Council - Wednesday 18th September, 2024 7.00 pm
September 18, 2024 View on council website Watch video of meetingTranscript
Transcript
Transcript
If any member objects, the motion will be deemed to be agreed. If anyone has any objection, please say so now. Members, please join me on the dais. Minutes from the previous meeting, unless any member wishes to raise a point of order relating to the accuracy of these minutes, I will consider that members are content that I signed the minutes of the last meeting. This is agenda item two. Please state now if you wish me to raise or wish to raise a point of order. Thank you. The minutes are agreed. Agenda item three, Lord Mayor's Communications, these are set out in the meeting papers. Agenda item four, declarations of interest, it is necessary to declare any interest in relation to the issues on which there will be a vote. These items were set out alongside the list of speakers on the order paper. Members need to declare an interest in the items selected for debate if they are speaking in that debate. All members in attendance were asked to identify in advance of the meeting if they have any interest to declare. If anyone has any disclosable, pecuniary interests or any other significant interest to declare, please do so now. Agenda item five, there is no statement on urgent matters. Agenda item six, Councillor presented petitions and deputations. All Councillors were asked to notify in advance of the meeting if they have a petition that they wish to present. I am aware of two petitions to be presented this evening. Can I ask firstly, Councillor Hassan to approach the dais to present her petition relating to Fonosa Street? Can I now ask Councillor Swadall to approach the dais to present his petition on pedicab licensing. Thank you. I'm not aware of any other petitions, however, if anyone has a petition they would like to present, please mention this now. Thank you. Agenda item seven, public participation. Each member of the public selected for this item and here this evening has been submitted or has submitted a question or has a petition which they will present to the relevant cabinet member. They will have up to two minutes to present their question or petition, then the relevant cabinet member will have up to two minutes to respond. Can I ask that when you are presenting your question you adhere to the question you submitted which you have a copy of. Can I also ask the cabinet members who are responding to please be succinct in your response. There is no right to reply and I ask that once you have received your response you return to your seat. All questions asked and responses provided will be made available on the council's website in the days after the meeting. Can I now ask Camilla Carballetto to join us at the front of the chamber to present her petition. Welcome. Thank you. Can I now ask the cabinet member for city management and air quality, Councillor de Mildenburg, to respond. Thank you, Lord Mayor and thank you, Camilla, for bringing this petition to the full council today and, yes, we will support residents on this. Council officers have met and been in discussions with residents on the issues faced at Turpentine Lane. The information we've gathered is being considered in developing the options to calm traffic locally. The likely option will include what's known as virtual cushions and examples can be seen on St George's Drive or we're also considering the installation of coloured high friction material at selected intervals, which is similar to a raised table. The installation of speed bumps has been considered, but given the proximity of residential buildings less than one and a half metres away, this type of measure could well generate issues with ground borne vibration, which would cause a new problem for residents. However, either way, council officers are working on this and more details will be provided next month for further discussion with residents and I will make sure that this is shared with you as well. Thank you, Lord Mayor. Thank you, Ms. Carvaretto. You may now return to your seat as you have done. Thank you. You've preempted me. Can I now ask Linda Strike to join us, sorry, Lydia Strike to join us at the front of the chamber to ask her question. Thank you. Thank you for this opportunity. This is a beautiful building. I hope it isn't torn down. It's like the wild west out here in good old Westminster. Okay, now I will share my question. I see what should be marvellous landmark buildings being torn down all over Westminster and replaced with characterless luxury flats, which often stand practically empty. Why has Westminster allowed this rampant destruction of the city's history to take place? And how many more of these luxury monstrosities do we need in this dire housing crisis? Why do you continue to allow this destructive, ahistorical practice to continue? Thank you. I now ask the cabinet member for planning and economic development, Councillor Baratraf, to respond. Thank you, Lydia. We had a nice conversation before this meeting and hopefully we'll be able to continue the conversation afterwards. I'm slightly perturbed by the amount of applause coming from the other side of this chamber here. As you know, the council has been under new management since 2022. And the majority of these ahistorical demolitions have been permitted and allowed by the group opposite when they were in control of the council. We are determined here that there should be no destruction of our heritage and the housing that should be built at the maximum possible amount of affordable housing within it. And we've been very clear with the offices that the city plan must be respected as it is written. We are consulting now and will be going to the planning inspector in November to get additional powers in the city plan to allow us to stop demolitions when they are not justified on the grounds of the amount of carbon dioxide released and sustainability, which we currently don't have those powers. Even so, I'm very pleased the planning committee at Westminster has for the first time refused the demolition of a building, the one on Savile Row, on the grounds of the circular economy and the lack of recycling in the statement in which the building was going to be demolished and the new one rebuilt. So I have a huge amount of sympathy with you, Lydia. I think we're on the same page. And when it comes to the planning inspector and the planning inquiry, it's going to be a public hearing, a bit like this one. And I would urge you and your neighbours to come along and support us at that inquiry next year. Thank you. Can I now ask Alexi Corrie-Smith to join us at the front of the chamber to ask her question. Thank you. Thank you. I'm just going to correct my grammar, because it's shocking in the question. But is there something that could be done about bike riders jumping lights, especially at pedestrian crossings? Using Bayswater Road, indeed any of the roads around where I live, around Montague Square, et cetera, while walking my dog to the park, feels like risking my life sometimes. Line bikes at full speed, racing through red lights, not stopping, ignoring the green man. Sometimes I want to push them off, but then I'd be arrested. So what do we do? Thank you. Can I now ask the cabinet member for city management? Thank you, Lord Mayor, and thank you, Alexi, for bringing this question to the full council this evening. I can assure you that road safety is of the utmost priority to me and everybody else in this council tonight. All cyclists, including line riders or any other bike hire users, are required to follow the Highway Code and adhere to signals. Such offences are a breach of the Road Traffic Act 1988 and is under the jurisdiction of the Metropolitan Police. Reporting a road traffic offence to the police can be done by the police website, and I'd encourage you and anybody else to do this when you witness an accident like the one you've just described. Here we are working hard to manage the growth of e-bikes on our streets by working with the stakeholders, including bike operating companies, to find the most suitable solution for issues of poor rider behaviour. As a first step, I believe the e-bike operators should use their GPS tracking to ban riders who go through red lights. We need a proper regulatory framework to be brought forward from government to include legislation that would enable local councils like Westminster to control the use of e-bikes and allow us to act against bike companies and riders who continue to show dangerous and poor behaviour. Thank you. [Applause] Thank you. Thank you Mr Horaceman. Can I now ask Sian West to join us at the front of the chamber to ask her question? Thank you. Welcome. This relates to Pimlico. Is that better? Thanks. So Westminster Council has proposed closing Warwick Way in Pimlico, the busiest road, to eastbound traffic from Belgrave Road with only one alternative route to Rochester Row and on to Westminster. This entails a diversion five times longer through narrow side streets and disrupting a key NHS medical centre. A statutory consultation was carried out in 2023, over 92% of those responding objected. Local businesses similarly object along both Warwick Way and Rochester Row. These associations object and certain councillors object. Why is the council pursuing this proposal when the overwhelming viewpoint of residents and businesses is that the area in the area object to what I would describe as an unreasonable proposal? Will the council pause on this proposal and consider alternatives that maintain a two-way vehicle use for Warwick Way accessing Pimlico? Thank you very much. Thank you. At this time, I ask the cabinet member for city management and air quality. Thank you, Lord Mayor, and thank you, Sian, for your question. The council carried out a survey of the continuation of the temporary Alfresco scheme and a possible permanent scheme in 2021, which showed over 83% of the residents and businesses were supportive of the proposals. So we went forward to the formal traffic management order consultation, which sought views on the traffic direction and curbside. The council received 972 pro forma objections, which were all the same response. Many people who responded to the council expressed their anger at receiving a communication from the medical practice on a non-medical matter, urging them to object to the traffic proposal. I understand that the NHS information commissioner has been asked to investigate a breach of the GDPR regulations. Given the thorough consultation exercise, it's now time for delivery, and having listened and responded to comments very fully, which we can include within the scheme, I believe it's time now to deliver the scheme for Warwick Way and Churchill Street. Thank you, Lord Mayor. Can I now ask Bettina Altman to join us at the front of the chamber to ask her question? Thank you very much. Good evening, ladies and gentlemen. I moved to London in 2018 and love to live in Westminster. I was lucky to rent my flat from a private landlord, and in general, we have a good relationship. Still, we all know rents in Westminster are too high, and especially one bedroom flats. And here my concern, they are not even in a good condition. I do ask the council and the government to set rent limits for private landlords, and these limits should be related to the standard of a flat. We have 2024, and energy prices are high. It is unbelievable landlords are not forced to install double or even triple glazed windows in older buildings. This would reduce heating costs immense. It is as well unbelievable that many flats in converted terraced houses are zero insulated. This must be reflected in rent prices. Landlords can as well not even just increase rents because of their mortgage got up. People renting from private landlords need more protection and support, and I kindly ask you to pay attention to this. Thank you. Can I now ask the cabinet member for regeneration and renters, Councillor Noble, to respond. Thank you. Thank you, Lord Mayor. Thank you for your question. I too live in Harrow Road and rent my flat, so I see what's going on around the area too. We know that private rents are very high across Westminster, and they've risen sharply, particularly over the last 12 months, and they continue to rise. Unfortunately, the council has no powers to limit or cap the price of rents, although tenants do have the right to challenge excessively high rent increases if they're higher than other market rents, and the council has a tenancy relation service which can help tenants with this if they encounter those problems. Where we can act is ensuring that rental accommodation is safe, is free from hazards, and is well managed. We also provide a home energy advice service which helps make homes more energy efficient and reduces tenants' energy bills, and residents can book a visit from a green doctor to identify what measures can be taken to reduce the amount of energy used and identify further additional support. In addition to this, we're exploring how selective property licensing can be used to improve energy efficiency standards, and how we can support landlords make improvements, and we'll shortly be undertaking a consultation on this over the autumn and early into next year. We're launching a private rented sector charter designed to inform and protect all private rented sector tenants in Westminster to make sure that they're aware of their rights. Finally, we welcome the new government's Renters' Rights Bill, which will finally abolish no-fault section 21 evictions, meaning landlords can only evict tenants in certain circumstances and this should help them to challenge poor quality properties. The bill also aims to improve housing quality by bringing in a new decent home standard and to prevent bidding wars, so landlords and agents have to stick to a publicized rent for a property. We don't have all the powers we would like, but we are committed to doing all we can with the tools at our disposal to make as big an impact as possible. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you, Ms. Altman. Finally, can I ask Sam Aband to join us at the front of the chamber to ask his question? Welcome, sir. Thank you. Why a permanent resolution cannot be found through a refuse from Clarence Gate, Glenmore Street? It's a wide street and with pavement both sides, whilst Checkford Street is a narrow street with pavement on only one side. Good evening, council members. I'm here on behalf of the residents of Checkford Street, a quiet neighborhood in Malibu and Westminster where I have lived for over 25 years. We are facing a serious problem that is affecting our quality of life. Residents from Clarence Gate, Glenmore Street have been dumping their waste on our only pavement. This, along with infrequent installations, has created a health hazard. Our pavement is continuously covered with rubbish, both back and on back, which in turn attracts more waste, which then attracts them such as rats, cats, dogs, pigeons, foxes, all of which have been seen ripping bags open. This problem means that the residents are forced to walk in the street, which puts them and their children, the elderly, the blind, at risk, not to mention the residents who use a wheelchair. Several of us have attempted to speak with the reporters of Glenmore Street building to no avail. We convened a meeting with Councillor de Moldenbeck, Councillor Sordo, Dalibor Knesevic and members of Checkford House Association earlier this year and for a period, our pavement was clear until this summer when the dumping resumed. By flagging this problem, nothing appears to have been done and the problem is as bad as ever. This needs an urgent and permanent solution, leading to the people of Glenmore Street putting their refuse for collection in front of their own homes. It would make more sense since the street is wider for collection trucks. Thank you for the opportunity to put this problem before you. Thank you, sir. I finally ask the cabinet member for city management and air quality to respond. Thank you, Lord Mayor and thank you, Sam, for your question. As you know, Glenmore Street includes the very large mansion block, Clarence Gate Gardens and the rubbish and recycling storage areas for Clarence Gate Gardens are located at the back end of their building at lower basement level, leading on to both Checkford Street and Siddons Lane. That's why the building porters and residents present their waste on these streets for collection. It's the most effective method of waste disposal and it's been that way for the past 100 years. I visited Checkford Street earlier this year and met residents with Ward Councillor Swaddle. We agreed that Veolia would pick up rubbish on Checkford Street at the same time as they pick up rubbish from Clarence Gate Gardens. That means the rubbish on Checkford Street is picked up five times a week. Unfortunately, the changes in Veolia structure some months ago resulted in the new crews not being informed of the decision that the Checkford Street collections should be increased to five days a week and I apologise for that. We've told Veolia to go back to the five day collections on Checkford Street, which should and will resolve the problem. I appreciate this has been frustrating for residents in Checkford Street and I hope that you will now see the refuse collected five days a week, which is better than anywhere else in the United Kingdom. