Transcript

No, he's not. Yeah, I'm here. Thank you, Nick. Thank you very much. The meeting has been live streamed on YouTube. So welcome to everyone who wants to join us with their evening on on YouTube. Elected members of the committee are unable to join the meeting in person, unable to do remotely. However, they do not form part of a quorum, they will not be able to vote and their attendance will not be officially recorded. In the minutes, anyone attending remotely must turn on their camera when addressing the members of the committee. With regards to the meeting etiquette, please may ask you to indicate your wish to speak by raising your physical hand. People online should raise their virtual hand. I will monitor the screens for virtual hands. Please note that the chat function has been disabled for this meeting. College as usual, it's a busy agenda tonight, seems to me of a pace, adequate time where greater focus is needed. The meeting of London Borough Prime and Transport, Whitney Commission is now called to order. So the first part to do is the so expected participants, I'm going to not go for it now. But as you speak, please introduce yourself. And with that, we'll have a little bit of time there. But thank you for coming here. So we're going to the sort of nuts and bolts of the meeting. Apologies for any questions. Councillor Garfield and Councillor Lee Parkway. Give me their apologies. Aaron, if you have any other apologies. I have no apologies. Okay, great. We'll move on. Any declarations of interest to members of the committee? Any disclosure in pecuniary interest or non pecuniary interest? They wish to clear any matter being considered tonight at this agenda, follow up to note any declaration? That's a no. Thank you very much. Item number four, the minutes. I'd like to move to approve the minutes of our scrutiny meeting held on November the 19th. Are there any amendments or corrections that members like to propose? Councillor. Thank you. Thank you, Nate. Okay, great. We'll move on. So I move but the minutes of the previous meeting to be agreed as a correct record, subject to Councillor Higgins's amendment there. Agreed. Thank you very much. So moving to the first chunky items. Thank you very much. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you.m so we take the reports was read by committee has read the report. However, we're going to you just to introduce the report counsellor Verdi do that? And will shown and Lisa, like a couple of minutes just to give us no view over to you. Thank you Chair I'm a Verdi Cabinet Member for community safety and to present this report that's come to you, so thanks to Scrutiny FC for helping to come up with the questions. And just to formalise in terms of some of the work that we have been doing within ASB, you'll be able to see some of the proactive work that we've put in place. Recognised, like you just mentioned, chairs, some of the structural and operational work that needs to be put into a much better position. Throughout the report, you can see a lot of in detail in terms of the data, in terms of some of the key areas of focus, some of the tactical things put into consistently tackle ASB. I don't want to take up too much time because I know you value your time and I want to make sure that the scrutiny is time to interject into this. I think one of the key things, if you look at this pile of appendices, so in terms of transparency, what we're trying to do in terms of organisation as a council, recognising the challenges we face to ensure the fact that we have restrictions on ASB. I don't think I want to add too much, but I would, if Sean wants to add a few bit more or 30 seconds to it, then we can go straight into it. Yeah, sure. Thanks, Councillor. So, Sean McDermott on the safety. As Councillor Ferri said, we try to produce a comprehensive report. We've included a lot of appendices mainly to sort of highlight the in-depth processes and policies that exist around ASB. There's quite a lot there to sort of unpick at times and work through. What I would say with a particular team in comparison to some local authorities, and it's very different, you'll probably find there's 32 different flavours across London. Some places have dedicated teams, some places have dedicated tenancy enforcement teams, some have ASB teams. Our team as a whole, which actually is a relatively smallish team, probably about 12 or so officers there or thereabouts, deals with a broad range of themes. So, we are aware that certain areas, for example, probably need a little bit more focus and are being quite upfront around, for example, how we deal with statutory noise and noise nuisance out of hours. So, one of the things I'm really sort of proud of, and it's taken us a little bit of time to do, is restructuring the service. So, over the last seven or eight months, we've actually restructured the service. So, from April, we will be introducing a very limited, at the moment, sort of a pilot scheme around Friday, Saturday night, working for the team. That itself has had some challenges around staff who obviously used to work in a certain way, working on dayshifting for some staff. That's not actually where they see themselves going. So, we've actually lost a number of staff. So, the process, we're going through that churn of staff and recruiting, which is working and going through a phase. But that's something I know certainly members, particularly, very much asking for, and it's been on the cards for some time. So, I'm really pleased that we are going to be delivering that. The other thing I'll draw out is we were inspected along with housing colleagues by the social housing regulator. It's sort of been complacent. So, we had a full bill of help, but we actually came off relatively well in terms of how they felt we did with BSB. I think things we should be doing and can be doing. We know that we've got a little bit of a gap, but we could be doing more around hate crime, and that leads into Lisa's other area of service, which is the community safety team. Another area I'm very ambitious about is trying to do more work with the other social landlords in the borough and making sure we're supporting them. But we're also providing training about how they deal with BSB better. So, that's what we really wanted to say, Chair. It's not been without its challenges. There's a lot more we can do, and we're trying to move forward in a positive bit of connection. Yeah, so Lisa Rosio, Head of Community Safety and Corporate Resilience, in my seventh month now, and really proud of the team. Particularly, they've been working through a number of challenges, particularly the staffing. But having met the team, I know that they're very committed and dedicated to their role and to the work that they're doing. I have a new manager, interim manager, coming in and started yesterday. I'm very excited to have her because she has a lot of experience in public sector housing and looking at how we can strategize and get more community input, doing a lot more work within the community, and making sure we're being effective. Also, I've reached out to some of the heads of the different services so that we have a steering oversight committee, which we've just had our first meeting, so that we can address any issues between us rather than perhaps emails that go backwards and forwards with some of our team. It can come to us, and then we can make decisions at our level so that we can address anything that might come up to be more effective and immediate. Brilliant. Just to kick off, I'll open the chair's privilege. One of the issues you've got is resource constraints. But I've noticed housing seems to have a lot of staff in their housing liaison offices. And I wondered, I see in the notes, you talk about a service level agreement being staffed here, you've got a restructure at the same time. I've just been probing, is there more what can be done to use the housing liaison officers because they have a locational basis, they've got their patches, and you guys fly in where there's a problem? And I wondered, is there more what can be done to aid their knowledge and more their resources? And I'll let you open that and perhaps members can come in. Sahib, you can come in after. Sure. So it's something, Councillor Verdi, which is really nice, because he's got both portfolios now. So basically, he's like... Great idea, chair, because I think, you know, this is what I always want. This is a space of innovation, as you rightly touched upon, in terms of the resources getting tight, we have to maximise what we have as a council. Collectively, as a council, as we work together as a partnership, like Lisa mentioned, efficiency. So one of the key things I looked at is how do we get the best out of, say, housing services, HLOs, some of our teams are dedicated, and, you know, I started looking at our history of what was there, and Sean will probably go into the details of this, of our agreements, and things that we could probably change. So in terms of detail of trying to look at that, those are underway, which is really important, because I think when you recognise, you know, which members will be know, you know, whether it's the states, whether it's presidential, teams are quite tight, but the is and is are some of those people that go into these blocks, some of the people that do site visits, tendency satisfaction measurements that are taking place now, they're the ones that see a lot of this stuff. So it's actually being proactive, and now the wheel's already in motion, and Sean could probably contribute in terms of what's being done at this moment in time. Very quickly, so yeah, we're looking at particularly work with the neighbourhood response officers, which actually only two to three members of staff, I think one of those is a problem solving officer, we do call upon to do our Designing Out Crime audits as well. So there's a bit of an overlap with the different elements, obviously, Lisa's team, the ASB team, if I use that, tend to deal with basically the behaviour of tenants in properties, you've got the neighbourhood response officers that tend to deal with inside of a block. And then you've got then the Community Safety Enforcement team, which is the other part of the business, obviously my uniform staff that generally do the wider public spaces around the states. And obviously, there is a lot more coming together, particularly under the new nice model, where the teams are attending those regular meetings, and Lisa's set up a new ASB steering group. So one of the things we're looking to do is the neighbourhood response officers to actually warrant them with powers, because at the moment, they can't issue Community Protection Warnings and notices. So I'm just reviewing all the delegations at the moment. So we're able to delegate them along with training and make sure they've got the conflict management skills. There is more, I'd go to Councillor Kamali, there is more we can do? I think so. I'm not overly sure at the moment, it's with the neighbourhood liaison, so the housing liaison officers. But the housing liaison officers, I think that's obviously a conversation to our housing colleagues, right? Yeah. Because I think the main thing you'll recognise is the fact that they need to do the audit, the data collection of what they need to do for the TSMs. There's still a lot of work to do with that. That's just been honest, right? So I recognise what their challenges are, but where there is scope, which Sean mentioned, it was an area which we can focus on. Phase one, you could say is the neighbour response team, which as I said, is three, four people. But once we upskill people, you might be able to get a lot of actual good traction that comes with it. The next phase, if a conversation can be had, the web can build HLOs and so forth. I suppose it's another thing in trail. Step one, step two, yeah, but recognise that. I will say, I keep hearing the word, we're our one council mention at cabinet. Yeah. And I do think it's a little bit of silo things have crept in there. So I'll leave it to you. But I think it's more polite for nudge, but can be done because obviously, these people have a occasional focus, like they might look up the quadrants. Yeah. You said it counts the eyes and ears. I think there's more what can be done. And I think it's up to committee to decide. I think there's a recommendation about nudging you politely in that area, to consider the HLOs additional resource and the eyes and the ex factor. I want to move on. Council, come on. Just a quick question. I mean, everything sounds good in theory, and all the policies, everything is brilliant, but it ends up on the shelf. Because in reality, we have all the policies, we do all the tick box exercise, but when a resident comes to you, and says they have an ASBO happening in their building. Now, when they find out the council, the council goes, it's not their responsibility, it lies on the police. When the resident calls the police, the police says it's on the council. So from a resident's point of view, who is responsible? And how is the council working with the police to ensure residents feel safe? Because every time a resident puts in a complaint, it gets logged, but nothing gets done. The the fence carries on repeating after repeating, but who are we holding accountable? And how is the council providing assurance to the residents that they are safe? Okay, so I suppose I've got first-hand experience of what I call demand ping pong, because, you know, particularly around night working, because the police, you know, someone I phoned up the police and said I've got noise nuisance at night, the police were quite right, it says the council, and at the moment we haven't got anyone to deal with that. So then it becomes a challenge, and the police haven't got responsibilities. I would say it's a collective responsibility around ASB, so whoever gets the complaint will have to determine whether they've got a responsibility to deal with it. We obviously in the outside, we get quite a large amount of complaints, I think it's like, you know, well over, you know, nine to ten thousand complaints a year, so we can't actually deal with every single complaint straight away. A lot of that would start with very low level noise nuisance, and I'm not saying that's not impactive. So obviously as you can see from the stats provided, often the process would be if it's low level noise, there's no obvious risk at that point, we would serve advisory notices. I was referring to drugs, not noise. Sorry? Drugs. For example, drugs. So we'd have to, we do work very carefully with the police, and obviously that's not just Lisa's team, that's Alison's team, and obviously the labour response officers. The new NICE model hopefully looks to address more of those repeat issues in a particular block. Obviously the police