam and Alibor, from the Council and the Mayor's Office, will work together to get this to where it got a lot of time and effort got into it. Please, over to you and our colleagues, friends there, to make some comments. Thank you, Mayor. I think you've set out the difference between the options and the rationale and, as Councillor Kabir mentioned, the quality of these developments are going to be the key, and for both options, that's the fundamental thing on which the policies are written. So, no further comments, Mayor. Very grateful to you. David, is there anything you want to add, Sir? Okay. Steve, you want to come in and please. The only point I wanted to make was, from my perspective, this demonstrates, I think, a shift in approach from the officer cohort. When I've long said, and I make no apology for it, we needed to become a much more transparent and enabling workforce. We always have to comply within the law, within the framework, within regulation, but this is an excellent example of officers that are adapting and adopting and want to be supportive in achieving the administration's aims, which is what we are employed to do. So I would just like to thank the staff again for all of their efforts. Thank you. Members, anyone who wants to contribute, it's about our future, it's about shaping the future of this project. Councillor Whyatt. Thank you, Mr Mayor, and thank you, leader, member. I think you've already highlighted, in terms of the needs of this going through, and also within the report, it's highlighted why there's a need for us to do this. Within the borough, our residents face a lot of inequalities, and I think, in terms of housing, is one of the biggest inequalities which factors in, in terms of attainment for our young people. They're already in the situation, living in a property which is overcrowded, they attain when it comes to getting their grades really, really well, but imagine living in a property where basically they have space where they can study, etc. So I think this is really important, and it's a game changer for the residents, and we, as a borough, will be basically in terms of hopefully setting the standards for others to follow. Thank you. Thank you. Councillor Whyatt, please. Councillor Shafi, please. Thank you, Mr Mayor. I'm very welcoming with these policy changes and the forward plan. It's a moment where we can celebrate actually pioneering 40% of affordable homes within London councils. Going up is one of the bold decisions that this administration and your leadership has taken, and I think it's credit to the staff and the consultation and all the good things that happened behind the screen, behind the system, to bring this today for a decision, and it's welcoming for the residents of Tower Hamlets as well as everybody in this administration. Thank you. Thank you. Anyone else? You're okay. Councillor Cribb, please. Thank you, Mr Mayor. I have gone through the new local plan, and I am happy to see that a number of priority development areas in the borough have been earmarked for new GP surgeries and health centres. Because GP access is a major issue in this borough. For this reason, I believe it is important that we all make it a priority to ensure that commitment in the local plan to deliver additional GP surgeries and health centres are delivered on so that the local residents will not wait week after week. Thank you. Really, this plan reflects our proactive approach for affordable housing is above 40%. It definitely is appreciable, and we welcome this report. Thank you. Thank you. Anyone else? Councillor Mustak, please. Thank you, Mr Mayor. I just wanted to commend for the innovative approach you have taken, and the team. It's really inspirational, motivational and reassuring for the people of this borough, and I have no doubt that these innovative approaches, along with many others, to come. Under your leadership, we will help to change the lives of the people of this borough, as well as the face of Tahabnids. Thank you. Thank you. Grateful. There are no other comments. Councillor Campbell, sorry. Thank you, Mr Mayor. Thank you, lead member and officer, for creating these reports. I welcome this proposal, Mr Mayor. On this new plan, recreation and green space plays a vital part of healthy living. On this new plan, we can have more control over even privately owned buildings. We can have more control over the green spaces, recreational areas. This way we can provide a better facility to our residents. I welcome this report. Thank you. Thank you. Grateful. Is that okay? Very much. Thank you for those comments. The government thinking around development and more housing, this document aligns with the current government's thinking. It gives us more opportunities. But more importantly, there are people out there with money, investors, developers, who are sitting on lands. I know they are supporting this. Yes, the place stretches a bit more in terms of the affordability element, in terms of seeking 40% homes for rent from them rather than 35%, and the intermediate element being reduced. But also it's an opportunity for them in terms of height, in terms of density. The developers who have written in support to me and to our planners are very much supportive of this. They are willing to forego some of the money, but in order to give them more opportunity and develop out on their land. So they welcome this on the whole. But we should also, our residents should welcome this. Height, more density means more homes for our residents, more family sized homes, more affordable homes, homes for rent. But also it will mean more Section 106, more seal money, more money to invest in infrastructure, in roads, in greening of our amenities, greening of our open spaces, more community facilities across the borough. More money for educational facilities, for GP surgeries. We have used Section 106 money in the past to deliver bricks and mortars for GP surgeries. We've done that in the past. We have more money in our pot to deliver that. Currently we use some of the money from Section 106 and the seal in order to deliver out some of our other services. So more money means more benefit for the people of this borough. So we should all as a community come together and support the local plan which is going out to consultation now. And can I please commend the officers, the work and the effort that you put in and I hope we can progress this now to a formal document eventually in due course. So thank you. Can we agree the recommendation and option A in the report please? Thank you very much officers. We're drawing agenda item 6.3 for reasons I've set out before. We're moving on to agenda item 6.4, tackling drunk related antisocial behaviour. Please. Councillor Shafi, do you want to present this? Thank you. Thank you Richard. Thank you Mr Mayor. Following a number of incidents involving out of control nuisance dogs and their owners, the council has been exploring ways in which we can be more effective in tackling those dog owners who continue to behave in an antisocial, irresponsible way in