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Abbott. So that concludes the last question of this item. Thank you for all those who've taken time to participate in tonight and asking your questions. If you would like to stay for the remainder of the meeting, you're more than welcome, but if not, can I ask you to kindly leave now and I would like to wish you all a very good evening. Thank you very much. Thank you. Okay. Agenda item eight, questions. As we all know, there are 45 minutes for questions. Would all members wishing to ask a question please indicate now and continue doing so until the notice from the chief executive and the monitoring officer has registered your, acknowledged your hand is up. I will then call members who indicated that they wish to ask a question after Councillor Swaddle has asked his three questions and as we all know, questions should be brief, questions should be the answers. Okay. Councillor Swaddle, please now can I ask you to ask your first of three questions. Thank you. Thank you, Lord Mayor. My question is to the leader of the council. Would it need, based on the petition this evening, to keep pressure on TfL to get on with the implementation of regulations to licence pedicabs as quickly as possible? Starting in spring 2025 is simply not good enough, as you would have seen by this massive response from the public. Before you step up, Councillor Hutt, could I just say these? No, okay, forgive me, please continue. Thank you very much, Lord Mayor. Across the city, we know that pedicabs are a real issue for local residents. It took far too long for legislation to be brought through the House of Commons to set up the regulatory framework that now needs to be brought into effect. Thankfully, at the end of last problems, I'll pay credit to the work of former MP and former Councillor Niki Aiken on helping getting that bill over the line, supported on both sides of this chamber. The time is now to put that into place. We have been clear to TfL that action needs to be done as swiftly as possible. We're conscious that this is an issue that has a predominant impact in central London rather than across London as a whole, and there is a lot of learning that is underway to work out how the regulation should be brought into effect, but we need them to work at pace to get a grip of what's going on on our streets. Our council officers have been doing an amazing job up until now with the powers that have been available to them to crack down on nuisance noise and poor behaviour through existing legislation. They've got them off the streets, they've got fines in place, but we need that new regulation to be in place, so I absolutely will work with anybody to make sure that we get that across the line. We've spoken to TfL recently to put that to - that goes for all the residents of Westminster who want to get this done. Thank you for your assurances. Will you join me in writing a joint letter to Sadiqul to keep the pressure on and to deliver this as fast as possible? Thank you very much, Lord Mayor. I'm happy to draft a letter that focuses on precisely that point about action and sets out what role the City Council can play in order to help get this done. I want to again pay tribute to the work that our officers have been doing to help inform TfL about the peculiarities of the pedicab situation, and I'm happy to work with people across the Chamber to make sure that that message is reinforced. Councillor Swattle? My next question is to the cabinet member for city management. Sadiq Khan may not be bothered about pedicab menace, but he certainly seems keen to fund low-traffic neighbourhoods, with another 30 of these set to go ahead and around £66 million so far identified to be given to boroughs for schemes including low-traffic neighbourhoods and school streets. The funding is expected to top £80 million by the year end. Can the cabinet member confirm that Westminster will not seek to deploy LTNs in Westminster? Yes! Thank you for confirming. For school streets, can you please confirm that, unlike the CCT, the plan is being finalised? Councillors are an important part of the consultation on all school street proposals and indeed play streets, so I will certainly ensure that councillors get early sight of proposals and take that forward, certainly. Councillor Swattle, your third question? Thank you. We've all seen the extraordinary announcement from the Mayor that he is taking over the Oxford Street project and planning to remove planning powers and all pedestrians from Oxford Street, removing vital access for the disabled and elderly, riding roughshod over your own commitment not to do so. When were you told this would be happening? It's at this point, Councillor Hugg, I've now got the right time to just make this quick statement, if I may. As mentioned at the start of the meeting, we are in a pre-election period. We should not be having discussions on items in Harrow Road or the West End Wards. However, as the question has been put to you, I will allow one question with a response from Councillor Hugg, but please note I will not allow any other discussions on this topic or any others in the wards mentioned. Thank you. Thank you very much, Lord Mayor. As Councillor Swattle is probably aware from the Chief Executive Statement earlier this week, this is a situation that we found out about on Thursday afternoon. We have made very clear since then our concerns about that process, and we have made clear our position of principal support of the work that we have been doing up to now to deliver at pace in our Oxford Street programme, which in two years had got almost ready to be on the streets after many years of delay. As he will be aware, I have written to the Deputy Prime Minister and the Mayor of London setting out 10 key concerns that we have raised on behalf of local residents, and we want to ensure that those are fully answered to our satisfaction before any further developments take place and any final decisions are taken. It's quite clear that you have no influence on national policy or London Labour policy for the Labour Party. Your job is to stand up for our city and local residents, as you pointed out. Will you help lead a JR against a decision, if needed, or will you resign and make way for someone who will stand up for residents? You're in favour of pedestrianisation. On that latter point, that is a matter for the electorate, and we will see that in 2026. On the first point, we will make very clear to the Mayor and to the government the position of this Council. We have set out what those requirements are. As the Member is aware, obviously there is no decision that has been taken by government and therefore that is a very premature discussion. We are going to work closely and efficiently to try and put forward our position to those other partners and we will look at what those responses are and we will respond in the appropriate way to safeguard our residents and our businesses and all of those users of Oxford Street. We are clear, this has come to us recently, and we will look at what options are available but we work pragmatically to try and get answers in the public interest on behalf of our local residents. Councillor Tozzal, could you ask your question, thank you. Thank you, Lord Mayor. We've all been really concerned to hear about the death of a local young resident of ours in Queen's Park as a result of the youth community in the wake of these tragic events. Thank you very much, Councillor Tozzal. As you know, we were all shocked by the horrific killing of Tikong horses a few days ago at the heart of Queen's Park. It was someone known by so many people in our local area, including Councillor Peddock, who was his teacher when growing up, Karen Buck, who knew him since he was a small boy, and his life touched that of so many people in that community. It was senseless act of violence and a symptom of a broader problem that we are working as a council to try and address alongside the Metropolitan Police and others. Councillor Sanquist and I, on behalf of the, and the Chief Executive on behalf of the administration, attended a community meeting on the 10th of September, along with many other councillors and ward councillors at the time, to hear from the community about their pain and hear what they want from the council and other partners, including the NHS and police, to do. We are committed to standing with communities facing serious youth violence and other forms of gang violence that happens on our streets, and to be clear, the victim is not part of that, and we want to put on record our deep condolences for the family. We are grieving with the community, and we are looking at what steps we need to take to further support communities that are facing vulnerabilities like that. So our heart goes out to them, and we as a council stand with them in the days and months ahead. [Applause] Councillor Scarborough. Thank you. My question is for the cabinet member for young people licensing public protection. So under the levelling up and regeneration act, which came into effect on the 31st of March 2024 and was made permanent, the payment licensing regime concerning tables and chairs on the highway now has only 14 days for anyone to make representations to the council, and you have to be able to see the blue notice, which they are required to post outside the premises. Please can we have a date for when the council will produce a register for members to be aware of which premises are applying for these tables and chairs licenses in their ward? Thank you very much, Councillor Scarborough, for your question, and I too share those concerns that 14 days is way too short for a turnaround and for members who actually have their say. We will be working with officers around how we sort that time out, but what I can say is that we will work with ward councillors that are most affected by table and chairs payment licenses. Yes, you're right, it started in May, and that is for every six months they will be able to renew their license, and it will be up to two years that they could have a license for, so we can work with you and colleagues on more matters, on payment licenses or anything else that matters to you. Thank you. Thank you. It doesn't quite answer the question about when we're going to get a register because actually the 14 days is statutory in the legislation, so supplementary, can the member please advise how many enforcement notices have been issued for breaches of conditions of payment licenses under the new regime, and what action is being taken where permission is being ignored? Thank you for your supplementary. I don't have the numbers to hand, but I will come back to you with those numbers in due course. Thank you. And I will talk about, I'll ask them for the list of registers, the list of registers to go out to members. But what action's being taken where there are breaches of conditions? Councillor Scarborough, I think you've asked your supplement. Thank you, Lord Mayor. Councillor Fisher. Yes. Thank you, Lord Mayor. My question is for the cabinet member for finance and council reform. I'm sure the cabinet member will agree with me that the efficient delivery of local government audits is essential to transparency in local democracy. This time last year, in September of 2023, there were 900 outstanding audits during the local government audit crisis under the last Conservative government. How has that impacted Westminster City Council? Thank you, Lord Mayor. Thank you. It very nearly affected us very significantly, even though we get our accounts in good shape and we get them audited almost before any other council. The council has agreed forward borrowing, as members will know, £400 million at extremely advantageous rates agreed before the pandemic from four different lenders. Now, one of those lenders, not so familiar with the state of local government in the United Kingdom and local government audit, took fright at the fact that the audit crisis and the capacity in the area meant that we had not actually had formal sign-off of our accounts and was threatening, very seriously threatening, to rule us in default and therefore cancel our forward borrowing. After some persuasion, they saw sense and we kept that, but I was determined that we should not be put in that position again. To avoid that I agree that we should seek a public credit rating from Moody's. And supplementary, if I may, Lord Mayor, can you provide us with an update on the application for credit rating from Moody's? Thank you. Thank you, Lord Mayor. It's what's fundamental to the process. The process is an independent and objective assessment carried out by Moody's and the decision was reached in July and it gave the council an AA3 issuer rating with a baseline credit assessment of A1 and outlook stable. But given that the United Kingdom's sovereign rating is only AA3, that is the highest possible rating this council could possibly have achieved. The Moody's report said Westminster, under Labour, has strong financial management with prudent fiscal planning. This rating was applied for under Labour and it was our fiscal planning, it was our financial arrangement. This rating will help us deliver our large and ambitious, that's a quote from Moody's, capital programme and will help lower the cost of achieving and delivering more social housing. Councillor Robathon, the floor is yours. Given the importance of affordable housing delivery for our city, could the leader of the council update this chamber on which new major housing schemes have been identified and added to the delivery pipeline under his administration? Is the leader of the council not able to answer on which major schemes have been added to the... Is your question directed, Councillor, to the leader? Yes. He should be able to answer this. We are working at pace, but as the Lord Mayor knows, obviously any family member is able to, of course, for having the questions on. But in answer to her question, we are working at pace to expand the pipeline that we have to make sure that we're delivering even more council homes and intermediate homes for local people. We are moving, we have recently broken the log jam that was affecting delivery of the Lissen Grove site that will be able to be moved forward and into delivery. So there's a range of things through our pipeline. I'm delighted to say that the CPO process for Church Street has now concluded, enabling work to get underway on site as soon as possible. We have gone through the programme we inherited, which is one of the biggest council home building programmes in the country, to make sure that it... Thank you very much. Well, we have taken it and we have enhanced it by delivering far more council and truly affordable homes within the distribution. So very clearly, at a time when the rest of local authorities across the country are not able to deliver a programme, thanks to the prudent work done by Councillor Boothroyd and the work that Councillor Noble is doing. We are getting on and building and we're making sure that what we're building is maximising the affordable housing for people. We will set out in due course the next stages of our programme. We have ambitious plans, but we want to make sure that they're right to be able to be delivered because we don't want to promise what we can't deliver in these difficult times. Thank you, Councillor Haynes. supplementary? Lord Mayor, I'm afraid I find that a shocking response from the leader of this administration, which is supposed to share our commitment to affordable housing delivery. In almost two and a half years, they have not identified any new major schemes, and the leader of the council should absolutely be aware of that. Is he not concerned that by not bringing forward and adopting any additional schemes for the building pipeline, that this will leave the council very short on its delivery? And by the way, is it not also a major concern that with this failure that the mayor of London, we can't mention the scheme elsewhere, is going to step in and grab control of our housing delivery as well? Thank you, Councillor Noble. Of course not, Lord Mayor, because the difference between us and many past Conservative administrations and sadly many other local authorities across the archery, we are getting on and building council homes across our city. Only from our scheme. Let's be clear, something that you would try and claim as your scheme was 291 Harrow Road. The reality is you just bought the land and you didn't have any plans to do anything with it. No, we know, Rachel, because we saw the fact, we've seen the paperwork, Rachel. That's rubbish. No new identified schemes to leave the council, that's shocking. You left a plot of land empty. You know that as well. You know that full well. We are getting on, talking to local residents, working to deliver that scheme in addition. So, ultimately, you may claim that as one of your schemes, but you left us with nothing. We are getting on and building that. You know that's true, Rachel. You know that's true. It's a shocking record from your administration. Thank you, leader. Thank you, leader. I haven't used this yet, so, leader, thank you. It's important to be clear with people who have short memories. Thank you, Lord Mayor. The first thing you say to me is where is the CCTV? Tempted to say Nicky Aiken abolished it, I'd like to ask the cabinet member for public protection. Absolutely true. What happened to the 75 CCTV cameras? They disappeared. They were switched off. Anyway, the cabinet member for public protection might be able to outline what's happening to Westminster CCTV. Thank you, Councillor Lee. So, whilst there have been a couple of tragic incidents in Westminster in recent weeks, Westminster still remains a safe city and a safe borough. We work closely with partners such as the police and affected communities after a serious incident. I would urge anyone that is a victim of crime to call 999 and to report it to the police. As you all know, we have launched our 100 CCTV service and 100 deployable cameras in order to assist the council and our partners in tracking down and helping our tackling crime and our antisocial behaviour, as well as noise and fly-tipping. So, these cameras are there to help us and the police and any other partner that wishes to use them. They are monitored 24/7 from our service centre at the Hamilton and Fulham Council and we have two full-time staff members that monitor the cameras there. So, whilst CCTV is a tool and it can be used by our local neighbourhood coordinators, it's one part of the council's problem-solving approach to resolving antisocial behaviour problems within local areas. So, that's what we're doing at the moment and that's where our cameras are and we have cameras. Supplementary, please. I