are at that meeting, Alison's team, Lisa's team is at that meeting, and they discuss those issues. Got no direct powers around, we can't search people for drugs, so we often have to rely on police, we can't arrest people for drugs. So again, that's a police responsibility. So we have those good relationships with the safe neighbour teams particularly. So if there was an issue like that, then we will look to do it. In terms of assurance, again, I can't say for every single case, and there will be cases where the residents don't feel they're getting the response, and I totally understand that. We do look at the repeat cases as well, because that's where I think there's a lot more risk. Now some of those repeat cases, there'll be people that phone up and we just literally can't do anything about their case. For those that we can do stuff about it, by checking who's phoned a number of times, they're the cases that now get flagged up and monitored. So on a monthly basis, I look at the top 10, and that's basically residential cases, I look at the top 10 private sector housing cases that Helen Marston's team, and I now look at the top 10 licensed premises as well. So if there's something coming up and we've had multiple cases, say for example relating to a pub, I will say to the licensed team, which is not coming in mind but will be, what we're doing about it and get assurance. And if I'm not happy, usually everything is in place, then I'll be saying to the police, like we need to do something on here, we need to get CCTV to monitor, we do extra patrols. So we do try and build those assurances in place. Obviously once we can start doing more of the Friday, Saturday night work, and we're going to have to triage that very carefully, because the concern I've got is opening up like an out of hours noise service where people can dial in, we will not be able to meet likely demand, and that's going to generate complaints. So we are going to be very careful about how we introduce that and look to basically triage what gets reported normally. So these processes are in place, but we've also got to recognise the volume as well, we can't deal with everything. Can I just do a supplementary if I can on your questions? I hope that gives you, but what I would say is that obviously every case is on its individual merits as well. So if it's a drugs case, we would be basically, I'd be asking the Addison's team to go in if it's in the block. If it's in a particular property, then we'd probably serve advisory letter, we'd obviously be speaking to the police. If it was that serious, the police might even look at a warrant. And obviously, if it's a private rented sector, we'd be working with the private rented sector team and also looking at liaison with the landlords and saying, okay, what's your responsibility here? As you were talking, I went on Newham's website to report ASB. At the same time, I went to the police's. I think there's a little bit more work we can do. If you go to the Newham website, you click on it, then you have to go into welcome to the new, my Newham portal. No one is going to do that, right? That's just saying to residents, go away. If I go to the police, it says, is it a crime happening now? Is there a risk to life and property? If I clicked and said it's ASB, in this situation, we're likely to call 101, and they'll log in. But perhaps to bring Councillor Kamali's question to the answer, surely, can we just look at how the person is triaged on the website? Yeah. I think, and also, this thing about logging into your Newham account, no one's going to do that. If I've got German bass playing upstairs in my house, and it's a very good music, basically. I have an account on that. I think we're missing the trick by looking at the police, if not by looking at the police's website, seeing how they report. Perhaps you can do a hand-off or a hand-to. I think, Chair, honestly, I totally agree. We have got, for our existing residents, we have got things like the noise app, which makes it a little bit more easier to use. I think one of the things, and hopefully with the transformation that's happening across the council, and we were chatting about this just earlier today, it'd be really nice for residents to be able to log onto a website and almost sort of, not necessarily a live chat, but basically talk yourself through and take yourself through the journey. There's nothing worse being a resident and a consumer myself when you spend ages on the phone, you don't get an answer, you eventually get through, and it's like the computer says. Some things we don't actually deal with, or we can't get with impact noise. Let's be upfront and tell people that first thing. I just wanted a clarity around CCTV. Firstly, how are they going to be used if they were to be implemented? Secondly, how much do they cost considering we are going through a budget crisis? Are they a practical solution to every place, and are we going to be becoming like the big brother around you and putting cameras everywhere? No, so that's the question. The thing is, we've got quite a substantial system. I can't remember, I think we've got 600 cameras in existence. There's some parts of the borough, if I had the money, I'd like to put some more cameras in because we've had development and we haven't had necessarily the infrastructure to go with it. I think E20 is probably an area where we know we'd like to put some cameras. It's not just the camera cost of putting a camera in, obviously the camera itself, the wiring, the power, there's licensing that goes with that as well. What I'm trying to do is we've purchased in the last six to seven months, we've got a dozen or so tasking 4G cameras, so they basically transmit over mobile phone signals. You still need a power source, but it's a little bit easier to move around, so it's part of the new nice model. We're going to bring in Councillor Higgins in a minute. I'll wrap up very quickly, Chair. As part of that, we've now got them listed. Basically, if we've got a particular issue, whether it's in a block, public space, anywhere we can deploy it, if we can get power in, we can put a mobile camera. It's a temporary fix because the idea is I'm going to capture evidence that we can deal with. I don't want to put a camera there, and it becomes default. All right, Councillor Higgins. Thank you. I've got Councillor Ferris, Councillor Rush, Councillor Femi, Councillor Allday. Chair, I have a couple of questions. Chair, I have a couple of questions. Is it okay? Okay. Page 106 of the supplementary agenda, it's about the emergency rehousing policy. It says that the victim of ASB would be affected not to be in debt in order to be eligible for emergency rehousing. That seems incredibly risky to me. I don't know why we're considering debt when it comes to emergency rehousing because somebody isn't safe. The criteria here is about immediate threats to life. That's the first question, Chair. I'm answering the first question. Is the third bullet point from the bottom on page 106? Next question. Have you got the reference? The requirement for the applicant to have a clear rent account and no other housing debt is removed. This victim would be expected to have a clear rent account and no other housing debt in line with the CVL criteria, which would be eligible for emergency rehousing. I will have to come back to you on that. I think that's a housing policy that we comply with that we've implemented. I will have to come back with that. From the violence and harassment panel section, I will double check, it does say that the requirement for a clear rent account and no other housing debt is also removed. That's for domestic abuse or threat to life. I would assume that would be exactly the same for threats to life. I will double check and come back to you on that. Are we clear on what you're coming back on, Sean? I would have the nervousness about that myself. I will double check, that's not the case. Just read out what you're coming back on, Sean, so I'll be clear. Chair, it's basically around whether someone should have a clear debt record and whether they're entitled to emergency rehousing apart from domestic abuse. I just think we need to clarify threat to life and domestic abuse. That doesn't come into account. Sean, obviously you have to check, I get that, but in principle, you get the problem that debt should not come into- No, I totally agree. Let me double check on that. Second question, then. Every question was about the land licensing scheme. Right now, the wards of Shroppville, Park and Royal Victoria are not covered by that. Obviously, that's a big funder for the ASB team. Governments removed their veto over the land licensing scheme and through the English Revolution Bill. Are we intending to expand the schemes for those two wards? Yes or no. Do you have the highest proportion of private rented sector in the book? It's not a straightforward yes or no at the moment, but spoken to colleagues and also the determinants of the licensing scheme, you have to meet one or four, there's four different parts to it. One of them is based on crime and ASB profiles, so the data is being looked at at the moment by Helen and the team. It's that for Olympic Park, and you mentioned a reference, so working closely- Sorry, the two wards that aren't covered. Yeah, so Royal Victoria and Royal Albert and the data, from what I've seen, the threshold, there might be a gap. So in terms of Olympic Park, but also, I don't want to give- Okay, so are we saying they're not covered by the scheme now? They're not. But we are building the data evidence-based- Correct. Future licensing in the future. And those have to meet specific criteria to come into place. There's four different components. Isn't that guidance, though? Sorry? Governments remove their veto over it, so they've issued guidance. Yeah. But they make it our decision, as far as I understand. At the moment, I understand, and it might change. We're not going to solve it, but what I've got is there's no license in the two areas by collecting the data. Correct. When is the next re-licensing timeline? It just starts in another four years. Hold on, hold on. Licensing just got renewed at this moment in time. Okay, so the next time would be in four years' time. Asking the cycle is four years, isn't it, right? Yeah. Generally. Just so we got this correct, could you come up with a bullet point, say, the next time- But we might be able to, like I said, I think there's a point that I just make, is scope to do, like I said, questions would have been asked with colleagues in PRS, because I had literally a meeting two weeks out of this, because a question was asked. I didn't start from colleagues, as I say, it's a shame that colleagues from house are not here, but seems to have it out there, is what the scope is possible. Okay, so can you come back? I can come back in terms of- Brilliant. Because some of it is dependent on data. If you can come back- Yeah, that's fine. Let us know, I think, if there is scope for us to go to put them into license in before the four-year period- There is, because that four years applies to the existence- Okay, Nate. Just introduce a new scheme, just- Nate, Nate, Nate. Okay. Just based on the criteria that- Right. Can you just come back with the criteria? Yeah, that's fine. Yeah, yeah. We'll put it in the minutes next time. Because it was asked- Nate, I'm going to go on to the next question. Shanti? Okay, thank you. On page number seven, and where the racing agency is made up to 12 dedicated officers who are here for residents during regular office time from Monday to Friday. While they may able to handle a lot of cases during these hours, but we know that especially those related ASBs are being happening outside the normal office hours. Because we see more incidents in the evening time after 6 p.m. So how can we best support our residents when we carry out investigations outside of our standard office hourspace? Do you want to answer that one? That's not different. So the officers will be triaged. And so it'll come through and there'll be a sign. Look at the different priorities, whether it's category one or two. And then they'll be asked to contact the resident to get to terms with the client, you know, provide some information, advice and actions. And you're right, as we've identified earlier, at the moment they're Monday to Friday. We do have Alison's team, who is the community enforcement team, and they work until midnight some nights. So they're on shifts and they're the actual officers that look at the environmental side of things. So they are out there. But one of the things that we did was that there is that need, and as Sean's talked about, we can go out on Saturday night so that we can actually go out, take a look and listen to see what's happening so that we have that to address some of those issues. And we haven't started that yet, but that's something that we're looking at. Thank you. Simon? Thank you, Chair. Did I miss hear or was I correct in hearing you say you don't actually have dedicated noise teams currently? So what we have is we have one team that services everything, Councillor, which is one of the challenges. My question was actually going to relate to that. My residential street has an impact. Every Wednesday, every Monday, they have noisy parties. Not saying anything, the list is going on there. And it is a scenario, it's not casework. It's a scenario. But you go down there, knocking the door on the front of the day, you send them a letter and they go, we haven't had any noise. We're not doing noisy parties. A few neighbours complained and that's about it. How are you going to prove it if you're not actually going to catch them in the accident? Do you have the equipment? How are you going to get that equipment there at three o'clock at 3am if you don't have teams available to monitor it? You're exactly right, Councillor. This is a bit of what we've inherited and this is no fault of the officers themselves, but they generally do a range of different things. So the challenge is they basically provide the tenancy enforcement for housing. So we get funded by housing, we get private rented sector funding and we get HRA funded. That's split between the two enforcement teams, the uniform team and the ASB team. But basically any tenancy enforcement activity is generally done by the ASB team. So there's a lot of work that they have to do in the day, as well as the fact that we've got out of hours noise. Just touching on both questions, if I may just clarity, the team will do, if they can, they will do some later visits, but they don't provide at the moment what would be cast as a response service. So if a resident phones up and says, not in the evening, I appreciate that at two o'clock in the morning, but if there's a need, they want to go and see a resident at six o'clock, the