public spaces. This report presents the proposal to undertake a public consultation on the introduction of a dog control public space protection order, shortly for PSPO. Many of our neighbouring boroughs have well established PSPOs in place. There are a number of control mechanisms that can be introduced through a PSPO. The council is proposing an order on dog fouling, an order to exclude dogs from certain spaces across the borough. This will include all gated play parks and sports areas. Through consultation we will test appetite to extend dogs' exclusion in other spaces. An order that all dogs must be on leads in certain spaces in the borough. An order to limit the number of dogs any one person can take out at any time and to gauge option on introducing a professional dog walking licence. An order to mandate dogs must be put on lead by the direction of an authorised officer. The PSPO will apply to the whole borough, including housing estates. PSPO breaches will be dealt with through fixed penalty notice. Before bringing a PSPO, the council must undertake a robust statutory consultation exercise with statutory organisation, animal interest groups, our PR partners and our residents. We know that the vast majority of dogs are peaceful and dog owners low abiding and respectful of feelings of others around them. It is therefore important to ensure that we neither demonise all dogs or penalise responsible dog owners. Any action we take will go hand in hand with looking at how we tackle fear, misinformation and negative perception about dog behaviour and control. Following the review of the consultation feedback, we intend to introduce the PSPO in the autumn following approval by the mayor and the cabinet in September. Thank you, Mayor. Thank you, grateful to you. Please, officer. Yes, so Mr Mayor, as has been said, this is a consultation so the report sets out the details of the consultation exercise and we are requesting permission to start that consultation. To talk about those proposals as widely as we can, so within the report there's the actual consultation questionnaire, there's the communications plan. But we intend to consult for 12 weeks and make that consultation as wide and engaging as it can be with all of the interested parties. We are working hard to make sure that we give people the opportunity to consult on the proposals that have been set out because we realise there's a lot of passion for different ideas. But it is a consultation and we will give the opportunity for a full 12 week consultation at the end of which we will look at what has been said and develop the final proposals to bring back in the autumn. Thank you. Can I just add, yes this is a consultation, at the same time we've had quite serious incidences of attacks on people by dogs over the years. And in some instances it's been life changing in the borough and across the country. And we're not saying here we're going to ban dog ownership, always saying it's responsible, it's a responsibility. If you own a dog, you handle a dog, there are certain responsibilities that you should have as individuals towards others, humans, people and property. And we're here to protect the people of this borough, but at the same time those who own or handle dogs, hopefully when the document eventually comes through it will be about them also taking on responsibility. The risks that it comes with to young children, to the elderly, to the vulnerable when people walk around with dogs. That's all we're trying to say here. Colleagues, anyone want to make any comments? Councillor Said, then the Deputy Mayor. Thank you Mr Mayor. I believe as a Council when we sort of see an increase in any sort of anti-social behaviour or any issues, whether that be in this case with dogs, there has to be a response. There has to be that responsibility from the Council. So I think this report is very important and we also need to remember that as it states in the report, we're not the first Council to do this. This legislation is part of the Highways Act since the 1980s, so we're just 44 years late really adopting this. It's something that's been around and at the same time it will also encourage dog owners to be more responsible. So I think I welcome this report, it's very important and I think we should go ahead with the consultation and see what the outcome is. I think it's going to be very useful for our residents. Thank you. Deputy Mayor. Thank you Mr Mayor. I welcome this report. I think over the last, I would say five, six years, not enough was done and things, situations were out of control. We've seen videos, many social media footages about out-of-control dogs. So this is about tackling this issue, dog-related anti-social behaviour. We're not targeting anyone, it's about controlling, it's about taking measures and managing. So I welcome this report and I think as a Council we need to, it's up for consultation but we need to continue to create awareness that we're not targeting anyone. This is a consultation and based on the consultation we will take the necessary measures and implement the reporting. Great. Councillor Wahid. Thank you Mr Mayor and thank you also for reiterating that this is not about us as an administration being anti-dog. It's about dog owners being responsible. In my ward there were several really dangerous attacks by dogs. And I think also for the officers when this consultation goes out I think it's important that somehow that message is out there that we're not anti-dog. It's about responsible dog owners and for a few dog owners who aren't responsible for others to be basically in terms of tarnish their needs. So please, if you can make sure that message is also out in the consultation. Thank you. Thank you. Anyone else? Councillor Campbell, then Councillor Ahmed. Thank you Mr Mayor. I welcome this report and this way we're not only protecting the residents, I think we are protecting the dogs as well. As you have seen, one person takes six, seven, eight dogs and we don't know if they have enough capability to run these dogs or not. So we are not anti-dog, we are creating safeguards for the dogs as well. At the same time I represent Whitechapel Ward, the most deprived side of the council and people live in a very congested building and only green space behind their building. They, children so many times, contacted me, they can't access to their backyard because of the dog owner taking the six, seven dogs on their backyard. So it's both where we are protecting the dogs and we are serving for the people of this borough as well. Thank you Mr Mayor. Thank you. Thank you. Are you recording the conversations? It's webcast, you can get all... [inaudible] Sure, I can help you, I'm very IT savvy. I can teach you one or two things in life. Let us get together, we're both friends and we can do a good job. Thank you. Okay, who else wants to speak? Thank you Councillor Ahmed. Thank you Mayor. I'll be quite brief, so I think it's very important before people start playing political table tennis with this. Section 1.7 clearly highlights, it's not