have to tread quite carefully because of the ward I'm in. Would the cabinet member for public protection like to mention any of the other wards that will be receiving CCTV in response to their neighbourhood coordinators and councillors working together? And I won't mention my ward. Please don't. As you know, cameras have been allocated to all wards, including the ward that we're not supposed to be mentioning tonight. And I'm pleased to say that there will be cameras in that ward on particular streets that have been raised as an area of nuisance, antisocial behaviour and fly-tipping. So, I'm pleased that that work is on the way and we are working towards delivering those cameras in those areas. Thank you. Thank you. Councillor Dean. Here, here. Thank you. My question is for the cabinet member for children. There's no statutory provision but no reforms to public fund families. Do you think we should be doing more to support this vulnerable group? Is that to me? Okay. Thank you, Councillor Dean. As far as I'm concerned, as far as I'm aware, we are supporting families that have no recourse to public funds and that is vulnerable families and refugees in the city. So, if you want to share the details that concern you, I will be happy to take them up and make sure that we address those particular issues. I don't think you're making enough provision. How can you make this provision when there is an overspend on placements and direct support costs due to an increase in looked after children and care leavers? Maybe you can spend less on community hubs and redirect some of the £10 million to children's services. Sorry. I don't think that relates to the first question because your first question says that we don't support and now you're saying that it's not enough support? Which we do, which we do support them. But I'm not sure about your second supplementary question. I don't think you're supporting them directly. We are supporting everyone that needs the help and it's coming forward for help. I can assure you that that is definite and we do have support in place for those vulnerable and those particular groups that you're mentioning. Thank you. We never turn anyone away, particularly those vulnerable groups. Thank you, Councillor Less. Councillor Southern. That question is one close to my heart. My mother left school at 16 and had to get a career when she got divorced and out of education was the way that she did that. Our fair economy plan has three pillars. We're keeping the West End humming, oh, I said it, sorry, as the engine of economic growth, supporting small businesses in the context of high streets and, most importantly, ensuring our residents have the skills, confidence and contacts to land the well-paid career jobs on their doorstep. And the Westminster Outer Education Service has a critical role to play in that. It's the largest service in London, a budget of £10 million, over 200 staff and teaches more than 7,000 students each year, including many learning English for the first time. It's a service we value and we cherish. Two-thirds of learners got a good grade English and maths this year and they got excellent results in graphics, fashion and arts too. Congratulations to all the students who achieved so well. So today I'm pleased to announce that Waze will deliver a new Green Skills programme in partnership with our new Anchor Alliance of major local employers and the first class of '18 is already enrolled at Amberley Road and we're building a new dedicated facility at Lissengrove. Because the curriculum has been designed with the Crown Estate, with Grosvenor and London Zoo, we can be sure the students will have the training they need to get the jobs of tomorrow. While I'm here, I'm assuming... Councillor Baratov, I think you've answered the question. Okay. supplementary. Can you expand on what you were going to say? I'm sure that's the supplementary. No, no, no, no, no, no. I'd like to say a few words about the vote you had laid tonight. Councillor Baratov, you didn't get the supplementary. Thank you. Thank you, Councillor. I wanted to say the vote tonight is to adopt a new industry's governance for Waze. Although, look, you're going to vote on this. You haven't even read the papers. I'm going to tell you what you're going to vote on. Although Waze has its own governing body since 1974, the service is not an arms length organisation. It does not have the status of an FE college or a school. It's fully part of the council and we need the governance arrangements to reflect that. They were last updated in 2010 and no longer reflect the way the council works today. However, I'm conscious that Waze sometimes needs to be able to move quickly to adapt to the rapidly changing circumstances of adult education. And that's why the service will have special arrangements with other council departments, including corporate property, finance procurement and HR, which will support Waze to continue to support its students so effectively. Thank you. Thank you. Councillor Mendoza. Thank you, thank you, Lord Mayor. My question is for the lead member for city management and air quality. I've recently had a convoluted case in my ward of an illegally parked car that has proved very difficult for the council to remove. Does a lead member, is he aware of the process for removal of illegally parked cars? And just to clarify, these are cars that have spent a long time in bays they're not entitled to be in, multiple parking tickets but show no signs of movement. What is the policy for their removal? Well, thank you, Councillor Mendoza. I share your concern. What happens is when a car like you described is reported to us, we get onto the DVLA to find out if it is properly taxed and it has a MOT. If it is properly taxed and it does have the MOT, then we cannot do anything about it. It is there and we cannot remove it. But what we do is we continue to find out when the DVLA information runs out, so when the tax runs out or when the MOT runs out, then we can act and remove the car. Well, a supplementary. Thank you, Councillor de Mollenberg. I know that is the established policy, but clearly something better can be done. Many of our neighbouring councils are able to remove cars that still have their MOTs or their tax in place. So I wonder if he'll agree that it does make more sense to expedite the process and not leave them in place for weeks or even months in some cases to do this, but to try and find a quicker way. And if he does agree, will he perhaps agree to review the policy and let us know the outcome? Well, there is only one council in Greater London that does remove cars in the way that you suggest. I think it's an outer London borough that does that. It's not Lambeth. Lambeth does. No, it doesn't. It does. No, it doesn't. It's not Lambeth. It's an outer London borough that removes cars in that way. But we do everything we can, and we've had some notable successes in chasing the owners and removing those cars whenever we can that do so. Thank you. Councillor Toki, as is. Thank you very much. My question is to the deputy leader and cabinet member. (inaudible) Can you update us on what new support we are giving to adults with learning disabilities? Thank you very much for that question. We have made an investment recently of 150,000 per year. The provider is London Disability Network, and we have opened new enablement hubs. The first one that I visited was in Victoria Library, and it was the first chance I had to cut a ribbon. And the other hub will be on the Harrah Road. And the services that will be provided there include social activities, education, workshops, employment advice and things like that. The one I went to on Victoria Library, there was a workshop on communication skills, and it was absolutely excellent. And I'm very pleased that we've been able to make this investment. Thank you very much. (inaudible) So these hubs, their primary focus is on adults with learning disabilities that don't have support from adult social care or have a very small package from adult social care. So when I visited the hub, all the people that I saw there attending, there were people that had attended by themselves, not with carers. There were people that had some employment and some voluntary work. So there were people who were very, very independent, and a service like that enhances their independence and helps them maintain it. Thank you. Can I ask our most newly elected Councillor, Councillor Hannah Galley, to ask her question? Hear, hear, hear. My question is to the Leader of the Council. There's been a lot of speculation about what will be used for the Leader to join the Conservative group in opposing this. Good question. Thank you very much, Lord Mayor, and welcome. I would like to thank you for your first question and welcome to this chamber. I look forward to taking many questions from you from that side of the chamber for many years to come. In terms of the - as you were aware, we're not always clued in on the Government's thinking on things, but that is, however, the case for everybody in relation to the Chancellor's budget. That is a matter that most members of any Government don't tend to find out until the day. What I will say is that we are proud to have been able to maintain low council tax here in Westminster, and we plan to be able to continue to do that for the future. We know many people in Westminster are single people, and that doesn't mean they don't face significant challenges in a more expensive place like Westminster. So, absolutely, we would like to see that protected. However, we are conscious that the previous Government has left a massive £22 billion black hole in the public finances after years of slow growth and other economic mismanagement, so we know the Chancellor has a tough time ahead. However, I'm hopeful that other measures will be pursued, and I would join her in confirming that we would like to see the retention of that, if possible, under the fiscal circumstances. If the scheme is brought in, and if the power of the Council, can the leader make a significant part, especially young people and pensioners? Thank you very much, Wilma. As she will understand, I'm not going to make a definite financial commitment on a hypothetical question about a hypothetical set of powers. Ultimately, we will look at that. I think very clearly, whatever happens in future, we will look at what actions we can take at a local level to best protect on the lowest incomes and those who are facing financial distress. So, we will look at whatever powers we are given in future and whatever challenges that we're presented with and work in the best interest of our residents. Thank you. Councillor Williams. Thank you, Wilma. A question to the Cabinet Member for Climate at the Library of Things, based in Pimlico South. Can you please tell us more about this initiative? Yes. Thank you very much for your question, Councillor Williams. I was really pleased that we partnered recently with the social enterprise, Library of Things, to open our first rental library of things in Pimlico Library, opened at the start of September. And it was great to see yourself from Pimlico South and Councillor Pitt Ford from Pimlico North at the opening, which can be so beneficial for the residents of Pimlico. Just for those who aren't aware, and because your question has to say a bit more about it, it's a social enterprise which will give residents the opportunity to rent useful household items they might only use once or twice. For example, when I cut the ribbon, I used garden shears that would have cost 50 quid if I was to buy them, three pounds if I was to rent them for the day. So that's the benefit it's going to bring in the cost of living crisis. It will stop things going to landfill and will help promote a circular economy in Westminster. Thank you, Wilma. Can I ask how will we ensure the Library of Things is having the largest impact in supporting residents in Westminster? Yeah, that's a good question. We want to make sure that it's having the best impact, that it's being used, that we're encouraging our residents to get out there and actually loan the items. So we're going to be monitoring KPIs the first few months very closely. A key one of them is going to be the average amount of loans taken every single week. We're going to be targeting 30 loans on average every week. And I'm delighted that in the first week, we have 45 loans, so already exceeding that target. And if we do continue to exceed the figures, if it proves to be popular, then I'm hoping we can explore opening one in the north and in the centre of the city in the future as well. Councillor Kaplan. Thank you, Lord Mayor. I'll do a brief intro. My question is to the Deputy Leader, Councillor Les. She'll be aware, because I first reported this five months ago back in April, that there are tents under the Westway on Tf L land, at Travis Perkins Roundabout, which is Council owned land, and also land at St Mary's Square, which is also Council owned land in my ward. Residents that I represent, who live in buildings overlooking these sites, want to know when the Council will do something about these tents, which have increased month by month because nothing has been done, and there are now more than 20 of these tents, with large amounts of rubbish, detritus, and many reports of ASB happening on a daily basis. Surely five months is too long. When will the Council act and do something about it? Thank you very much for your question, Councillor Kaplan, and I share your concerns as well. It's a nuisance. Obviously it's not very nice for the residents and the businesses that have to live and work in the area. Sorry, I'm giving you my back, but I don't want you to hear me. But we are working with the police because, as you know, we don't have the powers to just remove tents. They have to be empty for a period of time before we can actually get rid of the tents. So there are some sort of enforcement powers that we do need. We're working with the police in order to do that. So unless the tent is seen to be empty for a period of time and it looks abandoned, that's when we can remove the tents. We have done that around the Victoria area, where there have been tents around, and the Victoria Piazza, where tents have been basically abandoned for weeks. That's when we can then go in and remove those tents. So I'm afraid it's a kind of waiting game. And I know that's not the answer that you're wanting to your question. You want a quick fix. But equally, we need to safeguard those individuals within those tents as well, because we want to help them move on to housing and support that they deserve and need. But I do share your concern that the tents are very unsightly. Thank you supplementary Lord Mayor. I understand the answer I've just been given, but actually what the council does have is the power to apply for a possession order. So what I want to know is why has the council not yet applied for a possession order? Or does it have the permission from the mayor to do so? We have our own possession orders that we apply for, but like I said, the tents have to be abandoned before we can actually remove them. They do need to be abandoned. The police can't touch a tent if there's someone in them. If you've got a possession order, you can't. Okay, okay. Thank you. Councillor Eagleton. Thank you, Councillor Eagleton. Last year in 2023, Veolia collected 80.9 tonnes of rubbish, out of which 2.7 tonnes was recyclable. That's just over 3.4%. This year, I'm pleased to say that Veolia collected 75.6 tonnes of rubbish, which is less. So that's less rubbish to be collected, which is good, out of which 7.6 tonnes was recyclable. That's 10%. So we are collecting less rubbish, but more of it is recyclable. And we've collected three times as much recyclable rubbish in 2024 than we did in the previous year. We're not going to rest on our laurels. We want to do more year on year. And I know that the Veolia team is working hard to work our ways. And actually, a recent experience makes me realise that the council's dragging its feet and hasn't deployed this. And my question is why. So my son was mugged 48 hours ago on Queensway, where the mugger forced him to walk with him down Queensway and said if he snitched, he'd be killed. The police attended, and they were very good. But they asked me if there was CCTV anywhere, and I had to reply, no. And so my question to you is why is the council dragging its feet on this vital public protection cameras that are needed? Thank you very much for your question, Councillor. I'm really sorry that your son had to experience what he did a couple of days ago. I can assure you that we have deployed some cameras. The problem that we have in some areas is that we have to find suitability positions and spaces for them. So if the lampposts aren't suitable, then we need to find alternative provisions in order to put the cameras up. So we are working with the team. We're working with all the neighbourhood coordinators. If you put in your request to your neighbourhood coordinator, we'd already have a list for where the cameras will be. And as I believe, I think in Queensway, around the Queensway area, you'll get in about four or five cameras around some of those hotspot areas that you so identify. So it's not a waiting game, but there are some delays in terms of suitability of where these cameras will go. Actually, my colleagues and I have suggested many, many hotspots in Queensway. Can you confirm that a suitability or a viability study has been done in Queensway as a result of our recommendations? Because I haven't heard of any. So every single recommendation has to go through a suitability kind of scoring. So they will score in terms of where the cameras are, the suitability for any location. They will go through a far suitability kind of scoring, and every single camera will be scored on location, suitability, the area it is actually serving, and if it's viable. And once it passes all those tests, it will then be deployed and put up as a result. Thank you. Councillor Angela Piddock. I'm pleased to say that over the summer, two mini hubs, which are