Agenda item

10.1    Urgent Questions (Part 4 - Paragraph 9.2.(b) of Constitution – Page 4-9)

 

With the permission of the Mayor, questions on urgent issues may be tabled with the proviso of a subsequent written response if the issue requires research or is considered by the Mayor to be minor.

 

Please note that the Mayor will decide whether a question is urgent or not.

 

The definition of an urgent question is “An issue which could not reasonably have been foreseen or anticipated prior to the deadline for the submission of questions and which needs to be considered before the next meeting of the Council.”

 

Submission of urgent questions to Council requires the Member when submitting the question to specify why the issue could not have been reasonably foreseen prior to the deadline and why it has to be considered before the next meeting.  A supplementary question is not permitted.

 

10.2    Councillors’ Questions (Part 4 – Paragraph 9.2(a) of Constitution – Page 4 - 8)

 

The list of thirty nine questions and their written responses have been attached to the agenda.

1.1    Urgent Questions

 

None received.

 

1.2    Questions by Councillors

 

NOTED

 

1.      The thirty nine questions on the Council’s agenda which had received a written reply from the relevant Cabinet Member.

 

2       The following supplementary questions and responses received for the questions indicated below:

 

Question 1 (UK Commissioners Office Code of Practice) from Councillor Lavender to Councillor Stafford, Cabinet Member for Finance and Property

 

What were the reasons for the delay in supplying a full unredacted copy of the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) Report (dated 25 July 2013) to the Opposition Group in relation to the investigation into the discovery of sensitive personal data at Southgate Town Hall?

 

Reply from Councillor Stafford

 

“The conclusions from the ICO investigation have been detailed within the written response provided on the agenda.  This included the fact that it was not possible for the Council, Independent Auditors or ICO to conclude exactly what happened and that the ICO had not felt it appropriate to take any formal regulatory action.”

 

Councillor Stafford advised that a supplementary written response would need to be provided in relation to the timing of the release of the full report to the Leader of the Opposition, which would be provided after the meeting.

 

Question 2 (Brimsdown Sports Ground) from Councillor Simon to Councillor Bond, Cabinet Member for Environment

 

Does Councillor Bond agree that (a) it is unacceptable for the Council to be left with the problem of addressing the mess resulting from the works affecting the sports field undertaken by the tenant without prior consent of the Council or Planning permission having been obtained; and (b) the work undertaken by officers to resolve the problems and address the significant impact on local residents so quickly should be commended.

 

Response from Councillor Bond

 

“Yes.  I would agree with all these statements.”

 

Question 3 (Staff sickness absence) from Councillor Neville to Councillor Stafford, Cabinet Member for Finance & Property

 

Does the Cabinet Member agree that the written response he has provided reveals a shocking state of affairs and can he provide me with details, in financial terms, about how much sickness absence has cost the Council in the years 2010/11, 2011/12, 2012/13?

 

Response from Councillor Stafford

 

“There is a need to recognise that the level of sickness absence across the Council has reduced over the last 3 years and the Council continues to work closely with the Trade Unions in managing sickness absence.”

 

Councillor Stafford advised that a supplementary written response would need to be provided after the meeting in relation to the additional information requested on costs.

 

Question 4 (Mini Holland Cycling Project) from Councillor Sitkin to Councillor Taylor, Leader of the Council

 

Can the Leader update Council on the outcome of the recent meeting with Andrew Gilligan, Cycling Commissioner at the Greater London Assembly? 

 

Response from Councillor Taylor

 

“The deadline for submission of bids has now been extended by an additional 2 week period.  I would like to thank Councillor Lavender for co-signing the bid and Councillors Laban and Bond for serving as part of the bid delegation when meeting Andrew Gilligan.

 

This bid represents a significant opportunity for the borough to attract additional funding worth between £25 – 30m with the potential to provide a wide range of benefits in terms of cycling facilities across the borough.  Whilst the bid has involved a technical process, the Council is also keen to use the opportunity to encourage more people to take up cycling by making it safer and easier in terms of the facilities available.

 

Andrew Gilligan was impressed with the cross party approach of Enfield’s bid, and I hope this support can be continued as it will to assist our chance of success.”

 

Question 5 (Employment of Agency Staff) from Councillor Neville to Councillor Stafford, Cabinet Member for Finance and Property. 

 

How much has the Council spent on the employment of agency staff (in terms of agency costs) from 2010/11 to date when compared to the costs incurred if they had been employed direct?