about punishing, it's not about targeting. The majority of dog owners are law abiding citizens, the dogs are well kept and they're responsibly managed and kept. Now, let's draw context. If it was a human, a youth or a young man or a young woman who's screaming and shouting, who's being quite aggressive to any passers by, what would our reaction be? Well to be honest the police would arrest them for a public order act, that is the reality of it. And where we have aggressive dogs and any type of, if we have hyenas on the street then we'd have to have bylaws for that stuff. It's very important that we draw context to this stuff. Now we know there's been a spike of attacks, we know, particularly I know in my ward there is a campaign out there to have green spaces which are dogs free. And sometimes in the past we had dog free areas because not everybody is sort of accustomed to having dogs barking and being around them and so on and so forth. Others feel, although they use pooper scoopers and so on and so forth, it still leaves residue and stuff like that in the parts and nobody wants to step on dog marks. So there's a lot of reasons why some people may not feel comfortable around dogs, others do feel comfortable. But it's about how we in civil society act responsibly and what this does is it supports that element of acting responsibly to support our fellow humans who are also sharing these open public spaces for everybody to feel comfortable. So when we talk about equalities and so on and so forth across the board we talk about respecting each other, giving everybody space, giving everybody opportunities. And this equally applies to this because aggressive behaviour, aggressive dogs can be quite intimidating for people who are not used to aggression in that way. I just want to highlight once again section 1.7 clearly identifies that majority of dog owners are peaceful, responsible individuals, the dogs themselves are also well kept and aren't offensive to the public. But we need to act in a responsible way in civil society. Thank you. Councillor Ahmed, you're very much on board on this, 1.7 does set out. There are, the vast majority of dogs are peaceful and dog owners are law abiding, respectful to others. But it's those exceptional circumstances that we want to make sure that we have the mechanisms in place and the law is out there. But to have the mechanisms in place for extra protection of our residents. I remember an incident in 2022, a gentleman and his wife came to this country on a visit from abroad. And it was an incident in Stepney in your ward when that man was attacked by a dog, damaged for life and he returned to his host country after the visit. But you know what, he was totally damaged. He had to spend on a private medical care, he had to spend a good £20,000 which money didn't have. His family and friends lent him the money. When he went back he had to continue his treatment. When you're visiting the country, you live in the country, you walk in the streets, you should not be living in fear of antisocial behaviour from humans or from animals. So it's about protecting the community at large and basically the message goes out there, if you can own a dog that's fine, but please be careful and mindful and respectful of others. Especially the young, the vulnerable, the elderly. Everyone in our community, that's what we're saying. With those comments please, can we agree the recommendation set out on page 86 of the report? We do need to have a good consplend, please, very important around this. And also to make sure we reach every community in the borough in terms of the messaging. So if you can speak to Jubeir, Kiran, Andreas, make sure we are appropriate. The consultation is meaningful, that all communities are involved. Okay, thank you. Thank you, sir. Thank you very much. Can we move on to the contracts forward plan now, 6.5. I'm just going to read out the reasons for the urgency set out here by me. This item missed the statutory publication deadline due to several ongoing and complex clarifications needed on two of the appendices within the report. These are now resolved and the amendments made within the appended documents. The report lists five items for either contract extension or a new procurement and these are all very tightly time bound and delay past cabinet will result in delays in getting to market, which may result in services being delayed or stopped. These in turn may lead to significant financial and reputational damage arising from services being delayed or stopped. That's the reason for the urgency. Is that okay? So I'm going to move on to the paper, please. Saeed, do you want to, then I'll bring Andy in if he wants to add anything. Is that okay? Thank you. Sure, thank you, Mayor. So this is the contracts forward plan for quarter one of this financial year. And as we know, it's within our Council's procurement procedures to report to the cabinet for a contract over one million pound in value or capital works over five million pound. So in this quarter one, within the appendix one, we have listed out five of the contracts which are due to be signed off. Within health, adult and social care, we have two, one being the home care direct awards and second one is a mental health supported living services. Then we have three in resources. The first one is housing and benefits IT system. Second one is Microsoft Azure tenancy EA agreement and the third one is corporate and customer care contact centre telephony solution. Of those five, one of them is an extension and one is a variation and three of those are new procurements. Over to Andy if you want to add anything more. Thank you. I think you're quite clear. Andy, you want to add, sir? I'm happy to answer any questions. Thank you, grateful to you. Can I, members, just take this each at a time? Is that okay? Let's move it forward quite quickly. So thanks for the forward plan and the recommendations are quite clear. Let's take the first one. The first one is the home care direct awards. That's required for the mobilisation because the new home care contract should be coming soon. But this needs to allow that to be implemented. So we need enough time, extension to be implemented. Can I suggest that we agree up to six months of extension, please, to allow you to do that? Is that okay? Up to six months, thank you. Can we move on to the next one, again a very important one, mental health supported living services. I don't think it requires an introduction as such. You said it and the document is quite self-explanatory. Can we agree that it's three plus one? And can I say, please, Andy, please, the one year mustn't be automatic, it must come back to me before the extension is proposed. We'll make sure that happens on all extensions. Thank you, thank you very much. Can we agree this? And each one has got community benefit of 10%, which is enshrined in the document. The following one is again very important, it's a housing and benefits IT system hosting support and maintenance agreement. Again, it's three plus two for obvious reasons. Is