pilots, have opened in Victoria and Charing Cross Library. Thank you to all members from across the parties who attended the launches. There are really varied programmes, everything from coffee mornings to support people, make social connections, to breakdancing classes, which I know some of my colleagues were interested in, lunch clubs, there's a makerspace to help people improve their skills, employment advice, and council drop-in services. Can you let us know whether there are plans for further hubs? Yes, there is, and I've been out visiting hubs across London, and we're taking lessons from our own pilots, but also from other community hubs going further south in the city. I should also put on record the hard work of Councillor Alcalest on this programme, which I've recently taken over. I'd love to answer the question. Go on, go on, go on, Councillor Dinnemann. Well, walking is the most sustainable way to get around, and walking is the way in which people, the majority of Westminster residents, get around. I'm very keen to encourage more walking, and one of the ways we've done that is to work with the social enterprise footways to create a digital map showing all the interesting routes through Westminster, avoiding the traffic, avoiding poor quality, and take interesting routes around Westminster. We launched it in Queen's Park, and we went from Queen's Park Library all the way through to Little Venice. It was a terrific walk. We're going to do more of those, and we're also going to launch a paper version of the map so that you don't have to have a phone to look at. You can have a map as well and put it in your pocket. So I'm hoping that we can do more of walking initiatives. Yes or no? No. I'm an awful cyclist. I would be a danger to anybody on the road. Since childhood, I've never had a bike. I don't drive either. I walk. It's the most safest thing for everybody concerned. Thank you. If any of us happen to see you on a bicycle, we'll avoid you. Thank you. That ends this session. Thank you. I'm sorry we haven't had enough time to get everyone in, but obviously, time is precious. Thank you. Moving, if I may, to Agenda Item 9, Councillor Issue. I call on Councillor Chowhiri to speak on his topic, his chosen topic, of issues with illegal short-term laps. Good evening, Lord Mayor. I want to remind everyone of a significant event from October 2007. Three friends sharing rental property converted room into an air mattress bed and breakfast due to rising rent. The goal was to host individual visiting for work, providing security for the host and authentic local experience for guests. This concept has since evolved into a profit-driven model that competes with local hotels, allowing hosts to rent entire property while absent. This business model has gained global acceptance, including investment as a city, as it offers passive income for residents facing high service charges. However, since 2015, when Conservative Housing Minister Brandon Lewis removed the planning permission requirement for short-term rentals up to 90 days, we lagged adequate primary legislation. Currently, only two enforcement officers manage around 10,000 short-term rental properties, and the council lacks funding to expand this team. On several occasions, I collaborated with two officers to investigate illegal short-list in Park West, over 400 flats and 25 post-place, more than 120 flats. I gained insight into the challenges officers face while completing a form that tracks nights at property violates the 90 days limit set by the primary legislation. This process resembles a game of whack-a-mole. I proposed uniting major landlords, church commissioners, Freshwater, and Western Quay within our ward to form a consolidated short-let group. This group includes representatives from environmental and short-let enforcement departments of the council, meets every 90 days to gather evidence, and seeing the burden on the two officers who previously visited properties year-round to identify breaches. Now, each property concierge fills out the witness forms and submits it to the council offices, indicating whether the property has exceeded 90 days limit. Residents are also encouraged to report violations through the council portal. It took eight months to bring the landowners together under this unified framework. Ultimately, thanks to the teamwork of Ronald, Daniel, Collard, Mark, and Ryan, they served an enforcement notice to a property in our ward for the first time in six years. Challenges precedes as we ensure all blocks convey a consistent zero-tolerance message towards illegal short-lets. Unfortunately, some notices were removed by aggressive agents who abuse concierge persons. And certain concierges were reportedly bribed with thousands of pounds to allow illegal short-lets. The level of corruption is so significant that it requires stronger primary legislation mandating individuals to register with council if renting out properties as a short-let for the business purpose. Further, the business should assess based on the business rate rather than residential council tax. I emphasize the issues of illegal short-term rentals because they while generate profits, they adversely affect residents through disturbance like noise, antisocial behavior, and fly tipping. For instance, a resident in purchase of place reported reoccurring ceiling lick every month due to a short-let property above his flat. Long-term residents, in my words, are forced to evacuate their homes due to significant rent increase as agents convert property into night short-lets for greater financial gain. I hope the renters' right bill from the labor's government will address the illegal eviction. Lord Mayor, the safety of residents and those renting short-lets properties is at significant risk. Recently, a fire on the ninth floor of a short-let building resulted in 50 percent of people being tourists. The building management lacked essential information, leading to confusion about shelter options for the night. Fortunately, our exceptional land fire brigade, along with the police and ambulance service, managed to control the situation. My concern extends beyond this incident. I once witnessed a family of six stranded outside a residence on Albion Street for eight hours after being evicted from their short-let accommodation. While the agent had vanished, illegal short-let properties contribute antisocial behaviors and drug-related issues due to inadequate management by the state agents. And some are involved in foreign activity and money laundering, creating a lawless environment in Westminster. Just last week, we had to involve the police to disperse a rave party in a short-let property, a persistent problem for years. The Lord Mayor and the Lord Mayor, all Westminster MPs, current and former, seem to agree on the challenges residents face due to illegal short-let term rentals. Nevertheless, even within existing regulation Westminster Leaven intends to enhance inspection frequency to address the violation related to unauthorized rentals exceeding 90 days. However, I must reiterate the situation concerning the cabinet member. It has been two years and we have only two officers investigating 2,500 properties, significant outnumbers, that there are over 10,000 short-let rentals property in the market. I would like to formally request that the cabinet member consider increasing the number of short-let officers from two to at least six. This increase would enable them to constantly visit properties and ensure that witness statements forms are completed by the concierge. It is concerning that since February, the council has not received a single form from Park West, especially given the Park West has been prominently featured in the news regarding short-lets. Furthermore, I will ask our members of parliament to take action to meditate the spread of illegal short-term rentals before it is too late. If we fail to intervene, residential property may be transferred into hotels, resulting in a greater number of hotels serving as temporary accommodation for homeless individuals, which would further accelerate the final challenges faced by the council. Thank you. Thank you. Councillor Noble to reply. Thank you. Thank you, LORD MAYOR, and thank you, Councillor Choudry. Congratulations on delivering a 15-minute speech in five minutes. We have at least 13,000 short-term lets in Westminster, which is more than any other area in the country. This doesn't include those hidden from view being offered away from the known-about platforms. What warrants homes for local people have been taken out of the housing market in the middle of a housing crisis. This is having a real impact on rent levels in the private rented sector, throttling supply when the market is already very illiquid. Local residents often face the impact of noisy parties and dump rubbish, as you were talking about. And hotels are faced with an uneven playing field, as they have to bear the cost of business rates, corporation tax, commercial waste collection, and complain with regulations that the short-term left market does not. There are some real horror stories in our city, such as what you were talking about just before, a whole block of flats that had more rooms for short-term let than the Ritz. And we're currently investigating a new record-high 2,400 properties which are suspected of being used unlawfully for short-term letting. Now, many of the issues that you referred to and some of the suggestions that you have would be resolved by the swift implementation of a register at a national level, which will allow proper enforcement of the 90-day rule, so that we can identify permanent short-term let use and take action to remove them from the market with the aim of returning them to the private rented sector for long-term lettings where they should be. What we do not support is any proposal to make properties which are already used for unauthorized short-term letting exempt from the need for planning permission. As you say, we want to return back to the pre-2015 position on the planning regulations. The most conservative estimate of homes lost to short-term lettings equates to at least three times the total number of homes the council requires annually, as identified in the housing delivery test, and several times more homes than are completed annually. It is likely that the permanent loss of this number of homes in a single event would take the city's housing market decades to recover from. And we believe this figure to be an underestimate due to the less visible means of short-term activity that I was talking about, large concentration of homes around Edgware Road which are known to be advertised overseas or through medical tourism agencies. We're working with the government to ensure that the exemption from planning permission which was brought forward by the last government is quashed, and instead that it delivers a few things. A compulsory registration scheme capturing each individual property with a unique property reference number. Commercial measures being in place. An accountable individual who has gone through ID verification and to ensure there is gas safety certificates, commercial waste contracts, appropriate insurance, et cetera. We also want to see that a proportionate registration fee system is put in place based on the cost of monitoring and enforcement. That will provide the council with the resources that you suggest that we need, and I believe that you're right, in order to fully take control of the situation. We want powers for local authorities to prosecute hosts for antisocial and illegal activity, such as fly tipping, noise nuisance, et cetera. We'll continue to work with Rachel Blake, the MP for Two Cities, who led a Westminster Hall debate on this very subject last week. Another example of our local MPs working hard to advocate for the council and our residents, as well as Georgia and Joe, our other two members of parliament. I want to thank you for delivering your speech on this subject. It's something that we're all, across the council, we all care deeply about, and we hope to be able to do more soon. Thank you. That concludes this item. We now move on to the remaining agenda items. Party business, reports for full council, and notice of motion. The topic selected for debate and the names of those down to speak were tabled on the order paper sent to all of you earlier this week. Each speaker has up to five minutes. Agenda item 10, party business. The majority party has selected the topic, a new vision for biodiversity and greening in Westminster for debate as their business this evening. This is as set out in the order paper. I now call upon Councillor Jude to open the debate. Thank you, Lord Mayor. I am delighted to stand here this evening and announce the publication of Westminster's greening and biodiversity strategy. Almost one year ago to the day, we stood here in this chamber and declared an ecological emergency for Westminster, which for the first time formally recognized the degradation of our biodiversity, the loss of nature in our city, and the devastating effects of climate change on our natural environment. And we committed the council to even further action to protect wildlife and improve biodiversity in Westminster, including, among many other things, publishing our biodiversity strategy and a green infrastructure audit. Today, we do both of those. As I said last year, the UK is one of the most nature depleted countries in the world. And this nature loss is having far reaching consequences from exacerbating the effects of climate change to damaging people's physical and mental health. And cities like Westminster have a key role to play in driving a more sustainable way of life, as this is where human pressure on the environment is often the most acute. And now with our green infrastructure audit published alongside our strategy today, we have more specific data for Westminster to show the impacts and what more we can do. The audit is the largest and most comprehensive one we've ever done of all the parks, gardens, rivers and trees all across Westminster, which cumulatively accounts for approximately 32% of our city's footprint. This detailed mapping and analysis of all our blue and green spaces will help us as policymakers, as planners, to ensure that green infrastructure-led design and delivery approaches are prioritised across the city, and will give us clear, actionable targets to work towards both internally and when working with our strategic external partners. However, it's also shown us in stark detail areas that we need to improve. Building on the work of our award-winning environment justice measure, the audit outlines the deficit of green infrastructure in the more deprived areas of our city, and the clear link between lower life satisfaction and less frequent interaction with open spaces and green infrastructure. It's mapped out our tree cover in detail as shown that whilst our total tree canopy cover is slightly below the London average, the variations across wards are vast, with some wards having 35% coverage and some as little as three. And it's shown us with great accuracy the hot spots across the city with particularly bad air quality. I believe that we all have a role to play in halting the ecological emergency, and so I'm proud of all the work that we've done as a council since the declaration last year. We developed the council's capacity and capability to respond to the emergency, including securing additional internal resource, dedicated resource, to support and to contribute towards our response. Distributing over £350,000 through the Greening Westminster Fund, and starting a suite of initiatives in North Paddington to increase the area's resilience to climate change. Alongside our favourites, Nomo May, Banning Glyphosate and joining the Wild West End Partnership. That isn't a reference to the ward, it is the name of the collective. So with this data and the work to date, I am very pleased to launch our vision and our strategy today. It sets out the next stage of our work, proposing a city ecosystem approach, where nature and people can thrive together through six outcome priorities. Protecting and enhancing nature in the city, enhancing being the crucial word. Establishing corridors for nature and people to improve the connectivity of our distributed green spaces. Improving resilience to climate change and pollution. It's not just a case of with my climate hat on, fighting the mitigation causes of climate change, but also adapting to what's already baked in. Making our streets cleaner and more liveable. Ensuring access to nature for all, no matter which part of the city you live in. And empowering local environmental stewardship. All of this, of course, delivered in partnership with local stakeholders. The strategy provides a framework for a collaborative response to the ecological emergency, which will enable us to work with local businesses, residents, community groups and more towards our collective goal. We have an exciting opportunity to deliver a truly fairer environment to improve the sustainability and resilience of our city, and to enhance and restore our natural environment for the benefit of all our communities and our future generations. We have a responsibility to act on this, I'm delighted to get the strategy published, and I'm looking forward to hearing what my fellow councillors have to say in the debate today. Thank you. Thank you. Can I call Councillor Williams? Thank you, Lord Mayor. As the Board Councillors for Churchill Gardens, we are very proud of the environmental heritage of our estates. The Council's biodiversity measures are most welcome to build on that vital heritage. In particular, the Churchill Gardens Wildlife Meadow Garden, which is an idea for an unused space on the estate by resident Tom Ball, who worked with fellow residents and housing officers to create and maintain an area of long grass with flowers, as an anchorage for protecting and promoting nature and biodiversity at the heart of our capital city. The flowers and other fauna there encourage a wide range of different plant species and help