 

Response from Councillor Stafford

 

“The Council is committed to employing full time staff where possible.  The costs of agency staff have gone down year on year, with the increase identified in 2012/13 due to a cost coding re-designation in Environment.  This reduction had been achieved against significant progress having been made on the delivery of a number of key projects such as the Ladderswood, Meridian Water and Alma Estate developments.”

 

Councillor Stafford advised that a supplementary written response would need to be provided after the meeting in relation to the additional comparator information requested on the employment of agency staff.

 

Question 7 (Employment of Agency Staff) from Councillor Neville to Councillor Councillor Stafford, Cabinet Member for Finance and Property.

 

In the light of changes to the law on the employment rights and benefits of agency workers, what are the policy reasons for continuing to employ agency staff?

 

Response from Councillor Stafford

 

“Agency workers are used when flexibility is required.  However, the Council is committed to working with the trade unions to preserve full time jobs and create as few redundancies as possible.  With this in mind we will only engage agency workers where there is a short term or time limited need or there is no internal capacity within the Council.”

 

Question 8 (Council Tax Collection) from Councillor Lemonides to Councillor Stafford, Cabinet Member for Finance and Property

 

Can Councillor Stafford remind Council about the outcome of the prestigious Institute of Revenues, Rating and Valuation Award for which Enfield had been shortlisted.?

 

Response from Councillor Stafford

 

“I am happy to confirm that Enfield won the award with one of the best arrears collection rates in the country.”

 

Question 11 (London Borough of Barnet, High Court Judgement – Resident Parking Permit Charges) from Councillor Neville to Councillor Stafford, Cabinet Member for Finance and Property.

 

Whilst the subject of this question is also subject to a motion my original question asked if the Cabinet Member was aware of the High Court judgement relating to parking charges in Barnet.  The written response provided makes reference to the permitted use of any surplus.  What is clear from the judgement is that it is unlawful to increase parking charges in order to produce a higher surplus for use on other purposes including concessionary fares e.g. Freedom Pass.  Can Councillor Stafford confirm for what purpose the surplus generated as a result of the increase in parking charges in Enfield during 2009/10 and 2010/11 were intended?

 

Response from Councillor Stafford:

 

“The Council has not acted and will not do anything to act illegally and I will consider taking action if it is claimed that I have acted in any such a way.  This compares, however, to the previous publication of a Conservative local ward newsletter in Bush Hill Park stating that the Administration were planning to close libraries, which was also a lie as the Administration has actually opened and not closed libraries.”

 

Following this response, Councillor Hurer asked the Mayor to request that Councillor Stafford withdraw his remark about lying, on the basis that it contravened procedural rule 19.1 “no member shall impute unworthy motive to, or use offensive or unbecoming words about another Member”.  The Mayor asked Councillor Stafford if he would consider withdrawing this remark, which he refused to do.  As a result, the Mayor ruled that the meeting should proceed to the next question.

 

Question 13 (London Borough of Barnet, High Court Judgement – Resident Parking Permit Charges) Councillor Neville to Councillor Stafford, Cabinet Member for Finance & Property

 

Given that Councillor Stafford acknowledges the High Court judgement in relation to parking charges, can he explain why he made the statement to the Winchmore Hill Area Forum in December 2010 as detailed within the minute of that meeting and why section 7 of the report to Cabinet on 14 July 2010 approving the increase in parking charges within Enfield includes as one of the reasons for the recommendation the need to make a contribution to the increased costs of the Freedom Pass.

 

Response from Councillor Stafford

 

“I recall that the context in which I was speaking at the Area Forum related to the impact of increased parking charges in terms of demand on the High Street.  I do not recall saying anything at the Area Forum in relation to the raising of revenue and if that is how it was recorded I feel I was misquoted.  Section 7 of the report to Cabinet in July 2010 confirmed the legal position regarding the permitted use of surpluses generated on the Parking Places Reserve Account and it was on this basis that the Cabinet decision was made.”

 

Question 14 (Barnet Residential Parking Permit Scheme - Legal Challenge) Councillor Sitkin to Councillor Bond, Cabinet Member for Environment

 

Can you explain why the reasons for Barnet’s failure to defend the legal challenge on residential parking charges will not apply in Enfield? 

 

Response from Councillor Bond

 

“As stated in my written response the failure in relation to the Barnet decision related to the basis of the charge rather than the permit system itself.  I can also confirm that a number of the decisions delegated to me by Cabinet in July 2010 were not progressed.”

 

At this stage the 30 minute time period permitted for supplementary questions ended.