there anything you want to comment on this? Just on the last three, Mr. Mayor, I think it's very important to note that if we look at quality of service, if we look at investment, infrastructure plays a vital role in how we respond to our residents. And putting this money in, in terms of investment, since we've come in, Mr. Mayor, we've transformed how the council's infrastructure operates and that's one of the contributing factors when we talk about best value, is residents getting a service. But in order for us to deliver that service, we need those infrastructure materials and systems in place. So for some, it was neglected for years and years. So I remember a couple of years ago when I took over the customer service portfolio, the telephony systems hadn't been upgraded from the hunting system for about 20 years. And again, now we've got a more modern, you know, with AI intelligence supported, you know, telephony systems. So going forward, that customer care, that service delivery should be enhanced. And in terms of how we monitor and sort of look at how we deliver our services, we can also track and trace these areas. Thank you. Councillor Milne. Yeah, go on. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Yeah, I just had a question on the community benefits, you know, social benefits. Although this procurement will be through direct award, officers are still looking to ensure that contractors provide additional community benefits as part of social value offering. Officers will explore with suppliers with options. I just wanted to know what sort of options we're talking about. Sorry, and just to add, normally we'll say 10% or whatever percentage, we'll squeeze as much as we can, but it's a 5.6 million pound of contract. It's got no community benefits. So it's one where we just want to flag up. So I think the drive for community benefits, social value for all our procurements will continue to grow and change through the new regs that are coming in because there are new mechanisms by which to secure some better social value. I think, I can't say what social value they would give in this case. It's different for every sort of procurement. Some give money, some give buildings, some give services, some give a combination of all three. So it would be wrong of me to try and predict what it might be, but they will be definitely driving them through the procurement. Okay, can we say, as usual with all other community benefits, we're going to stipulate at least 10%? Okay, and if you can get us more, it's fine, but minimum has to be 10%. Okay, so an amendment here. So we're saying, like the others, we're saying social value will have a 10% overall weighting in the tender valuation process with requirement being developed and defined during the preparation of the tender pack. Okay, we're adding that. Thank you. Good. The next one is the Microsoft Azure Tendency EA Agreement. Again, it's a contract variation, isn't it? Yeah, it's a contract variation. It's to give us more licenses to produce some of the Microsoft Power BI stuff and things like that, which is absolutely key to all the other things that our finance colleagues are driving through. Does the assassin require any community benefits as such? Okay, can we agree with this? We've got savings of 25k, yeah? Okay. Where did the 10k go? Okay, that's fine. Can we agree with this? Yeah, good. And the last one is the corporate and customer service contract telephony solution, and this also means that our staff here will get a telephone on their desk and we get a switchboard too. It's the current telephone system, which you know, since we've been here, we've been moaning, we've been complaining, but more importantly, our residents are complaining. It doesn't work. We cannot be contacted, we're not contactable, plus the internet here isn't that brilliant. So we need a switchboard, we need a telephone system to improve customer services. Is that okay Andy? That's absolutely the heart of this procurement, Mr. Mayor. So this will be money like others, money well spent. Can we agree with this? Yeah? Agreed, sir. And again, the two year will send the extension. Okay, this is agreed. Thank you very much. Can we now move on to agenda item 6.6 please? Okay, Kibrebi, do you want to quickly introduce this? Yes, thank you Mr. Mayor. It's very brief. In this report, firstly, cabinet is requested to grant permission to commission in clinic integrated sexual and reproductive health service collaboratively with other North East London boroughs, and to enter into collaborative arrangement and joint contract to ensure the continued provision of high value cost effective in clinic service to our residents. In this report, firstly, cabinet is requested to grant permission for continued involvement in Penn London commissioning arrangement of the online London sexual health and contraceptive e-service, which is an integral part of the London SRH service system. Thank you. Just to add a few things. Tower Hamlets has some of the highest levels of sexual health need in London because of the young population. This is a pressure on the public health grant because we have a mandatory requirement to support any resident who accesses sexual health services anywhere in the country. There's a lot of work that we do to ensure that we get as much value for money out of this contract as possible, which is why we enter into collaborative agreements with our neighbouring local authorities, but also across London. I'm also aware that what we're asking for in this commissioning proposal is a five plus one plus one plus one, which departs from the standard three plus one. There are reasons for that. I don't know if Liam wanted to just say a little bit about that. Happy to comment on that. We appreciate the reasons why normally we would want to go for three plus one. In this instance, as Sherman mentioned, this is part of collaborative, de-held contracts with other boroughs, so we need to make sure we're agreeing the same timeline with them. Additionally, the nature of these contracts, which are held by NHS trusts across the council, there is quite a lot of clinical governance across them, including pathways to other services like HIV services and gynaecological maternity services, et cetera. All of those clinical governance and clinical pathways means that slightly longer contracts in this sector has been the norm. The last thing to just say is that the contract is on a modified block contract, which means that we hold 20% of the payments based on performance. That allows us to control the activity directed towards the most important things that are most beneficial for our residents, like prophylaxis against HIV and long-acting contraception as well. Thank you. Can I just seek a clarification, please? I'm sure you told me this, but I just want to refresh my memory. Just look at the recommendation page, 137. The first three sets of recommendations I understand. Then you've got the following one, two, three, four recommendations from when it says regarding the online sexual health