Agenda item - Councillor Question Time (Time Allowed 30 minutes)

Agenda item

Councillor Question Time (Time Allowed 30 minutes)

11.1    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.

 

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

 

The list of fifty three questions received and their written responses are attached to the agenda.

Minutes:

1.1      Urgent Question

 

The Mayor advised that in accordance with the criteria set out in the Constitution, he had accepted the following as an urgent question:

 

From Councillor Keazor to Councillor Oykener, Cabinet Member for Housing

 

“Given the changes that have been made to ECO funding by the Government, will the Cabinet member for Housing provide the Council with an update on recent developments of ECO funding to Enfield.”

 

Councillor Oykener provided the following verbal response at the meeting:

 

“I can confirm that ECO works to properties within the borough are being undertaken on a two phase basis.  The first phase involves works (on a pilot basis with British Gas) to properties at Scott House which are due to be completed by June 14.  The second phase involves works to other medium rise housing blocks scheduled for 2015.

 

Recent Government announcement regarding significant reductions in carbon credits has led to energy providers walking away from similar ECO deals with other local authorities, which in turn will impact on higher energy bills.  In Enfield, however, negotiations have continued with British Gas and as a result it has been possible to reach agreement to secure significant continued investment with a contract due to be signed shortly.  I would like to congratulate officers on this achievement which will have a significant impact in terms of energy efficiency, fuel bills and employment within the borough.

 

The deal with British Gas will contribute towards the decent homes programme of works and involve 6 small blocks across the Exeter Road and Kettering Estates.  Securing this investment is a significant achievement for Enfield when compared to other councils and in terms of tackling fuel poverty.”

 

1.2    Questions by Councillors

 

NOTED

 

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

 

2.      The request from Councillor Neville for confirmation to be provided on the circulation of written responses to supplementary questions asked at Council on 29 January 2014, which the Assistant Director Corporate Governance agreed to provide following the meeting.

 

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

 

Question 1 (Palmers Green Library development) from Councillor Ann Marie Pearce to Councillor Stafford, Cabinet Member for Finance & Property:

 

“Has a date been set for the start of the development work on the library?”

 

Reply from Councillor Stafford:

 

“The works are due to start any day now, with full details provided within the Cabinet report already referred to.”

 

Question 3 (Support to Friends of the Park Groups) from Councillor Chamberlain to Councillor Bond, Cabinet Member for Environment:

 

In my question I asked for details of the reasons for the reduction in parks officers supporting the Friend’s groups, to which no response has been provided.  Could I ask why these officers have been reduced?”

 

Reply from Councillor Bond:

 

“The reduction was as a result of a departmental restructure.”

 

Question 12 (London Stansted Cambridge Corridor Consortium) from Councillor Savva to Councillor Goddard, Cabinet Member for Business & Regeneration:

 

“Could the Cabinet Member provide further details on the objectives of the Consortium?”

 

Reply from Councillor Goddard:

 

“The main purpose of the Consortium is to identify and help to provide social and economic development opportunities along the corridor as a whole, without regard for political boundaries.  Its function is to bring all the key stakeholders together in order to identify and lobby for infrastructure improvements and other inward investment opportunities on a co-ordinated basis (recognising the way other regions function across the South East of England) based on a clear and well defined profile for the area.  The approach also ensures joined up working between the relevant LEPs, Planning Authorities & County Councils covering the Corridor area.

 

The Government’s aim to achieve full employment will require the creation of approx. 40,000 jobs in Enfield, which it will only be possible to deliver on a joined up basis working with key partners and neighbouring authorities.  The Consortium provides a robust mechanism for delivering this approach, which also has the benefit of being recognised by the Government.”

 

Question 13 (Community Help Point Scheme) from Councillor Chamberlain to Councillor Hamilton, Cabinet Member for Community Wellbeing & Public Health

 

“Although not able to provide specific details, the response does confirm that the controller for each site has been trained and Criminal Records Bureau (CRB) checked.  In terms of the sites listed, however, would the Cabinet Member review the information provided as some of it appears out of date.”

 

Reply from Councillor Hamilton:

 

“Can I start by stating that this is a fantastic scheme.  I do recognise that the list of help point sites needs to be updated, which will be done along with further promotion to ensure that as many people as possible are aware of this excellent scheme.”

 

Question 14 (New River algae treatment) from Councillor Anolue to Councillor Stafford, Cabinet Member for Finance & Property.

 

“Can the Cabinet Member please confirm that the product being used to treat the waterways in front of the Civic Centre is animal friendly.”

 

Reply from Councillor Stafford:

 

“I can confirm that the product being used has not been tested on animals and is BUVA approved.  We encourage all sub-contractors to use these type of cleaning products.  It is also worth noting that the product being used to treat the waterways has been developed by a resident based in North Enfield, and is now being marketed on a nationwide basis.”