team will flex their shifts to go and speak to that resident. But obviously what the issue you're referring to is about trying to identify, which comes back to your question about noise happening at the time, which is what we don't have. So the restructuring, which I've done, which has involved new job descriptions, new allowances, losing staff because they can't work nights, because that's not what they've been set up to do, recruiting staff and retraining them to be able to deal with statutory noise. That's all the processes that we've been doing alongside that. I've had to train them in conflict resolution because they don't do as much as that first aid and obviously that type of activity. So that's going to be in place for April. We started because of all the other demands on the team. We were only doing Friday, Saturday nights. If I was being honest, the demand picture is like most of London, apart from the West End, Thursday to Sunday. But if we put the staff on Thursday to Sunday, there wouldn't be enough staff to service the stuff they got to do in the day because we paid for housing to do stuff in the day as well. So this is why I'm saying, so some of the councils do have a dedicated noise service and they've had that for some time. From the history, as I understand it, that got removed by the council some years ago. So obviously we're in a position with a smaller staff. Specifically related to this, I mean very small. Yeah, just I want to reassure you, you have an action plan. I would like to know in our next meeting or in a relevant meeting, you are doing something regarding this matter, please. Well, hopefully, council, just because I've said, I've just gone through several months of doing a restructure with the year. And we've also got an improvement plan from the regulator, not identifying anything major, but just to reassure. And that's in there is an action plan in place. Do you think the, so the plan you're doing at the moment has been completed? So the restructure is completed. Right. And the new SLA with the new team will be operational when? So basically with the introduction of the Friday, Saturday night, it's going to be in April. Okay. The reason we've done that chair just is again, there's a little bit around officer safety. It's a rotor system, so the team would be working. Can you provide an update? We meet in nothing at the 15th of April approximately. Can you provide a short update, not war and peace, more than two pages? Just restructuring has been done. This is the new survey. And we can circle it around the team, around the committee. We can update members that way. Absolutely fine. Fine. Councillor, let me. Maybe you've mentioned this, if so, sorry about that. You talk about action plan, I mean, and I heard you talking about drug issue and stuff like that. I know drug issue is a main problem around here. Now, I know that council tenants, if they find with drug issue, they might be affected. What happened to the leaseholder, council leaseholder? And how many times can you report a drug issue before action has been taken? Have I asked the question? Again, it would probably depend on the individual case to be fair, Councillor, around what type of drugs, the extent and the impacts, and what we then do as a team with NDAs, with the housing team around particularly leaseholders. So I couldn't give you a definitive saying it's three cases. What I would also say, and again, it's not making any excuses, but you've just said the court system is actually jammed back to the moment. So that means that any enforcement action that goes to court does take a hell of a long time. Just a supplementary on that. In the notes, you gave us a list from tenancy, down to letter, right? But there's no hierarchy or flowchart, right? It'd be helpful if you put them in a flowchart, right? So for example, in that question, if a resident is found, and it's like open drug county lines house, so first offense, they get X. Second time, they get X. And the third time, they get the tenancy taken away or whatever. I think part of the answer is a lack of certainty in what these sanctions are. You've listed the sanctions in the report. You haven't put them in a hierarchy. You know, stage one, stage two, stage three, and you're out some sort of thing. So just to, yes, the answer is we haven't got that. I need to be specific. You haven't got the policy sitting behind it as to, but will they get hoofed out? Councillor Odeh. I thank you for speaking about the out of hours service. So I want to ask, first of all, do you have the money to pay for this in a sort of long-term city way? And so I wanted to ask that, it might get overwhelming service, and then it might suck a lot of complaints, but at the same time, if we're going to pay for this, we want to get to you effectively. So what I'm going to, how is it that you're going to roll this out carefully, so that it isn't overwhelmed? And then my second question is on the good neighborhood agreement, that we're going to try and have mediation or conversations between tenants where there's conflict. So I'm a bit skeptical about this, because say, for example, you have a tenant and you have a landlord who are in dispute, the landlord has tenants, and I'm not even a new one, for example, and you can't reach that landlord. How is that going to happen? Or, for example, if the conflict is between two residents of, yeah, tenants, but the issue is actually like changing and you can't keep your children still. Okay, any other questions? Or just some example, like if one tenant has got the capacity to engage in that conversation. Those are two questions. That's a good idea. Is there anything else? Thank you, Velma. Yes, sure. So I've got the first question now. So what I would say is we're not investing any additional money into the service, it's using existing funds. So that's the part of the reason I'm treading really carefully, because we've got quite a large demand, as you can see. Friday, Saturday nights is something that we haven't had additional investment for. So my experience with services before is that, obviously, if you've got one car out, which in essence what we'd have, we'd have a double crew car out on a Friday, Saturday night. If you do an advertised service, you're going to get probably multiple residents phoning up. Now, there's nothing worse if you put a phone call in and basically the car doesn't get to you because they've got five other jobs. You've got limited time. It's only going to be up to like one, two o'clock in the morning. They're working, which is reasonable. So the concern I've got is introducing something that suddenly becomes a source of complaints and people then, and then we have the casework associated with the complaints, which I don't think is appropriate. If we would get an additional resource, and it's not to say that that couldn't be a discussion in future, coming back to your point, Councillor, about HRA and things like that, but we still need the staff to do it. Second question. The second question, and I'm not necessarily an expert on good neighbour agreements, but they are seen as an element of good practices as part of a toolkit. So it does rely on consent. You can't necessarily force it because it's an agreement. Just to chair supplementary now. Surely a tenant has a tenancy agreement, which must be good standard of behaviour. Right. So secondly, what are we doing to enforce standards of behaviour of a tenant, the council tenant? What are we doing there? Yeah. So again, every case, please, I'm not trying to make excuses, but you've got to look at it on a case-by-case basis around, for example, what's the level of evidence. A good neighbour agreement, because ultimately, what we want to try and do in all enforcement is behaviour change. We don't really want to take enforcement action, because there is a potential if you evict someone, then do we have to actually rehouse them, and that just becomes someone else's claim. No, but I find... I'll say no, but that wouldn't be something we'd necessarily be able to do in a lot of cases, in particular, if there's welfare issues, like if there's children or if there's some capacity issues. So a good neighbour agreement, often the time, and it can also be associated with getting mediation. So one of the things we know about, you know, is it that valuable and what about mediation service that we can introduce to do that? So you can get an independent facilitator in and get the neighbours to identify what the issues. For example, a lot of domestic noises, people putting washing machines on at the wrong time of day, understanding why that takes place. Someone doesn't know someone worked shifts, someone doesn't know they've got kids. The other issue I would say in a lot of newer builds now is soundproofing, and you've probably experienced, say, if you live in an older property like myself, you know, you can't hear anything. You go to some of the newer properties in the middle of that, putting on your washing to save money at three o'clock in the morning, which other people would do without issue, and COVID's a big driver. More people working at home, they're more susceptible to noise during the day. Thank you, Sean. I'm going to go into the second round. Councillor Kamali. I'm going to move away from ASBO. I mean, Newham celebrates diversity, and we have lots of people from different backgrounds, different protective characteristic and everything else. But what was really mind-boggling is the regulator's report on hate crime. It was so weak. What are we, as Newham, doing to make our residents feel safe and protective? Because obviously, hate crime, I don't have the stats in front of me, but it's more than ASBO at the moment in Newham. What are we actually doing? Because it's on the increase, and just anyone could be attacked. Councillor Kamali read my mind, because I wrote down hate crime. Yeah, so I mean, it's not lost us on council. I mean, what I would say, I would double check the stats, but my last count, I think we've seen a reduction in hate crime over the last year. If we talk about border hate crime, we know a lot that's been driven by geopolitical incidents, particularly around them. What did the regulator see, which alerted their senses? I think there's an issue around, we weren't particularly well flagged initially, and Lisa can probably come in on, so that was an issue. We've got assisting. So basically, our system is not particularly good. And being honest, we've got a system that hasn't been upgraded for... Uniform, right? Yeah, it's a system that's used across... Blame in the system, are you? No, I'm a competent Councillor. But it does link to a lot of things. For example, I know you're very data-driven, as much as I am. We can't get data off the system as much, so this has taken a lot longer to do, because the system doesn't enable us. I manage the system. Can I just say something to you? Sure. You read my mind. I am data-driven, but I'm also a person that takes responsibility, right? So therefore, when I read the report, which is uniform, I know that in the report, you've got these working groups, you've got a workaround on the system. I get that. I know it's also in the report you gave us. There's something about risk assessment templates and risk assessment that's been raised. So can I just ask, because it is concerning about hate crime, we can't have a computer that didn't say yes or no. Can we fix that quite soon? Because it might be data for us, but that's someone's life at the outbreak of a phone who's raised that, right? Absolutely. And as I said, I know, again, I'm very orientated, and Lisa can talk about a bit more data, but in essence, I've asked for a corporate uniform steering group. That's been a bit up now. So we've had our first meeting, and there's another meet up next week. There's a number of users on uniform. Before Lisa comes, I'm going to let some kind of supplementary, and Lisa could probably answer your question at the same time. So if you'd be brief. I just wanted clarity. Did you say that hate crime has decreased? Is that what you said? Yeah, I'm saying that certain areas of hate, types of hate crime, I can get you to get up, so I'll get a bit into it. Because I can give you example of lived experience where hate crime has increased on a regular basis. So for you to actually say hate crime has decreased, that's not true. Xavier, hold on. It might be, they're not undermining what may happen out there. It may be on an issue of reporting. Yeah, that's right. And the second point is, once the person reports, does the uniform system correctly dog the concern? I don't think you're undermining. Oh, please don't. I mean, I've been subject to hate crime as well. And I know it gets underreported. And there's a lot of people in this room that have had it. So I'm not underplaying because one hate crime is enough. What I'm saying is the reported ASB we get, not just because of the residential side, which I'll come on to very quickly, is that we have seen a decrease in that. And I think that the increase we did see in terms of particular types of hate crime has been particularly linked to certain geopolitical, that's all I'm saying, Councillor. So please don't get it. We know, and Lisa's obviously got, on the other side of the business of community safety, we've done a hate crime survey. We've got a lot of feedback from residents around what the challenge is. And I think the regulator picked up is, we haven't got particularly good systems or residential ASB to flag up the hate crime challenge. So not undermining, I'm just trying to summarise what we're going here. I'm looking at Councillor Kamal, if you haven't got this right. We're not undermining the issue of lived experience and the nature of hate crime. What we're saying, our reporting systems could be and should be better without what we're saying. Yeah, and it is also the hate crime. That's fine. Yeah, that's exactly fine, yeah. Yeah, I think hitting it on the head is about that confidence of reporting. And I'm grateful for people that mentioned, a lot of people have gone through hate crime. You know, people, obviously I don't make it personal, but even people like myself, right? So I think there's something really important about the confidence of reporting. I think what we need to really showcase to people is, and Lisa probably touched on it, that the survey that was carried out and information that came from it is about who we reported to and the right people. Now, because of the importance of the issue, I'll get back to Councillor Kamal. Are you happy with the answers and the actions coming forward to your answer? Not really, because I don't really see an action because we're saying that the server isn't good or we're not really logging it, lack of confidence or lack of trust, but then what are we doing to build that