e-service, shl.uk. And then in cabinet is recommended two, so number of contracts to commence from 26, 25, and again from 26, 27. Why, just want to understand, why are we entering, we can all advise you for entering into contracts three years down the line, two years down the line. Just explain, I'm sure you told me, I just forgot. Can you explain that to me, please? So the paper's looking for authority to enter into two different contracts. One is for the in-clinic contract, which we do locally with four boroughs locally in North East London. That's to commission the Ambrose King Centre right here, our centre of excellence. The other thing that's really crucial is that we have the online service, which is a London-wide service, so residents can get access to STI tests and some treatment via an online service. That provides us with lots of substantial cost efficiencies, it's much cheaper to provide STI tests via that service than when people go into clinics. And that service is a London-wide, so the paper's looking for two separate things. In terms of why we are asking for permission now when the contracts aren't going to start until 26, 27, 26 it is actually. The reason for that is because... Just give me a second, I just want to understand. Also, have you procured the provider already of you? So shl.uk, who are they? So shl.uk is the name of the service, which is the London-wide service. The provider is called Preventex, the current provider is Preventex. And why from 26 to 25? So the reason why we're looking for permission now when it will be from 26 to start the contract is that obviously this is a service which is jointly procured by 30 of the London boroughs. So there is a number of steps that need to be gone through between now and procuring the service in terms of getting agreement on the detail of the service back. We anticipate, based on the discussions we're in, that there will be substantial changes to what the current spec is, but there are some changes we want to make to improve things. So it's just essentially because it's that many people, that's how long the procurement takes. Before I forget, can I please for those ones, because they're quite a few years back in the future, if we are in the lead member of the chief executive please, can we be kept in the loop? And have sight of the procurement backs and loop of any changes in procurement going forward please. Can you make sure that happens? And it's in the document, it's okay, I regularly introduce. Okay, that's all I'm going to say for now and I'll come back afterwards, one or two points I'll make afterwards. Anyone else, any comments from anyone? No? Okay, the comment I'm going to make please. So I know we're saying five years, then another, for the first one, recommendation, we're saying five, then three terms of one year each. Yeah, so five plus one, plus one, plus one. So can I say that yes, five years, yes, plus one, plus one, plus one, it's got to come to me. It's got to be automatic renewal when we do need a performance report, to see how these people are doing. Okay, not automatically to be renewed. Each year we need to review. Okay, that's for number one. Number two, yeah, it's good to concentrate with the Mayor and the Leader of Health. Yeah, that's fine, and the Health of the League and Chief Executive Finance Officer, that's fine. Number two. Number three, in consultation with the Mayor please, I would like to see who we are entering into contract with. And the Leader Member, yeah? Okay. Okay, and we made the comments about the other ones we just said, we want to be kept in the loop before we go out to tender. Is that okay? Go on, Kabir. Sorry Mayor, I just wanted to understand, so with the five plus one, plus one repetitive, what does that achieve? And does that mean after five years we review the service and we're looking at re-tendering or going out to tender again? Does that mean on an annual basis it's reviewed and then given another year, what is the goal after the five years? Because usually the plus ones is about creating extension and resilience in order to look at how we move forward thereafterwards. So, let me explain, Kabir. I know what you're saying, I've asked the same question on the Leader Member and Shuman and the team, our colleague here, they've been very explicit, very open and transparent. Because we're doing the tender with other local authorities, so obviously it's business sense to go out together as a team, that's one. But to go out and procure for a length of time is much more cost effective and this is what the other authorities have agreed. So that's why it's that length of time, five plus three, but the three is not automatic to answer your question, that's the question I'm saying. So each year, before the expiry of the each year, well before the expiry of the five year, it should come to us with a business case why it should continue for another one year. Again, it's very well in a good time expiry of the second year, Steve, it should come to us with another explanation. Obviously if it's for the full five, six, seven, eight years, the business benefit, the cost benefit analysis, economic scale is far better. Okay, go on. The reason behind that is I'm asking, so if it's unsatisfactory after five years, can we unilaterally pull out, because we're tied in with the rest of London councils, or are we still tied in year after year? Yeah, so the nature of the five, so at that point at the five we can decide to pull out, definitely. Similarly on both of those two contracts it's the same, so we can decide to pull out and then it will be up to the other boroughs whether they want to amend their contract so that it's just for them to carry on without us, or whether they want to also terminate themselves or something else, but we can pull out ourselves without a pair of agreements. Could you guide me to where that's written in the contract or in the paper? I don't know if that detail is in the paper, but I'm happy to add it in. We need, we agree subject to that, that I'm hoping everything's going to go well, but if it doesn't we're talking about our residents, service they receive, that we want the assurance that service is good by the end of the fifth year or any year, and that we have the opportunity, Steve, to pull out if we have to. Okay, and walk away with our contribution of the money, share of the money. Okay, we agree with that proviso, is that okay, John? Yeah, so just to clarify you'd like some text added to the, an amendment which reflects our ability to withdraw unilaterally at the end of five years, if that's what we feel is the right thing to do. Yeah, and walk away with our share of the money. We can't leave the money there and just walk away, we want the world to come with the money. It's okay, Steve, if that could be reflected. So if you can draft some text, please. We're happy, I'm sure John and Steve will include it in the body of the report. Is that okay? Thank you, that's very good. Your PhD has come useful, isn't it? Sometimes. Okay, thank you. Is that okay, can we agree? Thank you