wildlife and insects thrive, as well as providing a peaceful and much-loved haven for residents. We know that biodiversity is crucial for our city's health and welfare, and it should be available for all to enjoy. Street trees and vegetation can improve air quality. Particulate levels can be reduced by up to 60 per cent on tree-lined streets, compared to those without streets. Just 46 per cent of people from low-income households who earn less than 15,000 have easy access to green spaces, compared to 70 per cent of those households with income over 35,000. Outdoor activities can improve mental health and access to good quality green spaces can reduce the financial pressure on NHS back to 2.1 billion. No one should feel they have a lack of access to green spaces and the benefits they bring due to their location or financial situation. As with so many public health issues, it's the poor and the vulnerable that bear the brunt. Those living in deprived areas are more affected by poor air quality, partly because these areas are often near busy roads. One in five of London's state schools are in areas with poor air quality. In my own ward, we have some much-loved green spaces, including the Bessborough Gardens and the Peabody Avenue Memorial Gardens. Lord Mayor green spaces are so vital for physical and mental health, and the Greening Westminster Programme, offering up to £50,000 towards green projects on the borough for community groups, is a much-welcome initiative. We've seen 27 projects funded to date, including Pimlico Gardens and community gardens across the city, with tree planting and other green measures. Environmental justice measures are important to ensure the focus continues to be on the areas of the most need. [Applause] Thank you. Can I call on Councillor Less? Thank you, Lord Mayor. Today we're here to address a matter of utmost importance. I'm really, really proud of you, Councillor Jude, and all of your work into this strategy, and I look forward to scrutinising it. We often hear about the global scale of the crisis, rising sea levels, extreme weather events, and melting ice caps. But today I want to bring the conversation closer to home. I want to talk about how this emergency is affecting Westminster, and why expanding green spaces in our borough is a crucial part of the solution, not just for the environment, but for the health and wellbeing of all of us, especially our young people. Let's start by looking at the immediate benefits that green spaces bring to Westminster. We are already seeing the impacts of climate change here, with hotter summers and unpredictable weather patterns, like today, in the morning it's winter and in the evening it's the summer. But Westminster, like many urban areas, is highly vulnerable to what's known as the urban heat island effect. This affects the air quality, makes life unbearable during heat waves, and increases energy consumption as people turn to air conditioning to cope, or heating to cope on the other side. Planting more trees and creating more parks can mitigate these effects, cooling down our streets and improving our air quality, which is particularly important for our borough, with high levels of pollution from traffic and industry. We also need to understand the impacts it is having on the city's resilience. The devastating floods that we saw in my ward of Maida Vale and the neighbouring of Little Venice is something that we cannot see again, and we must take further action to ensure that it absolutely doesn't. Green spaces play a critical role in supporting the mental and physical health of Westminster residents, particularly young people. In a borough as fast-paced and bustling as ours, where the pressures of city life are ever-present, access to green spaces is essential for wellbeing, and we often forget how deeply connected our mental health is to the natural environment around us. Young people growing up in Westminster face enormous challenges, whether it's academic pressure, social media stress, or worries about the future in our world with the grappling with climate change. Studies show that access to green spaces can significantly improve mental health, helping to reduce anxiety, stress and depression. Even just a short walk through a park or a quiet moment under the shade of a tree can provide a much-needed escape from the hustle and noise of urban life. But unfortunately, many parts of our city, especially in the more densely populated areas, lack these vital green spaces, and children and teenagers are missing out on the mental health benefits that they rightly deserve. Now, I grew up here, I was born and raised here, and so was my mum, and so has most of my family. Because of that, I've played in a lot of estates, so from Hallfield Estate to Churchill Gardens Estate, and if I haven't, my mum definitely has, but that's a lot of concrete stairs that I've stayed on, by the way, and probably not enough greenery. But in fact, the only real green space that I remember was P-Rec, which is now the ward that I represent, but that's where I learned how to ride a bike. But the point is, we just don't have enough, and we need more of them. Some of the most iconic green spaces in our borough, St James' Park, Green Park and Hyde Park, are wonderful and beautiful, but they're not easily accessible to everyone in this city. Many young people, particularly in lower-income areas, do not have local parks or gardens within walking distance, and I think that COVID definitely exacerbated that. This lack of access to green spaces not only affects their physical health, but also limits opportunities for social interaction, outdoor play and physical activity, which are crucial for developing healthy habits and a sense of community. So it's not just about planting more trees, although, yes, we definitely need more of them. It's about creating inclusive, safe areas for young people to connect, to relax and to escape from the pressures of our life in this city. It's about giving a child, no matter where they live in our borough, the opportunity to experience the calming, restorative effects of nature, and a well-designed green space can become a gathering place for families, a playground for children and a refuge for those seeking peace in the city. We have a social and political responsibility to ensure that all residents of Westminster, regardless of their postcode or income, have access to the health benefits that green spaces provide. We need to think beyond the large, famous parks that we've got and consider how we can introduce smaller, more local green spaces in areas where they are most needed. Whether it's transforming vacant lots, greening school yards or creating rooftop gardens, these spaces don't have to be grand or expansive, but even just a small community garden or a street lined with trees can make a huge difference, and I'm just conscious of time here. In conclusion, it's not just a global challenge, it's definitely a local one, and I really, really, really look forward to reading this strategy in full. Congratulations again, and let's make Westminster a greener, healthier and more resilient borough for us all. Thank you. Thank you. Councillor Barataf. Thank you, Lord Mayor. I'd like to speak now about how this administration is delivering this in practice and how we're making the city burst with life. Let me talk about Greening Westminster, our program of community grants. We're putting our money where our mulch is. It gets worse for us. We wanted to make a real impact, so we doubled the budget to 400,000 pounds, and more money means more plants. We wanted to make it easy for community groups to deliver projects, so we included the services of our landscape gardener in the grants, money for the plants and money for someone to suggest the right mix and teachers to look after them. And to keep things fair, we've been targeting the areas in most need of some TLC, thanks to the environmental justice map. Now, some examples of how we've been sowing the seeds of change. There's another joke there. Come on, guys, you've got to listen. We gave a grant to the Covent Garden Playground and Nature Garden. The money was used to replant the playground in free-draining sandy soil with 5,000 new plants to encourage pollinators. At St. John, the evangelist in Kensal Green, unused tarmac yard and parking spaces have been transformed into a biodiversity bonanza, including a yew hedge and two beehives. And there are now six benches from which locals can sit and enjoy the buzz. You're a tough crowd tonight, I tell you. My personal favourite is the onion garden behind City Hall on Victoria Street. What used to be just another boring paved space wedged between offices and the district line, now has herbs, wildflowers, fruit trees and mostly a café. £24,000 of our grant, well spent, if you ask me. But we're not stopping there, because Greening Westminster has really grown on us. We're funding 15 more projects, that's 15 more opportunities for the people of Westminster to get their green thumbs dirty. So, coming soon will be the Fitzrovia Community Centre in the West End Ward, with a grant to replace damaged and worn-out planters and encourage residents on Foley Street to install window boxes. On Harrow Road, an exciting project to kickstart... Councillor Barraclough, I think you wanted us to laugh at your jokes and listen to you, so now please listen to me. I did mention at the beginning we shouldn't make reference to Harrow Road or West End Ward. This is not Harrow Road/Harrow Ward, this is Harrow Road in Westport. An exciting project to kickstart greening their garden activity, with local residents including replacing planters and planting bolts. Even the bin stores are getting a makeover, and this builds on the great work to introduce new flower beds in Maida Hills Square. And don't forget about the south, we're funding new plants in Ebury and Millbank Estates and Peabody Avenue Greenery for All. Look out for the full announcement soon. Now, while community grant greening is wonderful, it's just the beginning. We're also working with property developers to bake biodiversity into their blueprints. Forget just adding a pot plant by reception, we're talking about developments that are green from the get-go. Now, luckily, we're pushing an open door here. Developers know that the green of the building, the higher the rent they can charge. And plants don't just improve air quality, they improve the bottom line too. A great example, just down the road here at Marlabone House on Marlabone Road, a recently completed retrofit and extend office scheme with green roofs and extensive planting to the terraces. This building has a 0.3 urban greening factor, which means 30% of the site is covered with foliage. That's great, but biodiversity is more than just grass and leaves, which is why national policy is now calling for a 10% increase in biodiversity for non-householder applications. Now, of course, in Westminster, sites often have no life at all, animal or vegetable, so a 10% increase is not very much. So that's why we're going to be requiring a 30% improvement in biodiversity in our new environment supplementary planning document. Now, the sharp eye to most of you will realise that a 30% increase on zero is still zero. So we'll be insisting on minimum baseline in terms of biodiversity units. Now, the units are based on better habitats and the capital doesn't give you any points for infrastructure that encourages particular species, such as swift bricks or bat boxes. Now, we want to encourage birds and bats, so we're going to add those into our environment SPD. And finally, we're not falling for the old trick where developers plant trees in Wales while paving over Westminster. There's going to be biodiversity, it's going to be here where it is needed. So let's keep greening, keep planting and keep buzzing quite literally into a brighter and greener future. Thank you. Thank you, Councillor Pittford. Thank you, Lord Mayor. Now, I know when this council voted on the ecological emergency last year, a few of my colleagues across the aisle were puzzled when I chose to abstain. There were shouts,
How could I and all people hold back on something so critical?Well, to those voices, let me say, abstain from and I will vote for it, because here's the deal. How can any of us with a straight face say yes to more consultations, more workshops, more talking shops and more promises when what we need is action? We've been down this road before. We have the Westminster biodiversity action plan in 2019. We have the greener city action plan in 2015. We have the green spaces strategy in 2014. We've identified the gaps, pinpointed the areas lacking green space. And yes, in some cases, like the Strand project conceived under the previous Conservative administration, we've made some real strides forward. But in others, Sussex Street play area, for example, we're missing huge opportunities. Time and time again, reports have identified the lack of green space here, yet your administration planned to build on the only opportunity for public green space. Not true. What we need is clear targets. Some might call it leadership. It's time we stop dancing around the issue and start asking the tough questions. How many car parking space need to give way to trees and by when? How many miles of hedgerows can we plant? How do we create more parks? Because these are the real debates we're having. Not only this, but how do we do this in the most deficient areas? Five wards have less than 10% canopy cover, leaving them heavily exposed to climate change and air quality issues. And I'll give credit where it's due, we are moving in the right direction, at least in some ways. We've seen some improvements in public realm projects. But here's the thing, moving in the right direction and actually arriving at your destination on time, those are two very different things. We can't afford to crawl towards our goals while the world around us is changing in ways that cannot be reversed. I've heard a lot of talk tonight about ongoing work and long-term plans. But let's be real, if we're serious about addressing this ecological emergency, we need action and we need it now. What we need are annual objectives and the investment to back them up. Let's talk about setting deadlines and measurable outcomes. Let's talk about rewilding our parks and creating green corridors across Westminster so wildlife can flourish again. Let's rethink our streets, not just adding a few cycle names or plants on the occasional tree, but greening those streets with shrubs, grasslands, spaces where both people and nature can thrive. These aren't radical ideas, cities across the world are doing this. And yes, we've made some progress here too. But why are we still sitting back content with more strategies and reviews while the natural world around us continues to decline? What we need, Lord Mayor, is strong leadership. We need annual targets for planting trees, thousands of them. We need annual targets for turning our paved areas into havens for biodiversity, acres of it. We need annual targets for planting hedgerows, miles of it. So let's stop talking about what we want to do in 2050. Let's talk about what needs to happen this year and next year. Let's debate what we're willing to remove to make way for biodiversity and then bring forward a plan we can vote for. That's how you'll get my support and that's how we'll start to solve this crisis. Thank you, Lord Mayor. Thank you. I now call Councillor Jude to reply. Thank you, Lord Mayor. Thank you colleagues for all of your various comments. I'll just come back on a few of them. Jason, thanks for talking through the experience of your residence on Churchill Gardens. Peaceful and attractive area for residents to enjoy is how you described the Wildflower Meadow. I couldn't agree more. And that's why we're so keen to get more of those in with our current work for greening our housing estates. One of the many things that we're doing, outlining the strategy, which I didn't have time to cover in my five-minute speech. Iman, again, speaks so passionately about growing up here, learning to ride a bike in one of our green spaces. Please do teach Councillor de Moldenberg if you get some time. It sounds like you're doing a few lessons. But as you said, it doesn't have to be grand or expansive to get our green space. And that's where a lot of councils have gone wrong in the past. Which brings me to Councillor Barakoff's comments on the greening Westminster fund. And in particular, the biodiversity net gain measure. The 30% target which we're going to be consulting on, the SPD, would be leading in the country. When everyone else is settling at the 10%, some of them pushing for 20%. We're really going ahead to show leadership here in Westminster. And I'm delighted that swift bricks and back boxes are confirmed to be in it. You all know my feelings about those. Councillor Pitt-Ford, I said last year it was a shame when you abstained. Look with you, there is no vote tonight. We're just going to be discussing. But given everything you've said, if there was a vote, I'm really pleased that you probably would have voted in favour of it. Talking about action, we went through a lot of what's going on with Councillor Barakoff already, with greening Westminster fund, with BNG. Again, when you get the strategy, happy to sit down and talk through the actions that have already happened. No Mo May, banning of glyphosate. In fact, we've done so much action on climate and nature, that we're ranked the top council in the whole country on climate and nature. Which, you know, I'd like to think that that is some sort of achievement. You mentioned, I'm really happy you mentioned the 2019 strategy. Because this was, it had biodiversity in the name and it was in name only. In fact, at the start of the strategy, it mentioned the statutory requirement for councils to give regards to biodiversity. Which, if you read the detailed strategy, is the only reason it really gets mentioned. In fact, I would ask you which action in that you're most proud of. Because I could tell you they weren't delivered. None of