confidence, build that trust, build that service where people are confident enough to reach out? Sure. So Lisa, come on, because we can do such a number. Lisa, go on. So one of the things I just had a meeting yesterday, because the way that the system in uniform is currently built, we can't extract some of that data that we need to know if we're being effective and our services, which came up with hate crime. And so we haven't launched this yet, but we're working with the Power BI, we're working with Helen's team because you have expertise in this. And Afzal, who wrote the report, has been working with her data technicians to come up with what we need specifically for ASB so that we can get accurate figures. And one of the things that we'll be addressing is how do we document hate crimes and how do we get specific about it? And so the database of the Power BI has been very good. I've just got some samples of how we can break things down, graphs, things that we have discussed. Okay. So Councillor Tamani's question was about confidence of reporting on a robust system. What we're saying, we've identified the challenge and there's a piece of work coming forward to fix it. So the second question is when it will be fixed. When will the system, the uniform system, will be of a fussiness or it provides the confidence, which Councillor Kamali mentioned in her question. Well, I'm not sure with uniform because we do need super users and I think we're down to one. There's only one or two people I think in our system that can actually use it, but for the family. But this Power BI is going to be separate, but we're pulling out information, extracting that. So if I can, because I just want to give you some reassurance. So I think we've got to take hate crime in the broader context. The nervousness I've got at the moment is we're talking about residential ASB that has got an hate crime element. And I think Councillor, you're talking about hate crime more generally. So the bit we've got a challenge is around currently when we deal with residential ASB that gets recorded on uniform, it's very difficult to record and report on what is a hate crime incident. The officers when they speak to the person will obviously identify that and will link it with the police, absolutely. On the broader piece, obviously hate crime is hate crime. So generally we would encourage people to report it to the police because there's a criminal offence there. So if we get a report, we can either pass it on to the police or we encourage the resident. They're the two different things. Go on, Chair, sorry. I think some very important points have come out from the discussion and I've learned a bit more intuitively about the uniform system. So again, I'm going to ask you for a note, right? Because there's a lot you just said and I want it captured for prosperity, right? I'm going to suggest something here. If members were to sit with you for half an hour at some point in the future when this system is robust, would you welcome that? Yeah, absolutely. I mean, to be honest, the fact that scrutiny is noted, I've pushed on the uniform system. Therefore, an invitation to scrutiny members, if to get, I think, greater confidence will come once they've seen the system in front of us after they've fixed it. So there's an invitation there from officers. I think I'm saying no more than half an hour. Wait five minutes to look at the system. So you can see the system and what they're talking about. Would that be okay? Do you feel happy with that? Yeah, if there's one thing just because I said I'm conscious of keeping to time but obviously not losing sight of things. There are other things that sit outside this. So for example, there is acronyms but there is a community risk management meeting which is basically when we look at high risk cases and there's also an approach where we look at hate crime and obviously those cases get flagged up and there's like a panel approach. It's like a multi-agency safeguarding approach. I just want to give you some reassurance around. I noticed that because you've got the CRM and it works with the, it's like a mash type thing. Absolutely. CRM works with the NEEM integrated community enforcement model, right? Okay, so could you do like a presentation? I'll let you give you time for reflection. No more than 10 slides. Put something together that says this is the uniform system. This is what we're doing. This is how we're doing reassurance. This is how it feeds into the joint system. Small presentation. So you've got it there quite clean. Send it through to Erin and members up there which could then come back to you and if you could donate 45 minutes of your time just to go through, I think that provide reassurance. That okay, members? Then I'm going to bring in, thank you. I found a very useful interchange. Thank you. Thank you. Stop to your mid flow. I'm going to bring you back in. Thanks, chair. The second part of the question I asked earlier about licensing was what are we doing to force on ASV in unlicensed areas at the moment? My entire ward is unlicensed. Royal Victoria is unlicensed. We have some of the highest private rented sector tenure in the borough. How are we enforcing? Because it refers to private rented being enforced through the licensing. We don't have that. Just a second question while I'm here. Go on, I'll let you have another one. Go on. It is related. It says that for ASV in housing association, we just refer it to the housing association, but many councils will know that housing associations are terrible at dealing with ASV. I don't see anything in here about scrutinizing. So therefore, how do we deal with non-PRS properties in Stratford? Very brief. Second point. PRS is not licensed. It's not licensed. And second one, how do we deal with social landlords? Very briefly. So the first one, it's the same applies to any other premises that we use. Obviously, the PRS has licensing, which means that there's certain things that we might be able to hold the landlord to account for. So the powers are exactly the same in general. So if there's statutory noise nuisance, we could deal with that. If there was a community protection warning, it'd be absolutely the same. It's just the fact that the additional licensing regulations and responsibilities on the landlord don't exist in those areas. So that would be the- What can't you do without the licensing? Well, it'd be what's in the licensing scheme. I'm trying to wrap my brains down. When I used to do PRS, so for example, if the landlord's got responsibilities and not fulfilling those, then there'd be certain regulations and requirements on the landlord. Obviously, the whole thing about the licensing scheme is making sure, for example, from memory they're a fit and proper person, for example. Their agent is. That wouldn't apply in this case, so we couldn't enforce that, for example. So basically, it's about what it says. If you forget the licensing scheme, some of the core powers we got apply throughout. So it'd be a universal. Is that okay? It doesn't necessarily mean we get it all right. I totally get that. But that's the approach. It just means with a licensing area, you try to be more preventive because you're trying to drive standards through the licensing scheme and the landlords and how they run the licensed premises, particularly HMOs, for example. Second point? The second point, what I would say is, and this comes back to resourcing and obviously our role as a council, we're not paid to really scrutinise housing associations, how they deal with it. What I would say is I think we've got a moral duty to try and support housing associations, which I did touch on earlier, where my ambition is we are providing them some support and training. But if they've got their own ASB teams and their residents are paying them rates and charges to deliver a service, I would expect them to be standing up. A question to help here, and I accept the second point, and do we not have one officer whose job it is to deal with the registered social landlords that want that single point of contact? Would that not make it easier? I wouldn't have the resource to do at the moment. I mean, what I would expect to do, I've done this and I've seen this work elsewhere, is basically try to get the housing associations and the providers together and basically share good practice and basically come up with some joint practices and procedures. Put yourself in our shoes. We get complaints from residents who live in housing associations, we send it to the housing association, we hear nothing back. What are we supposed to do then? Right, so the bit for me is I would have no issue, you coming to the team and saying to the team, can you try and see if you can help with the housing association? I would expect that. I want to try and build those relationships so we've got stronger so we can support that. I actually do, so for example, how do we deal with hate crime? How do we deal with domestic abuse? Because I know some of the housing associations are really bad because they've never been trained to do this. That is an aspiration. What I would say is obviously, there is an opportunity for scrutiny to hold individual housing associations to account. I've seen that before, particularly certain organizations that have been invited to be held to account. I would say, please come back because we do support you, Councillor. We will try and do our best, but we'll be pushing back and saying, we can't invest loads of resources to do someone else's jobs there. I'm going to push back on that in a minute. I'm going to summarize the meeting. I think it's been a very good meeting actually, and I particularly like the honesty in there and the willingness to do different. What I've got is a recommendation around the greater use of housing liaison officers because you haven't got a lot of resource. And that links to the second point. They are the eyes and ears. They operate locationally, and you fly in and deal with a problem. Madness, you're not using that resource. And what I will say to you politely is, break down the walls of silo things, Councillor, on that one. Second one is, can we look at the website strike information to capture people, how they report ASB via the police and via us. Our systems are not great. Like I said, German-based and often long-term accounts not going to happen, right? The second one is about, and I'm going to add to what Nate said. Can you confirm the criteria for adding in Stratford Olympic Park and Royal Victoria into the landlord license scheme? Also in that, can you set up quite clearly in Stratford Olympic Park, what can you do without the licensing scheme regime? That came out in the last bit, Councillor. Yeah, we can confirm the universal offer check. The other bit is, you list a range of interventions you can do. It goes from tenancy breaches, down to injunctions, letters and blah, blah. But I think it might be easier in terms of helping implement the policy and for us to understand what they're doing if you put them in a flow chart. What is the flow chart of interventions? What's stage one? What's stage two? What's stage three? I'm particularly interested in trying to be very slow to act on bad landlords in council properties when we expect private landlords to adhere to standards we don't do ourselves. So I think I want us to be as exemplar of that. Also on hate crime, I think I talked about, it's up to you how you deliver it, a small presentation setting out what do the regulators say? What are the challenges? How are you fixing them? How are you using the reporting data to do it? How are you providing Councillor Kamali's point reassurance to get that right? So it's better reporting quality systems. Also the last bit, I do think there is something about how we liaise with the registered social landlords. It's not, goodness of your heart, you're saying come to you and you sort it out. I think there should be a policy and SLA sitting behind there. I know you're challenged for own resource but that shouldn't be a challenge why we can't do something. I think there may be a bit more of a form, I'll leave it to you, formal system we deal with registered social landlords. I believe it was that. I've got something we've done before. There was another action chair just to remember. It was just to review the emergency housing. Lovely, right. In that summary, I'm not going to take any more questions. I want to see if I got summarised the meeting. Is it a question or are you helping me with my summary? I just want to say, kind of clarification, I want to clarify something. Go on. Look at space. How, oh, oh, oh, that's a new, no, no, that's multi, that's a new question, right? Okay, come on. Picture me now. I got you then, right. Now members, if you, have we had a good discussion tonight, if you, I think it's really catching points there. Officer, have you managed to get over the points you wanted to get over tonight? Yeah, thank you. It's a really complex area. We know there's a lot of what we need to do being completely transparent and we are moving. I love it. And I will say, if there's anything, as you're driving home tonight, you think, I've said that, please go to Aaron. Oh, is that what you're saying? Before we do it for you. He's been great. Are these brief comments not open new areas? Can we make sure that in all blocks, and yeah, all the blocks are that all the notices are up to date. Housing, that's housing issue. You could write to housing and do that. He's housing, so you take it down. Actually, since we cancelled, no, but you're in the cabinet. Yes, you can take it. Action. Just because we have suspicion, the numbers might not be quite right because of the system. And six months after a new system, can this come back to the committee? Yeah. Because the numbers seem incredibly low on enforcement. Can we, for the next municipal year, when it's come back to a refresh with a good system? Right. Can I thank you for your time? I've enjoyed it. Thank you. It's good news. I can give some information to Aaron. Lovely. Which is lovely. Thank you. And thank you very much. Thank you. Good question, guys. Thank you. All right. We're going to go on to air quality. Let me get my notes. All right. Thank you for that. The report is noted and that resolved. Happy with the recommendations? Thank you very much. Next section is new air quality action plan. The purpose of this item is to evaluate the impact of the 2019-24 air quality action plan and to review the development of the new plan, which is 2025-2030, and the ongoing consultation process. I'd like to thank colleagues who provided the report. Very extensive. Thank you for that. And thank you for the, well, people wouldn't know we had a meeting before this, which helped us plan for that. And that was very, very useful. Actually, we've got Councillor John Whitworth, James