Issue - meetings

An issues paper prepared by the Opposition Group is attached for information. 

The Council rules relating to Opposition Business are also attached for information.

Councillor Laban introduced the issues paper, prepared by the Opposition Group.

1.            Issues highlighted by Councillor Laban were as follows: 

·         That Enfield had been slower to open up face to face services following the Coronavirus lockdown than other city centres and London boroughs. 

·         The Civic Centre has been closed since March and since July only 4 of the main libraries have been open for face to face enquiries. 

·         Works have been taking place in the reception area at the Civic Centre throughout and there is no clear signage to explain where to go to get help and support. 

·         This has had a detrimental effect on the local economy and retail outlets. 

·         If lockdown restrictions are to be re-imposed the Council needs to be more flexible and efficient at opening up. 

·         At the libraries that are open, residents have to book appointments weeks in advance to be able to browse the books, unlike in other places. 

·         The government lifted restrictions on opening of leisure centres on the 4 July 2020, but leisure centres were only opened during the week of the 17 August and some are still closed. 

·         The household waste and recycling centre at Barrowell Green is still only open via appointment.  This has led to an increase in flytipping. 

·         The Council could and should do more to open up for business. The closure of the Civic Centre building had made the Council look as if it had been closed.

·         A review should be carried out to find out why the response has been so slow and a plan of action produced to deal with any future lock downs.  The Council should be ready and agile to do more to open up services and support the local economy.

2.            Councillor Caliskan, the Leader of the Council, responded on behalf of the Majority Group highlighting:

·         She had been astonished at how disingenuous, ineffective and out of touch the Conservative group had shown themselves to be in bringing forward this topic for opposition priority business. 

·         If the Civic Centre had been fully open during this time when Covid 19 infections were increasing it would have been unwise and been in contradiction to Central Government advice, that people should work from home wherever possible. 

·         The administration had taken the decision to keep Council staff safe. 

·         Despite this approximately 150 members of staff were attending the Civic Centre to provide vital services every day.  During lockdown a supply centre had been set up to deliver food parcels where needed, the call centre has taken over 20,000 calls, £1,000m funds have been provided to support small businesses and local town centres.

·         The Council had introduced an appointment system for the recycling centre and this had also been done at the leisure centres to help manage visitor flow.  There has now been a significant reduction in no shows. 

·         Fusion is not run by the Council.  It was outsourced by a previous administration. The Council had not been prepared to subsidise this private organisation.  However, four leisure  ...  view the full minutes text for item 6

An issues paper prepared by the Opposition Group is attached for Council to consider. 

The Council rules relating to Opposition Business are also attached for information.

Councillor Smith introduced the issues paper, prepared by the Opposition Group.

1.            Issues highlighted by Councillor Smith were as follows: 

·         The Opposition Group were alarmed at the proposals for high rise, high density developments on sites in Enfield including at Cineworld and at Cockfosters Tube Station which they felt were out of keeping and would strain the amenities of these areas. 

·         Clarification of planning guidance on housing densities following the publication of the Mayor of London’s Local Plan is necessary to make clear to developers the Council’s position.

·         There is acknowledgement that there is a huge need for more affordable housing, but there is a debate about where this housing should be situated and whether is should be in tall buildings.   

·         It was felt to be inappropriate to build adjacent to the green belt or near the listed underground stations. There should be a presumption against tall building and changes to the skyline.

·         Good quality building that fits in with the area should be encouraged. 

·         Area Action Plans could highlight areas which might be appropriate for high rise buildings but these should be limited.

·         The Opposition were seeking reassurance that current guidance would not be jettisoned. 

2.            Councillor Caliskan, the Leader of the Council, responded on behalf of the Majority Group highlighting:

·         That the National Planning Policy Framework established a need for all local authorities to update their Local Plans.

·         When the Council’s 2010 Core Strategy was developed, population growth and the housing crisis was not on the planning agenda to the extent that it is now.

·         Previous Council housing targets were challenging, but moderate in comparison to today’s housing challenges.

·         Enfield’s current target was 798 new homes every year, but under the new London Plan it is set to be 1,900. The government’s assessment of need is higher at 3,500. Whatever the target, there is a need to increase the delivery of housing in the borough.  

·         The emerging Enfield Local Plan 2036 has put forward 7 options to meet the borough’s growth. These will include looking at the role that existing industrial land and retail parks will have to play.

·         Meeting a minimum target of 1,900 new homes a year, increasing industrial capacity and protecting and enhancing Enfield’s character and green belt means being realistic.

·         Intensification and co-locating residential development in industrial areas, as well as building on retail parks is important – and both these approaches are included in the Local Plan. The council is taking a brownfield, town centres first approach to accommodating growth. However, this will not be enough to meet the borough’s housing needs.

·         In that context the new Local Plan will provide updated policies regarding height and density to guide development in different places across Enfield. The approach to height will be dealt with on a case by case basis across the borough.

·         There will be sites in Enfield, particularly where we have transport hubs, where development could increase density and include excellently designed taller buildings.

·         The commitment to creating safe and strong communities  ...  view the full minutes text for item 7

An issues paper prepared by the Opposition Group is attached for Council to consider. 

The Council rules relating to Opposition Business are also attached for information.

Councillor Laban introduced the issues paper, prepared by the Opposition Group.

1.            Issues highlighted by Councillor Laban were as follows: 

·           Racing on the A10 had been causing distress for a long time despite efforts on all sides to improve the situation. 

·           The wards abutting the A10 and further afield were disturbed by the noise and affected by the increased emissions. 

·           It was a key issue for residents, raised on the doorstep and as shown by comments on social media forums and had also been discussed on BBC London. 

·           Transport for London were aware of the issue and questions had been asked of the Mayor of London. 

·           Cameras monitoring average speeds which could help solve the problem had been promised in 2015, but had not materialised.

·           Detective Superintendent Andy Cox and his police team had helped to alleviate the problem, but this was only a temporary solution. A permanent solution was needed.

·           In Hertfordshire, further up the A10, average speed cameras had been installed and this had reduced racing. 

·           Lives were being put in danger and quality of life disturbed. 

·           Councillor Laban asked Council to agree the recommendations in the report. 

2.            Councillor Caliskan, the Leader of the Council, responded on behalf of the Majority Group highlighting:

·         Welcoming of the opportunity to discuss this important issue, where safety was paramount. 

·         Before 2015 there had been 60 slight, 1 serious and no fatal accidents. Since, there had been 11 serious and 2 fatal accidents, a marked increase. Members were right to be concerned.

·         Acknowledgement that the current police operation, while welcome, was a temporary solution and that a permanent solution was needed.

·         The Government had overseen a cut of 30,000 police officers in London and a £6 million cut in police budgets. This was unsustainable. 

·         The problem with the Opposition recommendations was that they gave no suggestion as to how the cameras were to be funded.  The Government had decimated funding in London and cut the Transport for London operational grant, which now received £1 billion less every year. This meant that they were forced to ration resources and were reviewing the criteria for safety cameras. 

·         The Leader had written to the Mayor of London, Transport for London and to Heidi Alexander (Deputy Mayor of London) to raise the issue and had offered a contribution from the Council towards the cost of installing cameras.

·         She had also written to Chris Grayling, Secretary of State for Transport asking for additional funding, which he had refused to provide. 

·         She felt that it was misleading to state that all transport funding had been devolved, as any fines collected were returned to the treasury. She felt that this money should be spent on safety measures. 

·         The Leader invited them to write to the Secretary of State with her to ask him to invest income from fines in road safety measures.  This could save lives. 

3.            Other issues highlighted during the debate were as follows: 

a.            The need highlighted by the members of the Opposition Group:  ...  view the full minutes text for item 6