them were delivered. The annual monitoring that you asked for, I agree. I agree. Again, that 2019 strategy said it would happen. There was not a single annual report off the back of it. So, what we are doing is actually delivering on what we're saying we will be doing. So, the Green Infrastructure, third step biodiversity net gain, rewilding parts of our city, greening our part, and trees. In the first year of our administration, we planted 33% more trees than you did in your final year. Biodiversity is not just a nice to have. The Green Infrastructure audit references all the studies that show the positive impact that our green spaces can have on health, on the economy, and on everything else that my colleagues have already touched on today. With this strategy, and I quote from the 2019 -- I quote from the Green Infrastructure audit about the 2019 Biodiversity Action Plan. This strategy will replace 2019 Biodiversity Action Plan, which did not provide analysis or actions in terms of any ecological sites, habitats, or species. That is a quote from the independent consultant that undertook our audit. So, I am delighted to be launching our strategy that really shows how seriously this administration is taking the ecological emergency. With our dedicated team and our resources to deliver this, the strong partnerships that we have built up across the city and the work across different teams in the council to already be delivering on the vision set out in the strategy. I know that we will see an improvement in our green infrastructure and our biodiversity in labor around Westminster. Thank you. Thank you, Councillor Duke. That concludes the debate on the item chosen by the majority party. The opposition group have selected the topicEnsuring sustainable and safe dockless bike and scooter hire operations in Westminster for debateas their business this evening. This is as set out in the order paper. I now call upon Councillor Pitt Ford to open the debate. Thank you, Lord Mayor. My fellow Councillors, let me paint a picture for you. Right now, here in Westminster, we are playing a game of musical chairs with e-bikes. We're asking thousands of people to cycle around this great city of ours. And when they arrive at their destination, well, it's anyone's guess if they'll find a place to park. The losers risk being fined in either money or time. And just to make it even more interesting, every now and then we take away a parking bay that gets too busy, as we did. Yes, you heard that correct. A parking bay got too busy, so rather than responding by adding capacity, this Labour administration removed it. This summer, we saw the demand for e-bike usage surge like never before, smashing records for journeys made. People are embracing this cleaner, faster and more efficient way to get round. But what we haven't seen surge is the number of parking spots for these bikes. Imagine, if you will, that we reduced car parking spaces by 40%, then turned around and got upset when people started parking on the pavement or double yellow lines. What I'm saying is the majority of e-bike riders want to do the right thing, but this Labour administration is making that very difficult for them, which is leading to the issues we are seeing on our streets. Looking at the numbers, in March we had roughly 4,800 parking spaces, 386 bays and 3,400 bikes. Fast forward to summer and we estimate the number of bikes was roughly 7,000, which would mean that we currently have 2,000 fewer spaces, 161 bays than we need. And next summer, that will be even worse. So adding 10% to the number of bays doesn't work. We need to be adding 40% as a minimum. Let's zoom out a little bit here. By 2040, Westminster is aiming to meet the clean air targets set by the World Health Organisation. And we all know what that means – cutting car, van and lorry usage to as close to zero as possible. Of course, we'll make allowances for those who need these vehicles, but the reality is that we need to see an incredible increase in the number of journeys taken by bicycle. In preparing for this speech, I did some rough back of the envelope maths. To hit those targets, we need roughly 30 times the number of e-bike journeys by 2040 than we see today. If we are to satisfy this, we need to add at least 500 e-bike parking bays every year between now and 2040. So when we talk about adding a bay here and there or maybe 30 new ones in a year, this just isn't going to cut it. We need a bigger plan for this city, a vision where we transition car parking spaces into e-bike parking spaces at scale. E-bikes, when properly managed, help reduce congestion. They slash emissions and they get us moving towards a transport system more like Amsterdam where cycling isn't just an option, it's a way of life. Unfortunately, they aren't being managed correctly and that is what is leading to the myriad of complaints that we're all seeing in our inboxes. Our job as local government is to enable this transition because it's happening whether we like it or not. I finish by asking the cabinet member to commit to providing sufficient e-bike parking capacity next year so that the pedestrians can have their pavements back. Thank you, Lord Mayor. As a city dedicated to improving air quality for all residents and visitors, Westminster has no choice but to promote and encourage sustainable travel options. As Councillor Pitt-Ford has just said, this is also vital for reducing carbon emissions and combating climate change. Walking is great and is the most common mode of transport for the people who live here. But for those with slightly longer journeys, the bicycle is a cleaner, greener alternative to most other options, as well as actually being great fun and certainly the quickest way to get around the city, even when, like me, you obey the rules of the road. As with every council meeting, I cycled here tonight. Due to improvements in battery technology, there's a new kid on the block, powered dockless e-bikes and scooters. Well, actually, they're not that new. Back in May of '21, I went to the launch of the TFL scooter trial in a rather fetching bus garage in West Ham and sampled their delights for myself. Since then, e-scooters have been rather eclipsed by the wide availability of dockless e-bikes from Lion, Human, Forest and the rest. We cannot un-invent these vehicles, nor should we want to. The numbers on our streets are a testament to their success. They open up active travel to those who have never cycled or scooted before, and this should be encouraged. It frees up road space for other users and public transport capacity for those that really need it. Recent research by Lion estimates that 49% of Londoners between the ages of 18 to 34 rent an e-bike at least once a week. With a few notable exceptions, this is not a demographic very well represented here in this council. That does provide a massive challenge for the council on how to deal with these new, inexperienced cyclists. We need to provide a safe environment for these vulnerable road users and the infrastructure to enable them to park safely at the end of their journey. We've all seen the mass of bikes dumped on pavements, causing a blockage for pedestrians and impacting the less mobile, maybe wheelchair users or those with baby buggies. This is not an act of wilful, anti-social behaviour, rather the result of a lack of responsible alternatives. There are certainly irresponsible users of e-bikes, just as there are irresponsible pedestrians and irresponsible car drivers. I'm not talking here about the illegally modified fat-tired private e-bikes used by food delivery drivers, often with no lights at night, wearing dark clothing, speeding through red lights at far more than the 15 mile an hour limit, with no helmet or regard for the highway code and other users. There are current laws to deal with this activity, which should be more rigorously enforced by the Metropolitan Police. The companies contracting their services should also be required to be responsible for the actions of their drivers. The issue here is the regular users of dockless e-bikes and scooters. Surely the council has a duty to work on what it can control and encourage better behaviour, making the roads safer so there's no incentive to cycle or scoot on the crowded pavement, and provide infrastructure to enable responsible parking at the end of the journey. Higher companies do pay the council for these on-street bays, but more bays need to be provided, as Councillor Pittford said. Recently, the Labour Council in Brent issued a rather odd ultimatum, insisting they're going to ban lime from the borough unless lime provide more parking bays. Surely this is the wrong way round. Providing parking space is Brent's responsibility. In order to demand rigorous enforcement, there must be an option to park legally in bays on road space provided by the council. Only then can the council reasonably insist on rigorous enforcement against those who break the rules, as it certainly should do. Banning bicycles does not help anyone if the council is serious about addressing climate change and promoting the benefits of active travel for all. Thank you, Lord Mayor. During tonight's debate, we now have a Labour government, a Labour mayor, and a Labour council. There is no denying that e-bikes are a fantastic way to get around our city. They are easy, clean, green, and relatively affordable. But there is a price to pay, street clutter and obstruction to our pavements. And the people who are paying the price are those who are often elderly or disabled. Don't Labour rightly talk a great deal about protecting our most vulnerable in society. When e-bikes are dumped, literally dumped on our pavements, it poses obstacles for the disabled, as well as those with mobility issues who are left to navigate around these obstructions in what must be accessible public spaces. E-bikes and the dangerous way in which they are left has become the number one issue in many parts of our city, including Knightsbridge and Belgravia. Our three immunity societies, the Knightsbridge Association, the Belgravia Society, and the Belgravia Residence Association, have sent numerous emails and countless photos over the past couple of years showing the ever worsening situation caused by e-bikes. Although we welcome the fact that having raised concerns several times, the Council finally did listen to us and have moved the Montpellier Street and Ennismore Garden e-bike bays, but they have inexplicably still refused to address the Ebury Street Bay, which due to overcrowding is a significant risk to residents. As a Council, we support those who are disabled or those who have mobility issues, but there is a huge contrast between the rigorous measures, which are rightly imposed on developers to ensure DDA accessibility compliance and the lack of enforcement on e-bikes. It raises important moral questions. As a Council, we extract heavy financial section 106 payments from developers to limit street clutter, to improve pedestrian movement, and to provide bike racks. Yet the regulation regarding e-bike providers is opaque at best, not complied with, and is minimally enforced. When it comes to licensing, tables and chairs will normally only be allowed directly outside of premises at the back of the footway. We will require sufficient space on pavement to allow pedestrians, wheelchair users, disabled people, the elderly, and those with prams and buggies to pass along safely and easily. But however diligently we may enforce licensing and planning regulations, it becomes meaningless when a few feet down the road there are dumped e-bikes. And if we move away from the topic of disabled residents and their needs to one of cleanliness and aesthetics in our city, what is the difference between rubbish on our pavements and dumped e-bikes? Both are unsightly and a hazard. Both, undealt with, degrade our surroundings and make Westminster a lesser place to be. Councillor de Moultenberg, you need to do two things. One, provide more e-bike parking bays. The number currently available is clearly insufficient to cope with the number of e-bikes in the city. And number two, recognize that the softly, softly approach this Council has taken with the e-bike operators over the past two years is not working. Warning letters are not taken heed of, only large fines issued by the operators when their bikes are left in inappropriate locations will sharpen the minds of their customers and prompt them to park their bikes responsibly. I believe these two actions will go a long way to solving this ever worsening problem and will make our city streets safe and accessible for our disabled residents and far more attractive for all of us. Thank you, Lord Mayor. Thank you, Lord Mayor. Unlike a number of colleagues in this Chamber, including Councillor de Moultenberg, I do ride e-bikes and e-scooters, so I do know how they work first hand. And this is really important. How the apps vet you, the information they have, how the GPS controls where you lock and unlock the vehicle and the photo requirements to prove your parking. E-bikes and scooters have changed the way I and thousands of people every day travel around our city. They have significant benefits that my colleagues have outlined. No congestion, zero emissions, physical exercise, et cetera. They also have significant pitfalls, especially when it comes to poorly controlled parking. The fact that bikes are so popular should be embraced, and this should mean that this Council makes them a priority. The fact we are still facing the same parking issues since the arrival of the e-bikes in the mid 2001s is at best worrying and at worst a disservice. When I was Deputy Cabinet Mayor for City Management and the e-scooters arrived, we worked closely with the hire companies and communities to get the system right. It wasn't perfect to start with. The GPS around some bays needed tweaking. The go-slow zones were eradicated because they were dangerous for scooter riders in places. But we got there, and quickly. Changes could be made within hours because the GPS zones track the location of the vehicle to the nearest meter. Another example, last year in the summer, before parking areas were created, we were having significant problems with e-bikes in the Covent Garden Piazza. A meeting was called with the Council Ward Officers and hire operators. We walked the streets, agreed to ban the bikes from the Piazza and some nearby streets, and we designated temporary bays because formal bays didn't exist then. The GPS was updated that day, within hours, and the revised parking scheme came into force. Not one bike has since been in an excluded zone in Covent Garden since, and the majority of temporary locations were formalized, which we were pleased to see. I appreciate the whole of Westminster is a larger scale and a much more complicated jigsaw, but having worked on these examples first hand and seen the effects of collaboration and decision making, why on earth has so little progress been made to date? Why are there issues with bikes parked across pavements when they can be limited to a specific area within a meter? Why are there still designated parking areas, especially on pavements, that simply don't work or overspill and carry numerous complaints? Why are there parking areas without delineated white lines, which should mark where the bikes can be parked, but more importantly set the GPS boundary which officers can check? Every bike is tracked, every user's details and journey is traced, every time a bike is parked it is photographed, and every square meter of Westminster can be controlled by the hire companies through their GPS tools. The e-bike problem is particularly acute in the central areas of Westminster. Commuter movements and events means there is an influx of bikes to certain locations each day. We have the data, data since 2021. Either we aren't asking the right questions or we aren't using the data or the technology to control the situation, because we should be on top of this by now. The lack of effective and controlled e-bike parking is a massive problem for residents, visitors and workers. In particular, Tim, Louise and I have had numerous emails from concerned residents, many with mobility issues or who are visually impaired, who are experiencing a dangerous environment in their public realm. Is this fair? No, of course it isn't. We even had a preemptive email from a concerned headmistress in June. She was worried her 200 pupils wouldn't be able to easily access a local theatre to undertake their primary school play because of obstructions by e-bikes. Have we really got to the stage where preemptive requests are being made on this basis? Tonight, we, the Conservative group, want to draw a marker in the sand. Tonight, we have brought this debate to Council. Everyone has had enough. We are seeking a material response to improve the situation. Less non-action and excuses and more solutions. Pragmatic interventions using technology, data, white lines and enforcement. A Council that can make this work for everyone, and one that isn't shy in holding operators to account. Thank you. Thank you. I now call on Councillor de Moldenberg to reply. Thank you, Lord Mayor. I think there's a measure of agreement. We all want more e-bike journeys. We all want to encourage cycling. Some figures. In July this year, there were 675,000 e-bike journeys in Westminster, more than double the 300,000 just a year previously. And the situation is that we have a network of 346 parking spaces for higher e-bikes since which was installed over the past year, providing a total of 3,400 e-bike parking spaces. It's the largest and most comprehensive e-bike parking network in London. In comparison, rent has been mentioned that has no e-bike parking bays at all. And that's why they have a massive problem of parking all over the pavements. Councillors Shearer, Pittford and Hitchcock all called for more parking bays. And we are delivering more parking bays. But I'd like for those three Councillors to tell us which parking bays in their ward that residents will call for removal of. Because my experience is that the complaints I get about e-bike parking bays needing to be removed all come from Conservative Councillors. When they're in the wrong places, as Councillor Hitchcock reminded the Council, we respond to that positively and the two that she mentioned that were in her ward have been relocated. And I've had letters of thanks from her constituents thanking me for relocating the e-bike bays to a more appropriate place. And we've done that across the city where it's clear that the bays that we installed were not working. We've responded. And we have a programme of expanding our number of e-bike parking bays because I agree if we're going to encourage more parking, if we're going to encourage more parking, then we need to provide the facilities for people to park. It's not rocket science. I've said we provide parking for motor cars. We should provide parking for bikes. Indeed, we have more parking stands for bikes than we do for visitor parking. We have 17,000 Sheffield stands in Westminster compared to something like 9,000 car parking spaces for visitor parking. So we are providing the number of parking spaces needed, but I agree we need more and we're doing it and we're doing it in real time to try and keep a pace of the growth on e-bikes as well. We've called on the e-bike operators to improve their act. The geofencing that Lime in particular use is absolutely appalling. It will not give a location precise enough for one metre. It's around 15 metres. And that's why the bikes are parked across the road. We are harassing, and I mean harassing Lime to improve their geofencing because that's the only way in which the system will work. Then don't forget that the e-bike operators do not require permission to do anything. They don't require permission to operate. They don't require permission to bring their bikes into Westminster. And there's nothing we can do until we have a change in the law, which we are urging the new government to introduce within the English evolution bill. And we are confident that this will happen. We're also harassing Lime to increase the number of rangers so that bikes that are badly parked are moved within the statutory contractual one hour. There's a huge amount of other big demands that we're making on the e-bike operators, but at the end of the day we need the power to be able to impose a £150 fine on riders or operators who do not keep to the regulations to keep the bikes safe and out of the way of obstructing the pavement. Thank you, Lord Mayor. That concludes the debate on the item chosen by the opposition party. Agenda item 15, notice of motion. The motion this evening has been submitted by the opposition party and is entitled winter fuel allowance and protecting pensioners from fuel poverty. There will be a single debate on this motion and the amendment, which is tabled on the order paper, I will then call the votes. Again, the names of those down to speak are tabled on the order paper and each speaker has up to five minutes. I now call Councillor Deane to move the motion. Thank you, Lord Mayor. This so-called caring Labour government has chosen to scrap winter fuel payment for potentially up to 25,000 pensioners in Westminster, despite promising to protect the benefit during the general election. The DWP has just published its equality analysis of winter fuel payment cuts that revealed 71% of disabled pensioners and 83% of the over 80s will lose this benefit. Now, this cruel measure to means test this vulnerable group is the wrong policy choice and one that will potentially jeopardise the health as well as the finances of millions of older people this winter. The last thing that they or the NHS needs. Labour's own assessment in 2017 said that means testing winter fuel payments will kill 4,000 elderly pensioners and undoubtedly will put a major strain on the NHS this winter. Winter fuel payments is an annual tax repayment for pensioners born on or before the 22nd of September 1958 for the tax year 24/25 and the payment is up to £300 for a single person. However, if you have a state pension and a small occupational pension worth over £12,000 per year, you are not entitled to the benefit. Can anyone here in this chamber tonight live comfortably on £12,000 a year? It is claimed that up to 800,000 pensioners are entitled to pension credit which would guarantee them the winter fuel allowance as well as a council tax discount, a free TV licence if you are over 75, help with NHS dental treatment, glasses and transport costs to hospital. Many vulnerable pensioners are very proud and reluctant to claim benefits but even if they do, the pension credit application form is 24 pages, 15 sections and 243 questions. This is enough to put off tech savvy people but for the elderly this is a daunting, confusing process. There is no chance all 800,000 eligible pensioners will claim what is rightly theirs so job well done by the Chancellor Rachel Reeves. With all these facts and figures it's easy to forget we are talking about real vulnerable elderly Westminster residents. Let me tell you about Jerry who is 88 years old and has lived all his married life in social housing in Little Venice. He worked hard for his family and eventually was able to purchase his black through the right to buy scheme. He worked full time until he was 72 and only retired due to ill health. He continued to volunteer in his community and was chairman of the Westminster Residents Association and was an unpaid magistrate until he was 78. He is now a widower living on his own with a state pension and a small occupational pension of £130 a month which takes him over the means tested limit. Jerry is fiercely independent and wants to carry on living in his own home where he has many friends and is a valued member of his local church. Jerry's ill health meant that he needed help with his mobility and I have been working for the last 18 months to get him an automatic front door and since a bad fall in April this year a stair lift on the ground floor of his block. Despite constant nagging and bringing this case up at two P&S committees, Jerry is still confined to his flat as the home improvement team and the aids and adaptions team under this Labour administration is not fit for purpose. This winter, Jerry is having to pay for carers since his fall, meaning his savings have dwindled to less than £5,000 and will continue to diminish. He is trapped in a flat where he will find it harder and harder to heat because of his crime of having worked hard all his life and having a small occupational pension. There are thousands of desperate pensioners in Westminster who are in a similar position. The new Westminster Labour MPs, Rachel Blake and Georgia Gord, both voted to remove the winter fuel payment for many pensioners in Westminster. Labour like to talk the talk about a fairer Westminster, as I have spoken in this chamber before, they are not fair to our adults with learning disabilities and our most vulnerable children. Now, they are actively being unfair to our most vulnerable pensioners. Shame on Labour. Thank you, Councillor Dean. I now call on Councillor Mitchell to second the motion. Thank you, Lord Mayor. I second the motion. I reserve the right to reply to debate. Lord Mayor, I wish to raise a point of order under section 2.15 of the council meeting procedure rules. I believe the amendment to be moved by Councillor Hug negates the motion and as such can be ruled out of order. Negates is not defined within the constitution. It is entirely within your interpretation. Please rule the amendment out. Thank you, Councillor Swallow, for putting the new Lord Mayor on the spot like this and raising a point of order suggesting that the amendment set out in the order paper directly negates the original motion. As you rightly say, section 2.15, paragraph three of the council meeting procedure rules sets out that the ruling of the chair on a point of order is final and should not be open to debate. You wouldn't expect me to make the decision without consulting the more senior members of the council, most notably the chief executive and monitoring office, which I have done, and I've taken due regard from the advice that they've given me. So therefore, based on their advice and their advice is important, I do not uphold the point of order, meaning that the amendment stands and may continue to be debated before being put to a vote. Thank you. Councillor Hugg, would you like to move the amendment to the motion, please? Thank you very much, Lord Mayor, and thank you very much for showing the commitment to due impartiality from the chair that we have for all members of that role. So thank you very much. I want to talk now about the work that the council has been doing over recent years to provide for those most vulnerable in our society. We are going to talk about the ways in which over the last two years we have put cost of living support at the heart of this administration's program. We've rolled out initiatives across Westminster, working to provide advice provision and outreach visits through Age UK, targeting minority groups and through groups like Medea, Vizzo and Koolan. We've been working with food banks and other institutions and voluntary sector organisations in the community who are providing direct support to the elderly and most vulnerable in our city. We know that many pensions are not receiving the benefits that they are fully entitled to. With this in mind, we're working to address barriers that prevent residents who are eligible for pension credit from claiming. We believe this to at present be around 413 households in Westminster through rigorous targeting, and each will be receiving a further letter highlighting this in the next few weeks if they have not done so already. Earlier this month, we participated in the national pension credit take-up campaign using our media channels. With support from Age UK, 400 letters were sent in 2023, which resulted in an extra 134 claims for pension credit, and a further 500 letters were sent out earlier this year. We are keeping on working to target pensioners who are eligible for pension credit but have not been claiming it. We will work hard before the December 23rd deadline to make them aware of what's available, and we'll make sure that council services are actively pushing this support, so make sure that people who need it are getting it. We know that within the borough, around 8,800 households are in receipt of universal credit, and one in four children are living in poverty. So across the piece, we've been delivering 23 million pounds in support, about half coming from the hardship funds, which the government has now extended, and half from our own funds. These initiatives have gone from the work that we've talked a lot about targeting help for families with our free school meals initiative, but as I said, it has also focused on the issues like energy and debt advice. We've been working to help people through the cold weather with our winter in the city programs that we've done over the last few years. We are bringing in 130,000 pounds this year to support winter activities, which will particularly help the elderly and vulnerable in our city over the winter. In 2022, 32% of people were supported through this campaign were over 60 and older, and we're particularly doing extra work to target them this year to help provide them with more meals and core sport activities in the winter. We will, as an administration, continue to focus locally to support the most vulnerable elderly people and focus on alleviating fuel poverty this winter. So I would definitely encourage all residents to consider what they're entitled to, and we're happy to work with them to tackle some of the bureaucratic obstacles that Councillor Dean outlined. Following on from what she said, we will make sure that Jerry's case is looked into further. I believe it may be -- is it Jerry Bolton? Sorry, I just want to confirm that that's the case that we will work to assist that person. Again, because I have known him for a long time, too, and I'm very sorry to hear that he is in that situation, so we will pick that up. What I wanted to say more broadly is that we know the scale of the challenge that our residents face. We have -- and they are dealing with the consequences of 14 years of Conservative government that have let this country down and brought us into a far less space where difficult decisions have had to be made to tackle the 22 billion-pound black hole in the public finances. We need to make sure that support is being targeted at a national level and local level to those who are most in need. So I'm proud of what we have been able to do as an administration to assist local people, and we will continue to find new ways in our communities to assist them. We will continue to do that over the years ahead, so I look forward to further contributions on this debate because we're open to what we can do, ideas that we can do in our community here to make a difference. I now call on Councillor Butler-Thalassos to second the amendment of the motion. Thank you, Lord Mayor. Being in power is much tougher than being in opposition, and that's as much true for our administration as it is for the government. And for this reason, in order to write this speech, I had to centre myself by going back to my happy place, the 2012 Paralympic Games, where, of course, it's lovely to watch Ellie Simmons win two gold medals. But for me, the highlight is to watch, once again, when the audience of disabled people and others united as one to boo George Osborne for quite a long time. They were expressing their anger at the government's introduction of personal independence payments and the universal credit. Both of these reforms made the lives of disabled people and other vulnerable groups harder, and particularly the fact that universal credit can only be claimed online was particularly damaging for people who are digitally excluded, like many older people. And of course, the government introduced two of the worst, most punitive policies to harm poor people. The eugenics-inspired two-child benefit limit, with its infamous rape clause, and the benefit patch. So, my take on this motion to the opposition is, you really want to go there? You really want to rehash everything that the government has done to attack and damage poor people, or everything you have done when you were in power to attack and damage poor people? With regard to the winter fuel allowance, am I happy that this had to be restricted to the poorest pensioners? No, I'm not. I prefer universal benefits. They are better. That's why I'm so glad that the free school meals we have in Westminster is a universal benefit. Unfortunately, universal benefits cost a lot more than targeted benefits. It was the Labour government that introduced the winter fuel allowance as a universal benefit in 1997, and it was Conservative governments that raised the age eligibility twice. But Conservative governments have handled the economy so badly, that we have no longer afforded many universal benefits. It's a shame, but the responsibility for this squarely lies with the Conservative governments of the last four years. With their failed policies of austerity, Brexit, and the many furthers, with their endless corruption scandals that have destroyed our economy to the point that we have to cut one of the few remaining universal benefits we still have. During those 14 years of Conservative governments, this council did the bare minimum to protect our most vulnerable residents. Instead, they cut services they didn't have to. You cut our youth clubs, our voluntary sector funding, you closed our housing offices, you didn't build enough homes, you let repair services deteriorate, and you wasted your lives on the house projects. Whereas this administration prioritised dealing with the cost of living crisis as soon as we were elected. Key to this was income maximisation, ensuring that our poorest residents were finding out about which benefits they were entitled to, and getting the maximum amounts that they can. Our existing advice contract does very well, and for every pound we spend, Westminster residents receive £4 extra in benefits. We can all applaud Age UK and other providers for the excellent work they do in this sphere. We also put in an extra £400,000 to fund additional advice services in 11 organisations. For example, we funded Age UK to also visit older people in their homes to increase the take-up of pension credit. We funded organisations to recruit advice workers who speak community languages to ensure that older people who don't speak English and who are not literate can also claim pension credit and other benefits. We put an additional £130,000 funding in food banks and food pantries to ensure the residents can access these consistently, but at the same time, they will receive advice on benefits, fuel poverty, and income maximisation. Of course, there is more that we must do, and we will do. As soon as we get the guidelines of the household support fund, which the Labour government has now funded, we will look to prioritise pensioners near the threshold of the pension credit. We will work together with the voluntary sector to ensure our residents receive the best possible advice and have access to free or affordable food and warm spaces, but because of the work we have done already, our residents are in a much better position than they would have been. If the Tory were still in power, in government or the local authority, and you have told me before that you don't think that services that encourage people to claim benefits might work, so let's continue. There were your own messages. I allowed Councillor Dean an additional 10 seconds, so I've allowed you 12 seconds. Thank you. I now call on Councillor Noble. Thank you, Lord Mayor. The very idea that the minority party opposite are champions or even cheerleaders for older residents is laughable, bordering on insulting. From 2010, the most vulnerable in our community suffered 12 years of Conservative austerity, right up until this trust's omnishambolic mini-budget in 2022, when things really took a turn for the worst. In an effort to cut taxes, the Tories torpedoed the economy, causing spiralling inflation, increased interest rates, and ensuring fiscal drag on all of us. And that includes a big impact on all the people. Yeah, for two months, Tome. Two months. How long were you in power for? Come on, look at me when I'm talking to you. Two million more pensioners became forced to pay income tax in the last three years of Tory misrule. For an elderly couple on minimum income, the amount of income tax they pay has tripled, from £297 to £949 per year in the same three years. That knocks the winter fuel allowance into a cot-tat. Oh, so that makes it OK, does it? You could have spoken on this topic if you wanted to. Why would I talk about Rachel Reeves when you've been in power for this long? Why would – are you completely oblivious to the state of the nation's economy that your party left us in? Completely oblivious to that. Are you unique now, Tony? What did you do since the last election? Have you got a job, or how do you contribute? Councillor Noble, we don't want to get personal, please. Thank you. 15% of Westminster residents, over 50, now live in the private rented sector, a figure that's rising. Despite promising to end section 21 evictions in 2019 and achieving nothing, it's the new Labour government who will actually do so. And within 12 months of coming into power, providing reassurance to this currently most insecure of tenures, where nationally one in three pensioners are living in poverty. The Tories' motion, as they proposed it this evening, is a particularly fine example of spilling wine on the carpet and trying to sell you a mop. They love to pretend that they are fiscally responsible, but time and time again this is an utter fallacy, locally and nationally. The only difference is the scale and the volume. Here, under the Conservatives, we had a £6 million mound, and their investments there, they spent £40 million on helicopter rides for Rishi Sunak. Here we had £20 million on Oxford Street consultants with nothing to show for it, and there they spent £465 million on extra advertising of government policies leading up to an election. Here, in Westminster, the Conservatives spent £1.4 million on not building a library on Luxborough Street. There, Sunak wasted £11 billion by spending too much on servicing the national debt. We've already shown, as NASCAR has set out, what this Labour administration is doing here in Westminster, and it's a lot more than the Tories ever had the gumption or the imagination to do. The people of Westminster won't be hoodwinked by the Conservatives, and neither will we. Councillor Noble, you may recall earlier in the meeting I did say please don't refer to Harrow Road or West End Ward. Agreed? Thank you for that. Please, next time, listen. Thank you. Not allowed to mention Oxford Street. I'll call you to speak. Thank you. Yes to Labour. At the end of July, we saw the end of the Prime Minister's, perhaps it's the shortest-lived political honeymoon, the Chancellor's and the Prime Minister's honeymoon with pensioners. Despite all the promises made by Labour, what we are seeing here is a proposal which will impoverish many pensioners who are just above the limit for pension credit. Lord Mayor, I thank Councillor Dean for her speech highlighting the inequities of the Government's plan to restrict the winter fuel allowance to recipients just of pension credit, and talking about experiences of a pensioner in her ward. Lord Mayor, Councillor Hugg repeated the Government's line, which I'm sure we will hear many, many times, and I'm sure that Councillor Demish will remind us about the so-called shortfall in public finances, which Treasury officials will not even substantiate. They have not substantiated and given any details. Now, when we came to Councillor Butler's analysis, she acknowledged the challenges of being in power. As we all know, politics is about choices, and when you're in power, you can't promise anything, or rather, you can't promise everything. You have to prioritise. And then she went on talking about many other issues, but very rarely about pensioners. And as Councillor Dean highlighted, her department, which is deficient because a pensioner in her ward struggles to live in his own home, whose adaptations have not been made to his flat. Well, now we've turned to Councillor Noble, and rather like Councillor Butler's analysis, we had a litany of woes, not addressing the winter fuel payments or the issues of pensioners and hearing about renter issues and various other things in his portfolio, but nothing to do with his motion. And when it comes to the amendment proposed by the Labour group, the Conservative group will not be supporting the amendment, as we believe it does not properly hold the government to account. No, Mayor, thank you. Thank you. So we will now first vote on the amendment to the motion by a show of hands. Those in favour? Those against? Those abstaining? I declare the amendment of the motion carried. We now vote on the amended motion titled protecting pensioners from fuel poverty by a show of hands. Those in favour? Those against? Those abstaining? I declare the amended motion carried. We will now move on to vote on the recommendations of the report listed under agenda item 11 and entitled updated Westminster adult education service instrument of governance report. The recommendations are deemed to be moved and seconded. By a show of hands, can I ask those in favour? Those against? Those abstaining? I declare the recommendations agreed. We will now vote on the recommendation of the report listed under agenda item 12 and entitled annual report of the audit and performance committee. The recommendation is deemed to be moved and seconded. By a show of hands, can I ask those in favour? Those against? Those abstaining? I declare the recommendation agreed. We now move on to vote on the recommendation of the report listed under agenda item 13 and entitled policy on disclosure and barring service checks for counsellors. The recommendation is deemed to be moved and seconded. By a show of hands, can I ask those in favour? Those against? Those abstaining? I declare the recommendation agreed. Finally, we will now move on to vote on the recommendation of the report listed under agenda item 14 and entitled binary standards committee report. The recommendation is deemed to be moved and seconded. By a show of hands, can I ask those in favour? Those against? Those abstaining? I declare the recommendation agreed. So you will all be pleased to know that concludes the council meeting. Thank you and good night. Thank you. [BLANK_AUDIO]
Summary
At this meeting of the full council, a number of petitions and questions were presented by members of the public, two topics were debated by Councillors, a new Instrument of Governance for the Westminster Adult Education Service (WAES) was approved, and a motion was passed relating to supporting pensioners struggling with the cost of living.
Illegal Short Term Lets
Councillor Md Shamsed Chowdhury spoke about his concerns about the rise in illegal short term lets across Westminster. He explained how, since 2015, when the then Conservative Housing Minister Brandon Lewis removed the requirement to obtain planning permission when renting a property as a short term let for less than 90 days, the situation had worsened and agents were routinely abusing the system to maximise their profits by evicting long-term tenants to make way for lucrative short lets. He said:
The level of corruption is so significant that it requires stronger primary legislation mandating individuals to register with [the] council if renting out properties as a short-let for [a] business purpose.
Councillor Chowdhury went on to describe instances of antisocial behaviour, including a rave, that he had had to call the police to deal with, as well as the difficulties he had experienced trying to get the council to enforce the existing rules. He highlighted that, despite Westminster having at least 13,000 short term lets, the council only has 2 officers tasked with enforcing the 90 day rule, and called on Councillor Matt Noble, Cabinet Member for Regeneration and Renters, to increase the number of officers to at least 6 to enable the council to respond to issues more effectively.
Councillor Noble agreed with Councillor Chowdhury's concerns. He outlined the issues caused by the increase in short-term lets in the city, particularly the impact on housing supply for residents of the borough. He then explained that he was working with the government to try to reverse the changes made by the Conservative government in 2015 and introduce new legislation that requires all landlords to register with their local authority, pay appropriate business rates, and provide up to date safety information and contact details, to ensure that they comply with the law.
A new vision for biodiversity and greening in Westminster
The majority party chose to debate their new strategy for biodiversity and greening in Westminster. Councillor Ryan Jude, Cabinet Member for Climate Action, opened the debate by describing the council's plans. He said that last year's declaration of an ecological emergency in the borough had been followed up with the commissioning of the most comprehensive Green Infrastructure Audit the council had ever undertaken.
The audit, published alongside the new Biodiversity Strategy, provides a detailed analysis of the quantity and distribution of all of Westminster's parks, gardens, rivers and trees. This has revealed that, whilst overall tree canopy cover is slightly below the London average, there are vast differences between wards. He explained how the audit had also been used to map air pollution hotspots and deprivation.
Councillor Jude went on to list some of the council's achievements since the declaration of the ecological emergency, such as introducing No Mow May
, banning the weed killer Glyphosate and starting a suite of greening projects in North Paddington, before outlining the 6 aims of the strategy:
- Protecting and enhancing nature in the city
- Establishing corridors for nature and people
- Improving resilience to climate change and pollution
- Making streets cleaner and more liveable
- Ensuring access to nature for all
- Empowering local environmental stewardship
Councillor Jason Williams, of Churchill Ward, spoke next about his ward's commitment to greening, highlighting the establishment of the Churchill Gardens Wildlife Meadow Garden as a good example of how residents can play an active role in protecting and promoting biodiversity. He explained how important it is that all residents of Westminster have equal access to good quality green spaces, regardless of their income or location in the borough, and expressed his support for the council's Greening Westminster Programme, which provides grants of up to £50,000 to community groups wishing to undertake greening projects.
Councillor Iman Less then spoke about the importance of green spaces for the physical and mental wellbeing of residents. She described the urban heat island effect, where densely built-up urban areas can be significantly hotter than surrounding areas, and explained how creating more green spaces would help to mitigate this effect, as well as help to prevent future flooding like that which recently occurred in her Maida Vale ward. She explained how access to nature helps to reduce anxiety, stress and depression and how vital it is that the council provides accessible green spaces across the borough.
Councillor Geoff Barraclough then outlined how the council is putting the strategy into practice. He explained how the council had doubled the budget of the Greening Westminster programme to £400,000, and how the money was being spent on a range of projects such as transforming a tarmac yard at St John the Evangelist Church in Kensal Green into a community garden, supporting the planting of 5,000 new plants at the Covent Garden Playground and Nature Garden, and transforming the Onion Garden
behind City Hall on Victoria Street. Councillor Barraclough then spoke about the council's plans to use its planning powers to require developers to make a 30% net gain in biodiversity on all new developments.
Councillor Ed Pitt Ford, of Lancaster Gate Ward, spoke last. He expressed his frustration that, despite numerous previous strategies on climate change and biodiversity that had been published by the council, very little had changed, and called on the council to stop talking and to start taking action. He said:
What we need is clear targets. Some might call it leadership. It's time we stop dancing around the issue and start asking the tough questions. How many car parking space need to give way to trees and by when? How many miles of hedgerows can we plant? How do we create more parks?
Councillor Jude finished the debate by thanking Councillors for their contributions and responding to Councillor Pitt Ford's concerns about inaction. He explained that this strategy was a substantial step forward from the 2019 Biodiversity Action Plan, which had not led to any meaningful changes in the borough.
Ensuring sustainable and safe dockless bike and scooter hire operations in Westminster
The opposition party chose to debate dockless bike and scooter hire operations in Westminster, and in particular the issues caused by a lack of parking facilities for the bikes. Councillor Ed Pitt Ford opened the debate. He said that the surge in demand for e-bikes in Westminster had not been matched by the council's provision of parking bays for them, and said that the council's failure to provide enough parking bays was contributing to the large numbers of bikes being irresponsibly parked on pavements. He finished by saying that, if the council was serious about promoting cycling and achieving its environmental objectives, it needed to start taking action now.
Councillor Judith Southern agreed with Councillor Pitt Ford, and spoke about the importance of promoting cycling as a safe, sustainable transport option. She said:
As with every council meeting, I cycled here tonight.
She argued that it was the council's responsibility to provide adequate numbers of parking bays, but that the council should also be working with the hire companies to ensure that they rigorously enforce the rules relating to parking, fining riders who park irresponsibly.
Councillor Elizabeth Hitchcock then spoke about the difficulties that many residents with mobility issues were experiencing because of bikes being left in inappropriate locations, and gave the example of a headmistress who was worried that her pupils wouldn't be able to access a local theatre to perform their school play because of the possibility of bikes blocking their access.
Councillor Tim Mitchell explained how he and his colleagues had successfully worked with the council and hire companies in the past to resolve issues with e-bikes in Covent Garden, and questioned why the same approach wasn't being taken to deal with problems in other parts of the borough. He said:
Every bike is tracked, every user's details and journey is traced, every time a bike is parked it is photographed, and every square meter of Westminster can be controlled by the hire companies through their GPS tools.
Councillor Paul Dimoldenberg, Cabinet Member for City Management and Air Quality, responded to the debate by saying that the council was already taking action. He explained that Westminster has 3,400 e-bike parking spaces, more than any other borough in London, and that the council was working to expand the network of parking bays. He said that he agreed that the council should be doing more to enforce the existing rules and that he was working to get the government to introduce new legislation that would give councils more powers to fine users who park irresponsibly.
Winter Fuel Allowance and Protecting Pensioners from Fuel Poverty
The meeting concluded with a motion put forward by the opposition party that related to the government's decision to change the rules relating to the Winter Fuel Allowance. The allowance, which is a payment made to people of pension age to help them heat their homes in the winter, was previously paid to anyone born on or before 22 September 1958.
The new rules, introduced by the Labour government, mean that the allowance will only be paid to people who are also in receipt of Pension Credit, a benefit for people on low incomes. Councillor Lorraine Dean, who moved the motion, argued that this change would leave many of Westminster's most vulnerable pensioners struggling to heat their homes.
An amendment to the motion was proposed by Councillor Adam Hugg, the Leader of the Council, which instead called on the council to support pensioners in claiming Pension Credit and other benefits they are entitled to, as well as to deliver its existing Cost of Living support programmes, such as the Winter in the City scheme. The amendment was passed, and the amended motion was then voted on and also passed.
Other business
The council also approved a new Instrument of Governance for WAES, which defines the responsibilities of the service and its governing body. The council also noted the Annual Report of the Audit and Performance Committee, the Biennial Standards Committee report, and adopted a Policy on Disclosure and Barring Service checks for Councillors.
Documents
- Printed minutes 18th-Sep-2024 19.00 Council minutes
- Appendix 2 - Revision to Chapter 6 of the Constitution Scheme of Delegation to Officers 3
- AP Covering Report
- Annual Report of the Audit and Performance Committee - July 2024 other
- Public reports pack 18th-Sep-2024 19.00 Council reports pack
- Agenda frontsheet 18th-Sep-2024 19.00 Council agenda
- Lord Mayor Communications other
- Appendix 1 - WAES Governance Instrument 2024 2
- DRAFT Council Minutes - 15.05.24 other
- Appendix 2 Audit and Performance Committee Self assessment and Action Plan - July 2024 other
- Updated Westminster Adult Education Service WAES Instrument of Governance Report
- DBS Checks - Covering Report
- GPC Report_DBS Checks for Councillors
- WCC_DBS_Policy
- Report to Council - Biennial Report
- Biennial Standards Committee Report 2022-2024