Custer, Director of Planning and Development, and Mark Partridge, Noise and Pollution Manager. So if you'd like to introduce a couple of minutes each. But you are, yeah. Thank you. Thank you, Chair. I'm very pleased to present this report and particular thanks to Mark and his team. There's a lot of work went into it. As you can see, it's a refresh of the previous air quality action plan, 2019-24, building on examining the successes or the relative lack of success over the next five years. It's a statutory requirement, so this is a refresh of the previous plan. You can see in it, we look at the state of air quality in Newham, the effect of poor air quality on health and how the air quality is monitored. We then look at the, really, the successes we've had over the previous five years. Some of the shortcomings and how we're building on the lessons learned for the next plan. So we've set out priorities for the next five years. And also, you can see it at the end, there's the matrix of actions and the key indicators of how they'll be monitored. And I'll just say that we're looking forward to your comments on this. I know you've had some experience of previous scrutiny on parks. Greenspaces, where you looked at air quality a bit, so you're building on that. And just say that this is a result of collaboration internally with the different departments of the council, including with the local plan and Jane's team, so thanks for them as well. And just also mention that this commission in the person of the chair has already had some input into this and has helped shape and support the report you see here. So we're looking forward to hearing your comments and contributions. Jane, Mark? I haven't got anything else to add. Yeah, so Mark Partridge, manager of the noise and pollution team within the council. Just expanding on that, obviously this is a draft statutory document. As the chair has said, we have had some previous conversations about the structure and how it looks in the template. We've taken previous comments away to see how, because the GLA like it in this template because it allows a comparator where they can draw out all the information from the matrix. We review and report upon progress against the action plan every year as an ASR. So the matrix that we have forms an easy sort of template for the GLA where they can pull out the information that they need in order to do comparators across London. It's in as a draft form. There has been a bit of slippage between when the last one was meant to be finished, the four, the five years and this one. Team and say, taking those comments, previous comments away, the council thankfully provided. We are now in a position where we've gone through the internal consultation with teams. All the teams that you'll see noted in the matrix are responsible for certain aspects of the plan and building up now following consultation with yourselves and feedback where we will be in a position to go out and do a statutory external consultation. Now we're looking probably a six to eight week consultation for that. However, first of all, as I say, because it's a template that GLA and DEFRA need, we've gone back to them now to say, look, we think we're still in line with your template but taking in, trying to neuromize it, should we say. And obviously, if they give us a go ahead, then we're ready to go. Unfortunately, if they say no, we don't think it's close enough or you've gone diverted too far away, then we're going to have to go back to the drawing board a little bit. But we're confident that, you know, we've stuck to the template as much as we can. We're obviously bringing our own new and concerned into the document rather than a GLA as a whole. Yeah. Councillor, I do have a member of my team who's got a wealth of expertise in air quality. This is a technical question. This is probably a question for Nick and something beyond my comprehension. On this air quality, on the report, it says air quality is linked to asthma. Like it is bad for children, but it does damper mould fall into it because obviously damper mould has an impact. So would you be able to tell me how would you say air quality has more of an impact on the child than damper mould in terms of asthma? Damper mould is a case of ventilation or poor ventilation in a building. And obviously, no, I'm saying during this report, asthma is related. You're saying it's bad air quality, therefore, we've got asthma. But when you read a different paper, it'll be like duty damper mould, we've got asthma. So which one is it? Both, because as you say, it's more prevalent in children because their lungs are still developing as you take in the pollution such as particulate matter, the M2.5. It helps the tumour. I think it might be what I think a drafting issue. Councillor Kamali is right. There is a contributory factor damper mould, which could give it the preconditions for asthma. Yes, it could be triggered by poor air, but poor air is not the sole contributory factor for asthma. So I think, as I always say, it could be in the drafting. I want to speak to public health colleagues and get a line of how I can disaggregate between damper mould, asthma, asthma, the minimum. I think it might be helpful just to put down, we are aware, but contributory factor the asthma, our damper mould, ergo, medium has an extensive damper mould task force in its properties. Yeah, for the point. Yeah. Yeah. Okay. I've got a comment. Nine. It talks about the potential function for the air. It's the fact that I have any plates and some in ink. And this sounds really good because we're going to straight focus this money toward the air quality action plan. My question is, what are these data centres? How many are there? Why is this only potential rather than guaranteed? And when we get this money and we reflect it towards these projects, how confident are you that whatever we do is going to cause more treatment than the damage caused by the multiple diesel generators used by these data centres? Good question. Data centres, as some of you may know, obviously with the introduction of internet, computer speeds, now with AI, more power is needed to generate the power to drive these, the computing power. That involves, and usually because, let's say, advantage or disadvantage, they've been so close to Canary Wharf as well, they want to get close to these hubs where all this data power is needed and is best used. So there are currently, I believe now they've both been approved by the planning decision. And there's one on Bidders Street and one at G Park, which is your next site down in Newplex Resins. They will obviously, I think we're probably three years away from the first one coming into action, but we won't get that money until that data centre becomes operational. The figure is there because it's based on a DEFRA air quality neutral guidance about how much they will contribute. The reason they need to contribute is because this air quality neutral guidance says they need to obviously be air quality neutral. With the use of generators, which are diesel generators, which are backup generators, emergency generators, just in case anything goes wrong, they will fall out of that air quality neutral. And in order then to offset that difference, although, you know, as a last resort, they are contributing a financial contribution to that. Can I just ask, in planning guidance somewhere, chunk of cash, whether it's one or six or four still, whatever it is, comes back for that purpose? Is it written down in this term? It's in air quality neutral guidance, which is within the local plan. And that cannot be manipulated? No, there's this calculation. I mean, Nick is a specialist on this. There is a calculation that they need to use. So we're going to get that money. Okay. Unless something goes wrong and they're not built and don't become operational. But if they become operational, there is that money there. So when the data centers are built, chunk of cash is coming our way? Yes. Well, yes. Are you hesitating? No, yeah. There's set figures at the moment for how much. One of them is dependent on extra and other electricity source. Okay. Written down in a big document some way. So within the planning document, how much that will be. Yeah. And your second question was? Second question? No, no, no, no. You asked two, didn't you? I've still done it. That's all right. I'll bring you back in second round. I'll bring you back in second round. Everyone's been really concise today. So we're going to... Nate? I hope I don't break that. Just a meta point. I think we should probably go to health scrutiny at some point. Like if they're going to know more about some of the health impacts than necessarily, it's going to be more paired to look at it. And also other aspects of air quality, like air transmitted diseases and things like that. Like I think we need to... COVID is an example. Some of the measures that you tackle indoor air quality with can also tackle COVID and that's really important. So I'd like to see it go to health scrutiny. On what we have in front of us, there's some stuff about emissions-based parking. One of the problems with that is that electric vehicles also contribute to emissions. So the actual solution needs to be quite substantial modal share. Is the department considering introducing weight-based parking or an SUV tax, as some would call it? That's the first question. And this is a question for... Are we campaigning to the Mayor of London to consider road user charging? Because it's unfair that the bridges and crossings that we do in the east have road user charging, but the rest of London doesn't. That's it. Weight-based chart parking, that was something we actually raised with our parking colleagues during the consultation period. There is no plans as of yet to introduce that because we've just recently introduced the emissions-based, and they are introducing a new diesel surcharge as well. I think it's already in place, but I think they're coming in for residential parking as well, as visitor parking. So I think they're conscious that trying to introduce too much maybe at once is difficult and we're trying to promote the move from diesel cars to electric, so then potentially penalise. Change from diesel cars to no car. At the same time, yes. There's different teams even with modal shifts into cycling and things. The true answer is there is no plans for weight-based. However, which I've written down, there should be a strategy the meta thing on vehicle charging. Other cities are considering it. It's in consideration when we discussed it, but at this moment there's no plans. I think we'll take it as a recommendation for the overall strategy for vehicle charging. John, the question was about charging bridges. Road users are charging so that people can charge based on their use, not just because they happen to cross the Silver Town tunnel or the Blackwall tunnel. It's unfair that getting road users are charging just for those tunnels but not for all of London. It would be one of the best tools that we have to introduce modal shift. So if a campaigning council is saying we're a campaigning council, are we campaigning for vehicle charging? We're not as yet, but that might be a good idea to consider. There was lots of discussion about that during the Silver Town DCO. So I don't know. I was with a different team. I'm just going to follow up on Nate's question. I mean, obviously we shouldn't be in a position of telling people how to travel, but if we look at it, I was more after the impact assessment on the road because if you look at electric cars are aimed at more people, more wealthy, more like have the money to actually invest. So what are we doing for the poor residents? Poor is such a wrong word to use, but residents who are on low income to actually compile by it, because I think if we do stuff like that, it has an impact on their budget as well, on their finance. I know we are rolling out for about 3000 charging point, but what are we doing for residents who live in flats as well? Cause they don't have access to that as well. I think really that's a question for EST because through the equity monitoring that we do and that supports them in some of the initiatives that they've had have, which improve air quality, likely low traffic neighborhoods. But that isn't something that's actually within our pre-mit. Okay. Can I just ask a question on that low traffic neighborhood on that point? Does it really reduce overall vehicle emission or does it just shift the pollution to another area? The evidence shows that certainly on the roads that are performed part of the LTN, there is a reduction in emissions. So therefore it shifts it to another area. So it has been evidence to suggest that people just take alternative routes, because obviously the idea is that they will come congested, but there is evidence there that initial impact falls away over time. But when they take other routes, doesn't that increase their journey time and doesn't that increase the emission base? Or people find alternative ways. Brilliant, Nick. Come in, Nick, please. Just really though there's no work done as far as I'm aware in Newham, this question has been raised with regard to low traffic neighborhoods. And there's been a lot of studies done that investigate effectively changes to the air pollution levels on periphery roads. And there has been no measurable increase in air pollution shown in those studies. So the pollution levels decrease within low traffic neighborhoods. And that's the stuff that the research has shown in Newham. And research shown in other places is it doesn't seem to affect air pollution on the border roads. Hopefully that helps. Can I ask you a supplementary? At the moment, I think 34% of Newham roads covered by LTN and we need to increase it by 10%. As per the documentation. The documentation also says that the strategic ambition to have 80% of our roads covered by LTNs. In that situation, what work has been done to assess impact remaining roads? Because when it's 80% of the borough's roads of LTN, there's a lot of cars running around on 20% of our roads, right? The general, I can't answer that specific question because it's dealt with through our colleagues in the highways. But again, going back to what was said overall is we're not just looking for shifting people onto different routes. We're looking for shifting people into active travel. It's looking at active travel. It's better for the environment and it's better for people's personal health. You get out on walking, on your bike, public transport, your health is better. Which is one of the reasons why we're looking to say, yeah, you know, we are having low traffic neighbourhoods. Yes, it does have a small beneficial effect in those areas. But actually, overall, to improve air pollution and to improve people's health, we're looking for mode shift. Okay. You talk about mode shift and you're citing research. Has that research got class underpinned in that research? Lots of research I've seen talks to middle-class people about middle-class modal shift, right? This is Newman, which is a slightly different population. In terms of the bias, have you looked at the bias in the research you're using to justify your position? I don't mean to be confrontational about that. I'm asking about the citing research. But what I'm asking for, has that research been sensitised to the demographic within Newham? And I've been in Saudi Arabia. If you're talking about specifics for the peripheral driving in low traffic neighbourhoods, no, I haven't looked at that. This is just the read all the air quality papers. I'm sad like that. With regards to the general benefits of active travel, that's universal. The colleagues in public health I'm sure will support us on this matter. The more active you are, as a rule, the healthier you are. And it doesn't matter whether you're rich or poor. And to be honest, the potential benefits for residents of Newham, because health is relatively poor, we have a shorter life expectancy here, then the benefits will be greater. OK, I accept the general thrust of the point. However, what I'm talking about is the transition from where we are into the future. Different classes of people and demographics move at different rates. What I'm not sure of is, as Newham, taking into consideration the different demographic and the transition. I'm going to bring in supplementary counsel from Ali. Then I'm going to bring in John. Then I've got Nate. Then I've got Santi. Then I've got Simon. A short cut question, supplementary? My one is around the whole this thing about active travel and encouraging people to be on the bike. But I think also we should also take in consideration. And I think it'll go back on the other conversation is the rise of hate crime is a lot, has increased. So for someone like me, there are a lot of people who look like me in Newham. A safe mode of travel is by traveling. I've been attacked on the bus. I've been attacked on the train, on the street, on the bike. So what you're saying is we're not dealing with hate crime on safeguarding, on our safety issue, but we're also taking the only mode of traveling safe. We're taking that away. We're not taking in consideration of disability. I mean, disabled people cannot go on bike. Not all disability can. So I think this active travel in theory is good, but it doesn't apply to all of us. So I think that should be taken in consideration as well. Safety element and health as well. Thelma? Oh, I wanted to ask about cycling, learning from a sidewalk. So on page 21, we talk about air quality vaccines. And we talk about like, you know, you're connected increased. But I wanted to ask if you're connected to different platforms. And we talk about some amazing new cycling routes that you have. I wanted to ask how public science and that so that people actually start to use it. And then my last question was on targeting intervention. Some pages and pages talking about the issue, the problem that people, there are some groups that are especially effective when it comes to air quality. However, when you talk about the targeting intervention, you're only going to talk about going to the GP and talking about supporting those first who are having sufferings. And that is really important. That is the right thing to do. But more than that. The question is? Yeah. All the stuff you said about, there's a lot of this pushing it, affecting the advantage. Is that your point about how you're going to factor those people? And John, you wanted to come back in earlier. So if you want to take those questions, you're right. Yeah, a couple of points. What Nick said about the benefits of active travel, is of course right. We're particularly concerned about a lot of very short distance travel, where people have actually, you know, by the time you've gone to your car, driven to the destination, found a parking spot. You know, there are quite a lot of people who take as long to get somewhere that's 15 minute walk away. And this is one of the things where we can make again with little inconvenience. So I think to raise awareness of the need for short distance travel, I recognise that many people do feel the need for a car. And I take on board a Councillor Kamali's point. This is an issue of society that needs dealing with, obviously. But there are a lot of occasions where I think we need to help people to reflect on, do they need a car for this particular journey? In some cases, do they need a car at all? We can make gains in that respect. The other point I wanted to make was really a question, which you posed yourself, Chair, about the relationship between modal shift and class. Now, I'm not denying the existence of class, it's reality, but it's a question of definition. And so it is a very problematic question, I would suggest. Perhaps an interesting one to explain. And I'm going to bring in Shantu, Councillor Verdon. For me, Simon, then my hand was off the spot. Okay. Hold on. You said your question had not been answered. Which one had not been answered? Yeah, the cycling aspect you're talking about, yeah. I mean, we appreciate and we mentioned it in the quality action plan, and certainly since I've been here a number of years, the interconnectivity around Newham is very difficult. And there's a lot of arterial roads that people have safety concerns about getting on their bikes. That is something that needs challenging and has been looked at. Again, it's working with this EST team about how that can be improved, where the cycle routes may be better. Other aspects of active travel we're looking at is just considering whether we're not just talking about improving quality, also talking about exposure to air quality with residents as well. So one of the bits of work we've been doing over the last year is doing sort of route maps to schools. So you look at alternative routes where you're not walking along a major road or something that reduces your exposure, certainly for children, that's beneficial, has health benefits. And also doing sort of reintroducing Clean Air Day, sort of nature walks and things like that, and how you can improve your health by going to green spaces, where all this interconnects and making it a fun sort of package that they can do during these routes. And the communication is about disadvantage. We have a number of messaging alert systems, one called Airtex, one called AirAware. And they are things that you sign up, you pay membership for them. And we've actually developed the AirAware with a number of neighboring boroughs. And they are something you sign up for, you get message alerts. Certainly with AirTex, you get message alerts where the air quality is bad. So if you're an asthma sufferer or have any other underlying issues, you can then decide, obviously, whether to go out or, again, you find an alternative route or you change the time of day that you go out when the air quality is improved. Again, it's similar to AirAware. Hold on. Those who are suffering, which is important, but I was just talking about the border. Okay. Now, I mean, you don't want to go next to the Ashanti. Simon. Give me the look. Simon. Right. Thank you, Chair. I've got loads of things I'm going to say. Just your first question. Questions and points. Yeah. Thank you. Firstly, digressing from what the gentleman said up there. He's up there. He's up there to vote from there, isn't he? He mentions life expectancy. Almost suggesting it's pollution. Yes, that does have an effect. But the main reason poor boas have a low life expectancy, because there's an awful lot of trafficking involved by the work of Tencent and Chelsea, one of the wealthiest boas, always have the longest life expectancy. Got loads of traffic. And off of this, dying. That does it. And lack of money that causes low life expectancy, not traffic, as proved in the London, various royal boas. Comment more made. The figures, you know, maybe nicely put together. It's called, your mind's got metrics. It's saying 42% of vehicle with this power only has full population with 42% of us having vehicles. I believe it's at least 48%. Other newer stuff for every reason suggests that. So I'd love to know where that figure comes from. Does that include people that earn a living with a vehicle, that are leasing a vehicle, rent a vehicle, minicab? And again, in a poor power, where the wages are low, an awful lot of people do that for a living. We still have data source. Can I just point out, the report did say to take lightly the data that is in chapter two here, because one of the reasons, another reason we haven't quite got to where we want to is, if you look, this is LAEI data from 2019. Some of this data, we've been told, there will be something coming out in March. This is a JLA, but these figures may well then change. They seem to be from commercial levels created by vehicles, and the figures aren't correct. You're suggesting things that aren't actually true? We will, before we go out to any consultation, we will update all these figures. This is just the best information we had at this time, and I'm not comfortable going out with the same information. I'll let you go one question. We were the sixth, or one of the highest public transport moment share within London at 41% back in 2019. Where are we with that today? Also, no, back in 2019, Newham's cycling was around 2% to 3%. Has that improved? I would have to look at the data, whether it's in here right now. The final question. Where are you getting the figures for pollution levels from? Are they our pollution things we put out, or City of London's? Because I think we seem to have them all over the place, where our other boroughs like Bowonit do use very limited. Well, yeah, it's because of the makeup of the borough. The data we're using, chapter two here, is called LAEI data, which is local atmospheric emissions inventory. It's a GLA project that goes into all these different junctions within. It's an extensive piece of work. It goes through all the junctions, models the air quality data, and hence you get the maps that you see in chapter two. This is separate to the modeling, the monitoring that we do. We have, as you say, on our website, we have, and if you look in the ASR, which I think was linked. Are we saying before the consultation closes on the report's final lines, does Councillor Rush's point, will the data be the most accurate we've got? We're told, although it won't be as recent as we'd like, but it's going to be 2022 data, but it will be different from what is in the data currently. Happy to add that data outside when it comes in. Yeah, so from page number 16, I can see there are many plans you have to improve the air quality. In different areas, I can see the reasons behind for the poor air quality, but I haven't seen many actions there. Like I haven't seen any suggestions, any suggestion not to use plastic bag or plastic bottle or just to, or for planting more just to improve, minimize the carbon dioxide and to minimize the nitrogen dioxide. I haven't found this kind of guideline. I found the source for pausing, but I would like to request you to encourage resident instead of banning at the moment, it would be difficult for our poor resident, banning plastic bag also. Encouraging using plastic bag, sorry, the cotton bag to use sustainable bottle. I'll just mark this is an air quality action plan. What you're talking about there is CO2 and plastic. That would be more climate change sustainability. Damping on street also damaging air quality. Find people dumping on our top. We're dealing here because this document is, we declared an air quality management air back in 2019 before NO2 and particulates is what this. Okay, hold on, hold on. Actually, you made the point well, but obviously that's a wider sort of carbon reduction strategy, which I think goes across the environment. This is air quality thing. Point well made, but this is a niche. This is one for techies, isn't it? This is about air quality. I'm not calling you a techie, Mark, but okay. Thanks. Yeah, just back to LTNs. I agree with a lot of what other members said about it being important that people who need to use a car can still use a car and that there are not disproportionate impacts on those people, but LTNs take unnecessary journeys off the road and that helps those people. I think that's the bit of people missing that conversation. It also makes roads safer. In that spirit, officers will be aware of the incident, horrible incident on Balmoral Road last week and the incident on Stratford High Street last month. Both of these will be making people more fearful of active travel and particularly the one on Balmoral Road is supposed to be within an LTN and it isn't right now. When are we going ahead with the Woodgrange and Claypool LTN? Is that no more a question for transport, Colin? It would be. I mean, we do all the background monitoring for that, so we would set up or identify where the monitors will be set up in order to provide the before and after. So we get told where the LTNs are going and a colleague of mine would say, right, this is where you want the monitoring. In terms of, I can find that information out for you. That would be helpful to you, Aaron. Aaron, we'll get Aaron as a screen officer to write to the environment people and ask that specific question. I know we are introducing, there'll be about 49 by the end of this year LTNs in place. Yeah, okay, I've got it as a recommendation, okay. And then on the, just because this refers to the draft, the 2025 local plan, which obviously hasn't been approved by council yet, when is that coming to council? Do you know? Yeah, it should be coming in June or July. Okay, and now I've got on the second round, yeah, and I've got, I've got Sabia. My hand, please. I thought you would give that a hand. All right, so okay, I've got Thelma, I've got Femi, I've got Shantu, and I'm, right. I came first. God, right, let's be very quick. No speeches, no rants. Right, questions? Page 29 first of all, you talk about how it's really done. One question. Okay, you talk about how it's really down to our record to like change the paper when it's the previous issue. However, on page 49, we can see a graph here and it looks so much that it really is construction that is the problem, see it where it's like, there's not really much happening domestically. So my question is, with lots and lots of regents going around across the borough, what are we doing to ensure that our air quality... Brilliant, brief answer, one question. Well, in terms of construction specifically. Yeah. They've answered the question. Construction is, yeah, obviously we're a fast-growing borough, so that's understandable, I think, and I