 

Question 16 (outsourcing of Council posts) from Councillor Levy to Councillor Stafford, Cabinet Member for Finance & Property

 

“Given the detrimental impact that the relocation of Council staff out of borough would have on the local economy can the Cabinet Member explain why he feels the current Opposition have raised this as an idea for consideration.”

 

Reply from Councillor Stafford:

 

“I have no idea why anyone would raise the idea of relocating jobs out of the borough at the current time given the efforts being made to tackle unemployment and levels of deprivation across the borough.  Whilst, as an example, Barnet Council may have outsourced its call centre to Belfast I see no benefit to the borough from this type of approach which would be a disaster for the local economy.  I can confirm that this is not an approach that the current Administration supports.”

 

Question 18 (secondary school places) from Councillor Hasan to Councillor Orhan, Cabinet Member for Children & Young People.

 

“Will the Cabinet Member join me in thanking the officers involved for their hard work and assistance in development and delivery of the secondary place strategy.”

 

Reply from Councillor Orhan:

 

“I will be more than happy to thank not only officers but also the schools, Headteachers and Governing Bodies for their ongoing support in delivery of the strategy, which has been made more difficult by the funding restrictions introduced by the Government.”

 

Question 22 (Brimsdown School kitchen) from Councillor Simon to Councillor Orhan, Cabinet Member for Children and Young People.

 

“Can the Cabinet Member confirm that she is aware of the current age of the facility being used as the kitchen at Brimsdown School, which is well overdue for replacement.”

 

Reply from Councillor Orhan:

 

“I am aware that this facility is well overdue for replacement, with funding already identified for new facilities at the school.”

 

Question 29 (Palace Gardens Car Park) from Councillor Laban to Councillor Bond, Cabinet Member for Environment

 

“Could the Cabinet Member provide a more specific date for the final update on investigation of the parking problem identifed.”

 

Reply from Councillor Bond:

 

“I expect to have a definitive position sometime in April.”

 

Question 30 (Market Garden initiative) from Councillor Brett to Councillor Taylor, Leader of the Council

 

“Does the Leader of the Council feel the market garden plans are supported by the Conservative Opposition in Enfield?”

 

Reply from Councillor Taylor:

 

“The Conservative Opposition will need to answer this question themself, although it does appear that they are somewhat cynical judging by previous comments made.  The important thing to note, however, is that the proposals are supported and have been partially funded by the Conservative Mayor for London.  He has recognised the potential of the initiative to provide employment and training opportunities as well as the environmental and income generation benefits for the borough.”

 

Question 32 (flood risk management) from Councillor Levy to Councillor Bond, Cabinet Member for Environment

 

“Would the Cabinet Member agree that the quality of flood risk management work undertaken is of such high calibre that it also opens up the potential to explore income generation opportunities.

 

Reply from Councillor Bond:

 

“I would definitely agree and feel that we should be proud of the service and expertise provided.  The potential to develop income generation opportunities as a result is something that can be looked at as part of the new Administration.”

 

Question 39 (Council Tax Bill) from Councillor Neville to Councillor Taylor, Leader of the Council

 

“Does the Leader accept the benefits, given the public are so ill informed about local government finance of including a breakdown of Government Grants and support funding along with locally raised taxes as part of the future explanatory leaflet accompanying Council Tax Bills.  Is there not a case to be made, within a democratic society, for this information being provided and not hidden from the public?”

 

Reply from Councillor Taylor:

 

“We will, having won the next election, be producing a Council Tax leaflet which takes on board the concerns raised by Councillor Neville.  In order to provide a fully informed position this will also, however, need to include a list of the funding reductions imposed by Central Government along with other movements in Government support (in real terms).

 

I also note the claims in leaflets being distributed by Conservative candidates in the forthcoming local election regarding our plans for Council Tax, which are pure figments of their imagination.”

 

Question 45 (landlord registration scheme) from Councillor Hurer to Councillor Oykener, Cabinet Member for Housing

 

“Given the vague nature of the written response provided does this mean that the Council will not be charging itself the fee for each property it owns under the proposed landlord registration scheme and if so will this not provide an unfair commercial advantage.  Can the Cabinet Member also advise, should the scheme be agreed, whether this will lead to the Council taking legal action against itself for any anti-social behaviour caused by their own tenants?”

 

Reply from Councillor Oykener:

 

“Whilst the Council has undertaken a consultation process, no final decision has yet been made on adoption of the licensing scheme.  If it is decided to implement a scheme the full details of how it will apply will be made explicit.”

 

Question 53 (voting patterns at Planning Committee) from Councillor Chamberlain to Councillor Constantinides, Chair of Planning Committee.

 

 

“Could the Chair also provide a breakdown of the occasions when he has voted or abstained on decisions at Planning Committee.”

 

Reply by Councillor Constantinides:

 

“These details will be available, as a matter of public record, in the minutes from each meeting.”

Supporting documents: