Agenda and minutes

Call-In, Overview & Scrutiny Committee - Wednesday, 21st July, 2021 7.00 pm

Venue: Council Chamber, Civic Centre, Silver Street, Enfield, EN1 3XA. View directions

Contact: Email: 

No. Item




Due to the absence of the current Chair and Vice-Chair at this meeting, a Chair was elected for this meeting only. Councillor Demirel was elected as Chair for the meeting.


Apologies had been received from Councillors Susan Erbil, Elif Erbil (Substitute Cllr Ayten Guzel) and Margaret Greer (Substitute Cllr Chinelo Anyanwu).


Councillor Demirel welcomed everyone to the meeting and explained the process to be followed in hearing the Call-ins.






Members of the Council are invited to identify any disclosable pecuniary, other pecuniary or non-pecuniary interests relevant to the items on the agenda.



There were no declarations of interest.



To review the Cabinet decision taken on 18 June as a result of the matter having been Called-in.


Additional documents:


Cllr Edward Smith was welcomed as the Call-In lead and highlighted the following:


·         The reasons for the Call-in are in the agenda papers.

·         As background, attempts have been made over the years to engage with tenants and leaseholders in housing matters with a view to improve service matters on their estates with the current arrangements focusing on Customer Voice (CV).

·         Members of the Customer Voice used to attend the Housing Board which was a formally constituted body with membership also including the Cabinet Member for Social Housing, the Opposition Lead for Housing and senior council staff.

·         The strategy will go out for a 6-week consultation period. Some of the reasons made in the Cal in have been taken into account in the responses but not all of them.

·         The response to reason 1 sets up the general principles emerging from the initial discussions. However, he felt that they do not constitute a full analysis of issues facing resident engagement in Enfield nor do they provide details on how matters might be better arranged in future.

·         The response to reason 2 on the Housing Advisory Group (HAG) refers to the fact that the meetings were always held in private. However, he felt that the meetings were effective and cross party and independent membership of the group has been changed without sufficient explanation in the report. Noted that the membership was open to review as part of the consultation process, wants to be reassured that the consultation will fully address this matter.

·         The proposed 11 new committees are unwieldy and unrealistic. The response does not address this issue just refers to the broad principles on resident engagement set out in the White Paper. The response does admit that the new structure might lack transparency and the means of holding politicians and officers to account.

·         More details proposals were required on reason 4 in the final consultation document to show reporting and lines of accountability.

·         Reason 5 the response does not address the concerns from the members of Customer Voice and felt that the new membership of HAG will not provide effective challenge to the council.

·         In summary reassurance was being sought that all the points raised will be taken on board and dealt with in the consultation document.


The Chair thanked Cllr Smith and asked the Cabinet Member for Social Housing Cllr Gina Needs and officers to respond.


·         The Cabinet Member provided reassurance that the resident voice will come forward. The points that have been raised will be in the consultation, this is part of the consultation stage which it is important to move to. It is really important to get to the consultation stage to get the views of the residents.

·         The change to the membership of the HAG happened prior to the strategy. The council is seeking a broader set of opinions. If residents feel that there are too many groups, then this will be taken on board. The views are needed from the consultation first, but she is happy  ...  view the full minutes text for item 3.



To review the Cabinet decision taken on 18 June as a result of the matter having been Called-in.



Additional documents:


Cllr Maria Alexandrou was welcomed as the Call-In lead and highlighted the following:


·         The many reasons for the Call In are detailed in the agenda papers.

·         Failure to consult residents, the perception survey which did not mention road closures had 263 responses and there was a petition of 377 people that was delivered in Parliament that wanted LTN’s. This contrasts to the 1600 signatures that opposed the Bowes LTN, plus the demonstrations and other petitions.

·         There was no prior debate or consultation that took place and this forced design was delivered to the detriment imposed upon residents’ lives.

·         The online consultation discriminated against certain groups. There had been a lack of community engagement on the scheme.

·         Nitrogen dioxide levels had increased by 20 per cent at Bowes Primary School in the 8 months since the implementation of the LTN.

·         Noted that the camera enforcement vehicles have now been switched to electric the cleaner air retentions have been usurped by the traffic fumes. No baseline measure on air quality were taken before the installation of the LTN so how can any meaningful comparisons be made. Traffic data will be put into a model to analyse the impact on air quality

·         Failure to address concerns over the impact on people with disabilities, their rights had not been considered and engagement with blue badge holders had been a “tick-box exercise”. A survey revealed more than three quarters of those with a disability thought the trial had had a negative impact on them. Multiple road closures act as a physical and psychological barrier between them and their families and carers.

·         LTNs had forced traffic into other roads such as the A406. LTN’s are designed to push traffic onto the main roads what about the residents that live on the main roads.

·         The proposal is to allow the LTN to continue to allow more representative data of normal conditions. However, NO2 has increased despite Covid restrictions.

·         In conclusion the drive to make the streets safer has created the opposite effect. The future of LTN’s are a political decision pointing that the outcome is a political commitment. The main beneficiaries of the LTN’s are all the residents of the borough in particular are children and young people. Yet the congestion is where children walk to school. LTN’s have increased traffic and there is no obvious uptake in walking or cycling. LTN’s have forced traffic into other roads and divided the community in order to create a few quiet roads in the entire borough.


The Chair thanked Cllr Alexandrou and asked the Deputy Leader Cllr Ian Barnes and officers to respond.



·         The Deputy Leader asked cabinet for the trial to be extended to allow more data to be collected about typical traffic patterns.

·         The traffic cams pollution data responses from TfL on buses on the North Circular in the interim report are all welcomed. This shows no issues on buses or on the North Circular. But this is heavily caveated due to the abnormal traffic patterns due  ...  view the full minutes text for item 4.



To review the Cabinet decision taken on 18 June as a result of the matter having been Called-in.



Additional documents:


Cllr Lindsay Rawlings was welcomed as the Call-In lead and presented reasons for issuing the Call-in.


·         The Call-in reasons and responses are detailed in the report.

·         Activity 1, paragraph 1 the emphasis in the report of most of the activities is on improvements to the cycling infrastructure with pedestrians second best.

·         Paragraph 2 if the intention is to increase cycle hubs at stations that the word existing should be removed.

·         Paragraph 4 believes that this should be a holistic framework not just about cycling and walking without including public transport. Not sure how many residents are aware of the number of bus routes that can be used. On a number of areas where there is poor connectivity a more joined up approach would allow more people to see where they can get to with public transport.

·         Activity 2 paragraph 1, anecdotally that the rise of illegal use of e-scooters, riding cycles on pavements and also through public open spaces does put people off walking around. Rather that look at pure statistics for accidents would rather see data collected on changing habits of pedestrians because of perceived problems on pavements. Even with the increase in safe segregated cycle routes in the borough there does not appear to be less people riding on the pavements.

·         Activity 3 thought needs to be given in how to engage with more people need to gain the views of a wider range of residents.

·         Activity 4 pleased that the activities are not ranked in order, but this should be made clearer in the report. A wide range of views are needed on this.

·         Activity 6 point 10 the response does not give reasons for providing so few references to public transport throughout the report. One of the main thrusts of healthy streets cannot assume that getting people cycling or walking will get them to leave their cars behind some journeys will need to be taken by public transport.

·         Point 41 whilst agreed that other improvements can relate to pedestrians they do not do so obviously. Others reading the report may miss these.

·         Point 55 there should be an indication of much or how little people need to change their mods of travel in order to make a difference such as leaving the car at home one day a week, etc. If residents could see how making a relatively small change could make a difference to climate change, they may be more inclined to do so.

·         To sum up not totally against the healthy streets initiative and am pleased that the emphasis has moved away from just cycling to include walking and public transport. This report needs to show residents that it is serious in its support for walking across the borough.


The Chair thanked Cllr Rawlings and asked the Deputy Leader Cllr Ian Barnes and officers to respond.


  • With regards to the point favouring cyclists over pedestrians throughout the report it talks about improving conditions for walking and cycling. The overall purpose of the report is  ...  view the full minutes text for item 5.



To note the dates of the next meetings as follows:


Business Meeting

Wednesday 2 September 2021


Provisional Call-in Meeting

Thursday 5 August 2021


The dates of meetings were noted, it was confirmed that the provisional Call in date of the 5 August 2021 is now a confirmed Call in date.