officer, thank you very much. Okay, another very important document, a lot of work has gone into it, the strategic asset management plan 24/29. Please say it. Thank you, Mayor. So this plan reviews the property needs of services for the next five years and explains how we expect our assets to support our financial strategy. Looking ahead, it provides a framework for a rolling programme to review our non-residential assets, allowing us to better utilise our buildings or release them for other priorities such as new housing development. This plan is a strategic document that paves the way to identify areas and produce more detailed action plans, for example, how we deal with community leases and rents. The completion of the strategic asset management plan also fulfils one of our outstanding actions arising from the LGA corporate peer challenge. Finally, it enables us to fulfil our best value duty by ensuring all our buildings are used efficiently and by optimising revenue from our income generating assets contributing towards the overall income target of the MTFS. That's the, this is summarise of the asset management plan. We've got Dave here if we have further questions. Thank you, Councillor. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Thank you, the Councillor. So, obviously it's a long report, I commend it to you, but there are a number of things I'd like to add to what the cabinet lead emphasised. Obviously the SAMP is about operational property, properties that we sit in like this one. It's about commercial investment properties, properties that make us money, but it's also about community facilities that we actually own. And those community facilities also add to our corporate agenda in terms of service we're providing. What's happened, however, is a council that's very asset rich, we've got £1.3 billion worth of property and over 1100 properties. We don't seem to have been keeping up with doing rent reviews and actually reviewing why we're actually leasing or renting properties to community facilities, to community groups. The core function of the council is, if it's supporting voluntary community groups, is to actually give grant support to those organisations. It isn't a very efficient way to give support by having no rent or peppercorn rents. So consequently, this is the time when we haven't actually renewed this SAMP, the strategic management plan, for five years. It's now time that we actually do rationalisation of how we're actually renting and using our property to deliver services through the voluntary community sector. Reviewing those rents to make sure that we as a council get the money we need to basically look after those properties and invest in them. So if I had to distinguish between other local authorities, SAMPs, I'd say unfortunately a lot of local authorities are in a position where they're having to sell assets. Luckily we're not, we're using our assets to help deliver services. But we've also got to provide best value and that particularly means the way we actually set rents and terms for people that deliver services through our property. Thank you, Mayor. Thank you, grateful, grateful. Kobi, please. Thank you, Mayor. So, just wanted to pick up. So if we look at a five year cycle, are we looking at covering about 20% every year as a programme? Or are we looking at covering all 1,100 properties within the year and then re-evaluating it in five years time? If we have a cyclic programme going forward and the assessment tools used, what will inform us in terms of that? What are the controls between what is decided by officers, what is decided, at what stages will that decision making process, will it all come back to cabinet? You know, if you can just capture all of that. Thank you Councillor Kabir. Yes, thank you through the Mayor. Very good question. So in terms of rent reviews, unfortunately rent reviews have not been keeping pace over the last five years. So what we're doing is aiming to try and get through our rent reviews, the majority of them this year. Just as important though is our investment in stock. So whilst this is a strategic asset management plan, we'll have individual action plans and investment plans under it for each service. So say education or children's would actually identify in the action plan where the priorities are for investment. And obviously the priorities are health and safety and other insurance matters as well as making sure that the stock actually helps to lead to a good service. So it will be the action and investment plans that will sit under this SAM that will show you where the investment priorities are. And obviously they will be developed with each of the services to agree which are the properties or the services that are highest priority for investment in. Thank you. Thanks Dave. Is the process going to be guided by stock condition surveys or is it going to be guided by assets and valuation? I just want to get an understanding of what are we going to do that sort of in sync, sort of parallel? Yeah, thanks. It is an important question. It depends on the type of property. So commercial property, we're driven by getting best returns. So we'll want to invest in those properties that have been under invested in that need to be improved so we can maximise the rent. When it comes to service or operational properties, that will really be, as a corporate landlord, we're led by the service to say this building isn't fit for purpose. It's not helping us to deliver service. We've got to improve it. So we were very much looking at the benefits and service improvements rather than any return on it. You're right to point out those stock conditions. Stock conditions have not been undertaken thoroughly, like any council, have not been carried out thoroughly over a long period. So to a certain extent it is catching up. We've also taken on new assets, such as the leisure facilities, so we've got to do a catch up in terms of making sure we know the quality of that stock and identify initially priorities for health and safety, fire and other assurances that we need to give. Thanks. To refer to Dave and the team, I, Syed and the team, who have been very much involved in the evolution of this document up until today, very much have had an input and they've reflected our comments and our suggestions and are grateful for that. And some of the points you made, really valid, but it's in the report, it's been reflected. Anyone else? It's quite straightforward, but it's very good documents about utilising assets for the benefit of this council and maximising income. We're getting rid of public rent, no more someone getting a building for one pound, we're getting rid of that. There has to be rent, either commercial rent or community rent, it's two categories of rent. No more rent free per se. If anyone invests in the property, yes there will be rent free period, they're investing, but not for 15, 20 years paying one pound rent, which happened previously, that's not happening under our cinema. Is that okay? With those comments, Syed, you are happy for us and