think we do comparators against other local authorities in there, because we're facing a switch of speed in terms of development. The dust and everything coming from that is shown to be greater. Right. But we do have the construction practice that we're introducing, which will set out how they need to monitor air quality. These are modeled figures against the LAI. In reality, we have the controls over there that maybe aren't considered in this plan. So as I say, they do have monitoring on sites. For instance, we've had the Silvertown Tunnel site. We've had very little issues there. They're monitoring all around, so the impact maybe isn't as great as you would potentially model it. Great. So I'm going to go for Nate Sabia. I'm going to go this way, and then Jemima. Quickly, Sabia. Oh, I'm just going to go back on the air quality stuff. We're surrounded by A13, A12, A406. It feels like a certain group of people are being targeted. What are we doing to monitor air quality, the impact that those roads have? There's very little we can do, unfortunately, because they're TfL roads. So we monitor, but we don't have any powers. The individual use of individual cars is not a local government issue. It's a central government issue. So there's very little we can do about those roads, because also the way they're run, they're privately run, and they get more money for the amount of air causing. Thanks, Chair. In page 57, there is a lot of lessons from 2019. So my question is, what are we looking to improve on the lessons from 2019? Bear with me. Don't have the minutes. Page 57? I've got it. It's page 27 of the AQAP. Yes, so what we've looked at here is obviously, because obviously we have resource issues as well, costs and everything as well, is how we can make a great impact. And like you said, we are looking at bringing, you know, just as a transition plan does, and just as the build a fair and new corporate plan does, we're trying to bring residents with us, raising awareness of the residents, what they can do, not just as a say to improve air quality, but to decrease the exposure to the concentrations that are around you. So it's bringing that with us, what they can do in order to improve their exposure to it. We talked about the bicycles and the safety concerns that we have, and it's working with EST Environment and Sustainable Transport to deliver on that construction site. You know, we're on that with the new local plan as well. We'll be introducing an air quality supplemental plan guidance. We'll have a code of construction practice. Before I move, a brief supplementary, go on. Yeah, how are you communicating to residents? Yeah, that's my question. All that you're doing, how are you communicating to residents? Well, we recognise where the previous plan could have been stronger was greater engagement and involvement of residents. And I think the new plan is a step up on that, because we've recognised the need to get not only people better informed, but also to participate in projects and to mobilise them to see the need that air quality is due to many things, but people can, to an extent, help and control it themselves. Can I just say that many people don't go to those participatory events in libraries. A lot of people are external participants in what they do at the Council. In a future communication strategy, can we focus on those people who don't go to any library events? And they are the greater majority of people, I think. And back to Jemima's point, lots of people don't go to those events, but they are affected by what the Council does. Can I just ask you to take back, in your communication strategy, focus on the silent participants, if you can call that. I mean, say a concept. Good point, Chair. But I think we have considered that, because it's not just face to face. That is not sufficient. I think that's, if you look at what's happening with all this charging, not nonsense, but not nonsense, if you don't involve the quiet majority, people will fight back, and they just won't have it. And at the moment, I don't think we've gone to the people who we never see at those 6.30 events on a Tuesday in a library. Just a comment I'll just take back there. Fair point. I was going to carry on. Go on then, John. I don't want to stop you in your flow. Yeah, because I think the next five-year plan is a step up, because we're also considering the fact of deprivation more than we did before. And this is part of the engagement. We're recognising that the inequality of air quality for health, coming back to the point you made about class, this is being taken into account more. And that's why, you know, it's all part of the just transition. We've got to make things better for the people that are suffering worse from pollution, very often the ones who are the least responsible. So this is a factor in the new plan. And we're also considering, really, the factors of air pollution in a holistic way, that it's all part of the local economy. Thank you, John. Femi, be brief. I mean, you asked that question. Okay, further down that line. Okay. You got a question about the, I mean, in page 444, you mentioned something about 813, 812, 8406. And it come down and said that Trafford Town or Trafford Town, Canning Town, East Town, Forest Gate, because of the traffic flow there, that pollution has increased. Now, question is, with the statistic that Nick has just explained to us, how do you come about that the pollution has reduced when you block other roads that link these people? Because you can't stop the traffic. You have the traffic flowing more because people don't find a way out. Then there's concentration of traffic in a particular area. So it's increased the pollution. I don't know how, because I'm struggling to understand your statistics. I don't think it's add up. There is improvement in the LTNs. Yeah. And like I say, we haven't done that. We haven't mentioned anything specific about Newham and the peripheral roads, but evidence elsewhere suggests that there is no change in air quality levels. That might be that people find alternative routes or change modes of transport. That's what the evidence suggests, is that there is no... The answer, just the air quality monitor, just measures what the particulate is. An assumption is not fact, is it? What is that? There has been tests done in other locations, not necessarily in Newham, that shows that there is no deterioration in air quality in the peripheral. Hi. And as you know, we live in a working class borough, where most of the people are using the car for their living. We need to be realistic, encouraging people to buy electric car. But the installment plan of the electric car is quite higher. What's the question? So how can you improve the air quality? How can you encourage people if you don't decrease the installment plan of the electric car? Hold on, can I just... I think their action plan is designed to do that. Yeah, but action plan is there, but the installment plan is higher. Yeah, but the difference, but you talk about an installment plan for an EV car, which is down to the individual, but correct me if I'm wrong here, but the action plan we've got is something designed to take into consideration all the strategic factors to help the borough move from where we are into the future, right? Yeah, we're looking at it holistically. So like you say, what we're losing sight of maybe is that Stratford and those areas now are some of the most connected areas of London with public transport. We should be promoting them, but I get your point as well, that maybe some people don't feel safe in a bit, and that's not maybe something we've considered in this, but maybe a broader piece of work with another team. Mark Simon? And I'm going to bring in Nate. Thank you. He's talking, mate. Thank you, chair. I don't know why we're calling it quite agile travel. Let's go for that. E-bicycles. I'm not going to use A-scope, because they're illegal. Yeah, A-scope it is. A-scope about bicycles. I'm sorry, yourself, Nate. I apologize. Yes, good thing, but a couple of things nobody's doing, and we should all be pushing as a council that wants to do these sorts of things. We should be promoting safety in E-bicycles and, again, with E-cars. Both of them have those things called lithium batteries in it. Lithium batteries, these things are put together, are out on the market, sold, but there's no safety concerns. They're not checks, but that's not an air quality thing. Yeah, I mean, we're aware that they're kind of using them. That's more of an environment question. Remember, we focus on air quality. I'm going to go for Nate, then Phil. Thank you, two concerns. The first is on the EV car charger rollout. It's really important that we start with areas that serve. I think the Ellington Park might be the only ward in the whole borough that has zero, looking at this map, so it'd be really great if we get a few council electric. We have some council car parking spots, so it's very possible to do it. Looking at this map, it looks like there's zero in the Ellington Park. Second concern is on the greening the council's fleet, and I think that specifically the concerns about the dust carts and so on, that the infrastructure for charging those. The thing says that... Question Nate. I'm getting to it. Monetary pressures have made the subject increasingly difficult to realize. Is this the council signaling that it's not going to be able to reach this goal of having a green fleet by 2030 and what? Okay, if this is the signal that there's a problem, what are we doing to try to address that so that we do have a green fleet? John's got an answer. It does need very expensive infrastructure at the council's depot at Folkestone Road, and at the moment we can't guarantee that that funding will be found. We're looking for it, but it depends on the money coming in to be able to pay for it, which we can't guarantee at the moment. Get that funding in order to reach the 2030 goal? Yeah, we will do, yeah. How soon do we need to get that funding to have time to reach? I don't know that. I know that there's sort of some figures we're talking about, but I don't know how soon we would need them. Maybe we could get that in writing because I need to know as a councillor when we're getting towards the point of like, oh, it's just not going to be achievable then. Okay, I've got it down. I've got it down. The recommendation's good. Last two, I've got the former flight, then I've got Serbia. Small ones, please. Not speeches. What's the approach of the former emissions network and the air? I could find out. I don't have that figure at the hand. Right, couldn't have that done. Sabia? I don't know if it's for now or later on, but I think we need some kind of assurance because as we know, the biggest contributor towards pollutions are the A roads I've mentioned, which people use as newcomers pass by to get to wherever they want. So what is a council going to do to actually deal with the real issue that is contributed towards the air pollution is those A roads, then just focus on little roads. So if we could come back with a proper solution in terms of A406, A12, A11, all the roads that actually impact residents more than anything else. Like I say, I mean, within the key line of inquiry, we do say that it is incredibly difficult and impossible for the council to do anything on those roads because of the way they're built and the structures they have. They can't do anything. They have to run. Okay. The car isn't a local council issue. It's a central government issue. So we are hamstrung in what we can actually do on those roads. We can maybe do something along the peripheral of them. We won't be able to reduce the amount of pollution from anything without any. Second, on your action plan, can we have some hard metrics? Some hard, smart metrics, please. I would like to know when we reach success. Yeah. At the moment, reading them, there's lots of intent. We have issues. Lots of maybes. But don't tell me, you know, on, you know, whatever, the six points there. This is what success looks like. I mean, we've got a KPI document there, which we've done separately because we see that's under our control. Obviously, we've found with the previous action plan, these can change over time. Thank you. But a KPI measures the process along the way. What I'm talking about, the outcome, the output. I'll get them wrong there. It's too late. What's the five, what's the outcome? One's process, one's argument. The outcome, isn't it? Outcome, right. What is the outcome at the end? You've got six colorful things at the end. But I'm not clear on what the outcome is. And just to be helpful, I know we've had many helpful conversations. It'd be helpful, the reason why I say that, because it'd be useful to tell the resident when we get there how successful we are, rather than telling them it's a journey, it's a journey, it's a journey, right? The second... The idea of the action plan is to... Again, because it's a statutory document, and we've had the air quality management, the idea of this document is to reduce the pollution levels below the national air quality objectives. That therefore means we don't need an air quality management area. However, that doesn't mean we're going to stop doing it, because we want constant improvement. It just is no end game, except we're never going to get concentrations. On PM 2.5, that's the one we need to get to the same level as the mayor of London's, right? But in the document, you don't explicitly say what the mayor of London's target is. And you don't say where we are now. John? I think it is mentioned in the document. It will reach the World Organization's objective by 2030. I think that's what mayor of London... But what is that then? So table one has the legislative context, so it's 10 milligrams per meter. And thank you for that. And also the other one is the hardy perennial is the Silvertown Tunnel. And that goes back to the question Councillor Higgins raised. Silvertown Tunnel is going to have a detrimental effect on our air quality, especially around Canning Town. And it goes back to the point which Councillor Higgins raised with you, John. We're supposed to be a campaigning council. When last have we written a letter to Sadiq saying Silvertown Tunnel is detrimental to our air quality, and this is what we want. Can you recollect that letter? Maybe 2023, it was during construction. That's four years ago. DCO battle then I think. Because before the DCO battle, then we were moving on to campaigning for better monitoring and everything. Right, I keep seeing the comms from Sadiq Khan letting me know when the Silvertown Tunnel was open. Yeah. With my new pattern, that tells me my air quality is going up. I've not seen from the council any communication from the council putting Newham's view forward. John. Well, the main action that's been going on is with the Silvertown Tunnel implementation group. And we've got three members on that, including Mark. And they are lobbying along with most of the other local involved for various issues, which we can say what they are about. All right, can I ask... The first year or two? Okay. Nick is on the... Sorry, Mark is on the... He can tell you what they've been doing. It's great. That is where the lobbying has been helping, but it's not in the public view. Absolutely right. What I'm asking... Nick. Nick is going to come in... If it's the air quality bit, yeah. Yeah. I was involved in the Silvertown Tunnel when I worked across the water in Greenwich. Yeah. Look, VETGA was part of the DCO process of the public inquiry. The things that I will be interested in overall is there was a number of assertions made during the public inquiry process, different consent order process, about traffic through the tunnel and the rest of it. One of the things I'm going to be pressing very hard for is finding out whether the assertions made at the public inquiry have actually been delivered when the tunnel opens. For instance, I'll give a pure, for instance, example is that the Silvertown way was not identified as a priority for transport for London to put an air quality monitoring station on. We, Newham, thought this was a bad idea. We thought that there was every chance that traffic would go up the Silvertown Tunnel and arrange for a monitor to be placed up the Silvertown way and arrange for a monitor to be placed. We'll be having a look at the monitors which are close to the tunnel portal and seeing if there are any changes over the first year of operation. I'm also looking, we'll be also looking at whether promises made regarding no increase in private motor vehicles crossing will also be done. What's actually done with the information, I'm afraid I'm going to have to leave to the council more widely. Right, Nick, that is a useful interjection. So what I'm going to ask the cabinet member is to really, John, one of my recommendations where is, it would be useful if we have an external communications campaign on Silvertown Tunnel. So what are we doing? What are we expecting? What are we expecting in the year? Because at the moment we've got no, there is no comms whatsoever on Silvertown Tunnel, right? All I see is what's it going to cost me and it's great. That's the concept TFL. Whereas for my Newham hat on, it's not great for our air quality. So what I want to see the chair of this committee is the council put in the Newham side of the debate. It's potentially not great. Nick came up with some really good things, checking whether the assertions at the beginning of the inquiry are going to come through. There's always been the issue of the air quality monitoring around the tunnel. I just want this committee to see, but we are putting Newham's resident side forward in our communications. All right. We can't change it. We can't block it up. We can't do it. I'm not going to lie on the road and stop cars, but please tell me what we're doing to mitigate its impact, especially when one of the air quality focus areas is probably going to get, they're probably going to get work due to that tunnel. Okay. Now what I want to do. I do have historical comments from the mayor to Sadiq, if that's interesting. We have a number of demands that have been made at the civil dental information, sorry, implementation group. If they're not met, then it's the time, or if they're not going to be met, then it's the time for a public campaign. Right. Will be necessary. But if you tell us what you're doing on our behalf, you've got the committee, but no one knows what's going on there. So if it's done in the result, I can say one or two things. But what I think, John, we need is a bit more of an external communications campaign, but you're sitting in these meetings acting on our behalf, which is fantastic. That's what you're doing, right? Get credit for it because it's what you're going to do for us in the future. Right. I want to draw to conclusion, right? We're running time. No, no, no, no. You've had five goes at the cherry, more than anyone else. Right. So in terms of recommendations, what I've got down, I'm looking for not of agreement or yay to improve. Number one, a joint commission helps scrutiny at some point on air quality, number one. Number two, we need a paper on the strategy for vehicle charging, like in costs and vehicle charging in terms of how it's going to work. Can we expect to say that that includes COVID because I think when it gets through the system, people will forget that that's our policy, so we say that in the report. All right. John, with the reporting draft, do you want us to hold off going to consultation? No, I think it's good to go. I think if you've had a good discussion tonight, I think there's been lots of food for thought, you might want to take some of those, improve the document. The major one I got was Simon's one, Councillor Rush's, about the data all needs to be updated. I think that from us, the Recruitment Commission, I see no problem in that going forward to consultation generally. Yeah, agreed? Yep. Yeah. Yeah. Number two, we need a strategy from the environment people on the vehicle charging regime and on including how we're going to support vehicle charging infrastructure. Take charging and charging. I think there's a cabinet report going next month, maybe. Okay. April. Aaron, can you link up with that? That might be it, that one. We need a campaign. I've got something about road user charging over bridges. Road user charging instead of bridge tolls. Right. We should be campaigning for... Okay. I think that's something we'll look at. Yeah. I think that's a recommendation back to John as the political lead on this, about please provide some information or an update on the next stage on that. That will go to you. We need to think about it. The next one is one for our environment colleagues. With the potential strategy of 80% LTA's across Newham, what's the impact assessment for Newham? Because I am using Councilor O'Dowd's words, I'm skeptical whether the research we are using as a local authority has gathered all the impact for that. Because 80% LTN's across Newham, that's a major shift. I'm not sure we've captured all the negatives as well as the positives. Yeah, I was going to say, I mean, they do come in as a... They're not permanent. They don't come in as permanent. So I think all that is... You mean they can go away? Well... Tell me an LTN which has been taken away. Well, I'm just saying... Exactly. Raise my point. On that one, is there any way or try... Because obviously, Newham as a borough, every part of the borough is different and the needs are different. So if there is a consultation and if there is a majority resident against it, are we saying that LTN is going to be taken over? Because obviously, some places there is a need for LTN and there's some places residents don't need an LTN. So I don't know how we're going to do this. Let's take... We've asked for the impact assessment of... Well, the strategic intent is 80% of the borough having LTN on its roads. We've asked for an impact assessment of that, right? I can see what you're saying. Let's finesse that when it eventually goes through to the Environment colleagues. But I capture the point. The next... We get the request for the woodgrains during case... Let me get there. Sorry, I just... Let me get there. See your finger. It says Balmoral Road LTN implementation date. Right? Got that. The next one is really... John, you'll get this to you and to Mark. Can we have a comprehensive communication strategy on air quality, please, which is external to the resident to explain the benefits from them? Obviously, it makes it easy for you. Once you're doing the consultation, you've got a tool which you can communicate with. But I do think there's some good work being done. I think we're hiding it under our bushel. Do you want to know what that bushel is? I don't know. It's a hat. Hat. Hat. Hat. Look, it's blackface. It would be sent to all these action points, yeah? Yeah, yeah, yeah. Talking about the Woodgrange and Capelet LTN, sorry. Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah. The next one here is the Folkestone Road Depot. So when do we need to get the funding for the infrastructure hit the 2030 date? That's clear. Clear. The next one, John, is I think it will come back to you. On Silvertun Tunnel, can we have an external communications campaign, which is letting us know what you're doing at the moment? I didn't know about this reference group. Not what I did. Residents may need to know that. And for what next? So you mentioned the issue, the Hardy Perennial, lots of movement on my leg. Can we just go about the air quality monitor mapping, right? But you'll get these anyway. Right. Committee, are we happy with that? Yes, just to be absolutely clear, we're not withstanding the requests, just in terms of the underlying resolution today. We're noting the... With regard to conservation. Yeah. And obviously we can't wish the department on the data and building with masks. Okay. Got questions for colleagues. Have you enjoyed your time at Scrutney today? Yes. You liar, John. Can I say thank you again? Thank you for taking time out from your families. And it's late, it's 9 o'clock. Thank you for your questions. Thank you. And we'll let the committee go. Before we go, I need to... Things... Are you going to close the live? No, no, no, no, no. Also, just to say, I moved the report. Another report and it's good resolution. Thank you very much. I'm going to item 7. Next item is the work plan. In addition to April's item of sustainable transport and major projects and highways management, which we'll ask some of the questions here tonight, will ensure that the fixed estate charge is incorporated into the scrutiny work plan for 2024-25. For council motion on the fixed state charge, we will explore how best to gather relevant information, including engagement with key stakeholders, such as the LGA, LGA, LLDC, with the aim of holding a full public meeting on the fixed estate charge in the next municipal year. We are currently developing a structured approach to gathering evidence, which includes formal report requests to council departments, the GLA and the committee. Additionally, we'll be exploring ways to capture the views of affected groups, such as businesses and residents. We will continue to refine this approach in collaboration with members ahead of our next meeting to ensure a full and clear and agreed framework for a scrutiny response to the full council motion. Okay. Now on that, I've done some draft stuff, which I've sent to Aaron. We'll send that out shortly. But when we send it out to you, the key thing we've got to do is five... Initially, it's who, when, what, how, what, right? We've got to find out what it is. We get that, we build along the programme. But I will say, whoever is in the chair next year has got to incorporate this into other things. And I would say, not to tie the hands of a future chair, I suspect there are other things we might need to do alongside the fixed estate charge that's got to be worked in. Also, I would say, looking at it, it's about taxation and all sorts of things and whether it goes for another body to be funding. We've got to scope out what are our areas of concern, our areas of impact on those same areas for the LGA and for the LLDC. I'm going to shut up. Any comments? Just on the fixed estate charge inquiry, the Shobham Manor Residence Association have done a lot of work on this. Obviously, they can attend as members of the public, but I really think it's worth us inviting them to be a witness. The amount of work that they've done on this, they're at the stage of talking to lawyers, they've done a lot and it's really worth including them. On the work plan generally, after my question about the local plan, we last saw it before it went to public consultation or as part of public consultation, it will have changed in response to that. I think the mayor of London had some objections around the social housing policy. I think we need to look at it again before, either us or overview need to look at it again before it goes to council. Would it be helpful if we ask a note from officers on the challenges from the mayor of London, rather than revisiting the whole thing? And any other significant changes that have happened. So can we have some- Maybe it should go to regeneration because obviously that's changed to another committee now. Okay, so it should come back to this committee because it was asked. So can we get a note from colleagues in planning on the mayor of London's changes and any major changes from the local plan, especially around the social housing criteria? And can our report on it go to full council with the local plan? Yeah. It goes to the full council. Right. Okay. That's good. What I will say, but when we send out the fix-a-state-charge work a plea, let's not expand it. Let me explain what I mean. We need to be quite concise to get the nuts of it first and then we can expand at a future point. Right. So can we be mindful of that? And also the thing I'm looking at is about taxation. We might not have the powers to recommend taxation, which is a treasury thing. And also if we're asking for someone else to pay it, it might be out of our peer view. And the reason why I say this, there was a recent scrutiny recommendation about hotel tax. I saw an answer somewhere from the treasury. It was relating to the farmers and the HHA. They kicked it back and said, the treasury decides on taxation and nobody else. So I've just put that there for consideration, not for decision-making. So that's the work program. Two items. The date of the next meeting is the 15th of April, which is more sustainable. And Shanta, some of the questions you asked, Shanta, I think the next meeting might be a better place to ask some of the points you raised. Top of my head, I think that might be a place. The next meeting is on the 15th of April. Before we close to any other business, will everybody happy with what we've discussed today? Did everyone get a bite of the cherry? I think there are some really good recommendations coming forward, quite a lot, actually. And thank you, I've enjoyed it, especially on the data Simon, on the Sabia about hate crime, and also about the system. I got something out of the meeting, so hopefully we all did. And you got five questions, Velma. So please don't have a go at me. You did better than Nate today, right? Take that as a winner. Is that the benchmark? Nate, you better watch out, Nate. You got competition, right? Yeah, yeah, yeah. You better change your name. Everyone happy with the meeting? Yes. Great. I really enjoyed it. Thank you. And are we OK to close the meeting? OK, just another time. Another time.