colleagues to agree with this recommendation? Okay, we approve it, thank you. Thank you very much. Okay, then we've got 6.9, 6.10, unfortunately schools becoming academies, we're taking both of them together, it's beyond our control. Sorry, is there anything else? Did I miss it Mayor, or did we miss over 6.8? Okay, sorry, I've got it here. Okay, the next paper is the, sorry, 6.8, London Dock Paper, Mr Debutemir, sorry I thought you said it, education, that's why I said it, education, I didn't see the front page. Thank you Mayor, this report seeks cabinet approval to ratify the award of the main work contract for construction of Morbrey London Dock School, to Keir Constructions London, for the contract sum of £66,408,000. Construction of the school commenced in 2022 and is due for practical completion and occupation by autumn 2024. The report reflects the successful resolution of a series of longstanding issues, such changes to the heating strategy and subsequent redesign of the mechanical and electrical equipment, delaying completion of the final documentation. The original contract was awarded to Keir in October 2020 under the JCT 2016 D&B form of contract. However, all DfE funded projects are required to adopt the DfE form of contract. A series of scope changes, design changes and a period of extended contract negotiation meant that the main works contract between Keir Construction and Tower Hamlets Council could not be finalised until November 2023, with a contract value of £66,000,000. This high quality new school will provide much needed education facilities for a mixed 6 DfE form entry secondary school with 900 school places and 306 form provision. The overall capital budget for Morbrey London Dock School of £75,400,000 was agreed in cabinet on 31st January 2024. The allocation is part funded by a grant allocation of £53,867,000 from the DfE. Under the Council's financial threshold, members' approval is required to award a contract of this value. The report contains further details of the history and funding where we are seeking cabinet approval to complete the signing of the final contract in consideration of the prolonged contractual and commercial negotiation with Keir and the DfE. The revised contract cost of £66,000,000 is contained within the current budget envelope of £75,000,000. The report is reasonably straightforward. Yes, something that we have to do. Any comments from anyone? Thank you Mr Mayor. My general comments. We are investing quite a lot of money into London Dock and Woodwolf, I just want to add. So I think there needs to be a proper common strategy on that in terms of opening and creating awareness in the community. I think a lot of the schools are going to be ready in September, Woodwolf will be ready in September, so we've got two on the back so we need to really start thinking about that as well. Thank you. Sorry Mr Mayor, I forgot to introduce Yasmin who is our Head of Capital Delivery, she's done a lot of work around it and Dave is also here as Director to answer any questions. I don't know if we have any questions on this to be honest, it's quite straightforward, but can I please ask our corporate director for education please, Children's Services, that we, both of them, both Woodwolf and London Dock, London Dock and Woodwolf, we negotiated, I negotiated with the developers. There's George, London Dock, Canary Wolf Group on Woodwolf when we secured the housing spec, a school on both Whipping and the Docklands. They weren't keen on giving us a school, we had to persuade them and then to be fair, the corporate director for property services also, we both worked hard. London Dock, a school in an area which is quite cut off, it's like an island, cut off from other parts of the borough, and so we want to, for both of them, we want to be able to, island lead members, be able to go and do the launch, appropriate launch please, so can you please agree on launch dates, Sam can you work on that with Kieran and Jubeir? Steve you should come along to, Sam we should celebrate, we're putting in, we have put in so much money as a local authority, but those land wouldn't have been available for the schools if you want for us and our previous administration. It happened in our previous administration and we need to celebrate that and celebrate our kids. Is that okay? Can you agree with the dates? So can we agree with this paper and the recommendations here? Thank you. Great, thank you Yasmin. Great, now can we take 6.9 and 6.10 together please, and can you please lead member? Thank you Mr Mayor, yes we take both together, five schools. The purpose of this report is formally notify cabinet of the academy orders issued by the Secretary of State for Education on the 24th of October and 18th of December. In respect of these five maintained schools, in total five for both documents, for both report, so the recommendations are below and I would like the cabinet to approve the recommendations. Thank you. Thanks very much, can I just say this is out of our hands ladies and gentlemen, you know, unfortunately whether we like it or not, you know, obviously the community schools or any schools or the faith schools, if the schools decide, the governors decide they want to become academy, there's no way for us to stop that. They are our children, they are our kids, we have to do best for our children, best for our children and so we have to go along with it and the proposals are set out here. For the community schools we are the landowners, we have to agree to, again prescribed by law, long leases to those academies, they can't sell or do change of use, the land has to revert back to us in that event and contract will reflect that, but we have no choice. Is that okay? If people don't have any, well if you do have objections, nothing you can do. So can we agree with this? Please, both of them with the recommendation, both of the papers, thank you, grateful to you. Now we move on to, again a very important paper, 6.11, Tahamut Safeguarding Children Partnership annual report 23/24, lead member please. Thank you Mr. Mayor, again the Tahamut Safeguarding Children Partnership is required to publish an annual report on the effectiveness of the Safeguarding and promoting the welfare of children and its locality. The Safeguarding Child Partnership annual report 2023/24 demonstrates the activity of the THSCP within the last financial year, which includes the priority subgroups, data sharing and impact of the children within the borough and recommendation is attached on page 291/290. Mr. Veddie sir, is there anything you want to add? Thank you. Just briefly, just to thank all our partners involved, as you said Mr. Mayor and Deputy Mayor, this is such important work and we enjoy really positive support from our partners across the Safeguarding Partnership. And I guess I'd just like to draw attention to, we have our young persons voice, our young scrutineers, and I know as an administration you're very passionate about young persons voice, so it's great to have, you'll see in the document, young scrutineers who work with the Safeguarding Board, who carry out work and scrutinise work for the Safeguarding Partnership and it's really positive to see their comments. Thank you. Good, good. Any comments? It's a good piece of work, it's a good report, the team are doing good work around this and it's reflecting the report. Anything you want to comment on? If not, can we agree the recommendation? Thank you. Okay, the next document, equally important, and we've got a Confidential Supplemental Agenda Paper with 6.3, like the previous one. Again, have I missed anything? Sorry. Okay, I missed anything. Okay, okay, thank you. Please, yeah. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Again, this is a very important report. It's an overview of the progress and impact of SCND improvement during 2023 and 24, which Steve chairs, so the report will show how the NHS and the North East London and the Council have been working together with our partner across local area to deliver on our priorities. In the SCND Strategy and Improvement Plan. So the report includes input from children and young people and parents and carers and carers' representatives. So the recommendation is attached. Thank you. Is there anything you want to add, sir? Just really quickly, again, really important work and the administration has put additional investment both last year and in the coming year, recognising the increasing demand of SCND. So we're grateful, again, for the hard work of all our staff and the work of partners and the partnership work we do with children and families on SCND. We recognise that there is still work to do. Thanks. Thank you. Again, it's an area very dear to us to supporting families and people with special needs and as the corporate director said, we have put more money into the service over the last two years. But we do want to see good service, improving service, please, and the additional work that's going in, we want to see how the fruit has been produced as a result. It's very important. Please keep an eye on it and if I could have an updated paper, please, on where that money is going in, what improvement it is proposed it's going to make and how that's been measured is very important. We're still getting feedback from parents who still believe there's a lack and there's a gap in the services. If colleagues are okay with that, can we agree with the recommendation? Yes. Thank you. Okay, now can we move on to agenda item 6.13, please? It's Shafi. Thank you, Mr Mayor. The Barkentine Heat and Power Company is a district heating energy centre located behind the Tiller Laser Centre on the Isle of Docks. The scheme is managed by EDF Energy on a 25-year PFI agreement expiring in October 2025. Following the expiry, this report is recommending we enter into a two-year transitional agreement with EDF for the following reasons. Post-expiry, EDF are responsible for ensuring all equipment has a two-year working life and there are reasons responsible for any breakdowns. Approximately $3.8 million of asset upgrade is required and the network operator, EDF Energy, needs to apply for any external government grant funding. We need to have a decarbonisation plan in place to meet new energy legislation coming up in 2025. To align the long-term plan for the Barkentine Energy Network to the energy infrastructure needs the area, including one housing regeneration plan, future proposals for the Seven Mills School and the Laser Centre. The transitional agreement will be based on the existing terms of service and therefore there will be no change for the customer. The government will have provisions to improve the service and the customer's experience for the residents. The availability fee for the transitional agreement and the work required for the decarbonisation and expansion strategy, the legal and technical work and procurement will be met by the existing funds. Mr Mayor, the cabinet is recommended to authorise the corporate director of housing and regeneration in consultation with the mayor to enter into a two-year transitional agreement to extend the existing agreement under appropriate commercial terms. To note a detailed decarbonisation expansion strategy is being developed. Note a future report will be brought to the cabinet for approval to procure a new long-term contract from 2027. Thank you. Again, colleagues, this is something we have to do, we have no choice, but I think it's something we should do. Then we get a chance in two years time to procure new provisions, new services, new contract. Any comments from colleagues? Just briefly, 3.4, governance. Have we got all the correct names and positions in there if we can just double-check all of that? 3.4. 3.40, governance. [inaudible] I just want to make sure we've got all the, in terms of the governance, the people with the right job descriptions and everything on there, because we're going through housing, regeneration, restructure and so on and so forth, where it's placed and who's chairing and so on and so forth. I'll ask Steve if he can have a look at it. Sorry, thank you. Yes, thank you. I can answer that. So at the moment, currently the director of housing, Karen Swift, is the chair of this steering group and I think Steve as well as Judith Lorraine are kept informed of the activities of the steering group and we have John Harrison, who's also the SFO on this project. I think going forward the proposals is that this project will stay with Karen Swift going forward. Can I just request Steve just to keep an eye on it to make sure there is continuity and that the strength is in the steering group to see this through, otherwise we'll be in trouble. Okay, thank you for coming. Thanks for that comment. Thank you. Please, Deputy Mayor. Thank you, Mr Mayor. This is again a flagship project. Nowhere in the country there is another plant and I'm grateful it's in our ward, so we need to be kept in the loop, I think. And also there have been issues previously with repairs and we've communicated with you, so we just need to make sure that doesn't repeat and I'm glad that this conditional survey took place and there will be some 3.8 million to replace some equipment, so I'm hoping that will hopefully resolve some of the issues, so I just wanted to know that. Yes, that's correct. So our two years of transition period, we're going to use that time to actually forward plan the investment that is going to be required, the minimum investment in terms of improving the assets. There are going to be longer term improvements that need to be made as well, so we're going to do a full business case and a financial model to support that. Abdul, thank you. If there's no other comments, can we agree the paper and recommendations? Thank you for the work, the time you're putting in. Thank you. Thank you very much. We agreed. Great. I believe there's no other business. Thank you for all your work today, as you would call it a day. Can the lead members and Ashraf and Steve just hang around, please? Thank you. And the meeting is closed. The meeting is closed. Thank you. [Applause] [BLANK_AUDIO]