Agenda item

An issues paper prepared by the Opposition Group is attached for the consideration of Council.

 

The Council Procedure Rules relating to Opposition Business are attached for information.

Councillor Neville introduced the issues paper, prepared by the Opposition Group.  Issues highlighted were as follows:

 

1.         The background to the issue being raised for debate had been the current housing crisis across London, which the Opposition Group felt had been aggravated by the Labour Government’s:

 

·                record between 1997-2010 in building the fewest houses for public and private use since the 1920’s; and

·                uncontrolled policy on immigration.

 

2.         In terms of Enfield, the Opposition Group were looking to examine the record of the current Administration given what they felt to be the lack of progress on delivery of the following major housing development schemes, inherited from the previous Conservative Administration.

 

a.      Meridian Water – concerns raised were as follows:

 

·                The lack of progress which it was felt had been made in preparing the site for redevelopment in terms of the acquisition of relevant land and the identification of a developer.

·                The delay in construction of the main highway, as a pre-requisite to progressing wider development of the site.

·                The need for action to be taken as soon as possible in order to facilitate the necessary acquisition of land, including use of compulsory purchase powers in order to secure the significant development opportunities presented across the site in terms of both housing and regeneration and in recognition of the increasing land costs.

 

b.      Small Housing Sites – whilst supportive of the general purpose and nature of the overall programme concerns raised were as follows:

 

·                What was felt to be an unacceptably long delay in development on the seven small residential sites having commenced, given the timeline outlined within the paper for the design and planning process.

·                The need to ensure that adequate cost and programme monitoring arrangements were established for all estate regeneration and other housing schemes.

 

3.      In addition, the paper raised a number of issues in relation to the Housing Gateway Scheme, with specific concerns as follows:

 

·                The structure of the financial loan between the Council and Housing Gateway Company that had been set up to purchase and hold the properties, given it was being funded via the General Fund rather than Housing Revenue Account.

·                The detrimental impact of the scheme in terms of the local housing market and at limiting opportunities for those looking to purchase their own homes within the borough.

·                Whilst recognising the need for action to be taken to address the unprecedented levels of demand for social housing, it was felt the Housing Gateway scheme was wrong in principle and represented a financially imprudent approach given that it would not deliver any additional housing build.

 

As an outcome of the debate the Opposition were looking to highlight what they felt had been the limited progress made by the current Administration in terms of taking forward the housing development opportunities identified, with specific actions identified as a result in relation to:

 

·                bringing forward a viable timescale in order to secure redevelopment of the Meridian Water site, with associated land acquisitions.

·                Establishing appropriate monitoring systems for management of all housing and estate regeneration programmes moving forward.

·                Abandoning the Housing Gateway Scheme and refocussing efforts on encouraging Housing Associations to develop additional social housing within the borough.

·                Strengthening Council policies around encouraging relocation and rehousing outside of London.

 

Councillor Taylor, Leader of the Council, responded on behalf of the Majority Group, highlighting:

 

1.      Whilst four “place shaping sites” had been inherited from the previous Conservative Administration for potential development, including Meridian Water, these had not had the necessary planning, detailed development or transport plans in place to enable the schemes to move forward.

 

2.      In terms of Meridian Water, all that had been inherited by the current Administration was the draft Enfield Core Strategy, which they had formally adopted in November 2010.  No land acquisition, remediation, transport, flood alleviation plans or Masterplan for the development had been in place, which were all key requirements for the development to move forward.  These were now in place (following detailed negotiations with key partners) having secured the investment required for redevelopment of the Angel Road station and twin tracking along with development of the Meridian Boulevard (previously known as Causeway) in order to resolve access issues to the site.

 

3.      The progress made by the current Administration in seeking to meet the increased demand for housing supply within the borough, despite consistent opposition from the Conservative Group with specific examples provided in relation to housing developments on the Cat Hill, Caterhatch Depot, Southgate Town Hall and Bury Street West Depot sites.  Whilst the Opposition Group had also expressed concerns about the time taken to progress the Meridian Water development it was pointed out that these proposals had also been subject to a series of call-ins by the Opposition Group.

 

4.      The need to recognise the previous Conservative Administration’s weak record on housing provision within the borough against the current Administration’s robust and commercially sound development plans that were now in the process of being delivered to increase and improve the quality of housing stock across the borough.

 

Other issues highlighted during the debate were as follows:

 

(a)       The concerns raised by the Opposition Group in relation to:

 

·                The lack of progress by the Council in acquiring land to secure the Meridian Water development and in passing, where required, the necessary compulsory purchase resolutions and in securing a development partner for the scheme.  The complexities needing to be addressed in relation to the Meridian Water site and land ownership had been recognised but it was felt this should not have prevented action being taken before now to acquire the necessary land to support the redevelopment.

 

·                The cross party support for the twin tracking and Angel Road Station redevelopment but need to recognise the role of the Mayor for London and Greater London Authority in securing the necessary investment.

 

·                The length of time taken to secure planning permission and subsequent lack of progress in commencing development on the various small housing sites identified across the borough.

 

·                What was regarded as the detrimental impact of the Housing Gateway Scheme on the local housing market which it was felt not only placed the Council in direct and unfair competition with first time buyers and others seeking to own their own homes but also artificially inflated house prices across the borough.

 

·                The proposed mix of housing identified across the housing site developments and need to ensure the wider infrastructure impact of large scale housing developments on the surrounding areas, such as at Cat Hill, were fully recognised and taken into account.

 

·                The proposed impact of the Landlord Licensing Scheme on the private rented sector across the borough and rates currently being consulted upon within the Community Infrastructure Levy, in terms of attracting further development across the borough.

 

 

(b)       The need identified by members of the Majority Group:

 

·                to recognise, in relation to the Meridian Water site, the co-ordinated and planned nature of the development programme which had been designed to deliver a viable and sustainable scheme through the following actions, in advance of the selection process for a development partner being concluded and the start of work on site, scheduled for 2015:

 

(i)        securing the necessary inward investment for the rail and station development in order to provide the required transport infrastructure;

(ii)       addressing concerns regarding the Deephams Sewage Plant;

(iii)     addressing remediation and flood alleviation issues across the site;

(iv)     undertaking detailed negotiations with landowners in order to  acquire the necessary land in advance of any compulsory purchase orders being sought;

(v)       preparation and approval of the required strategic planning framework and policies

 

·                To commend all members and officers involved in delivery of the Meridian Water development for their efforts and work in delivery of the scheme.

 

·                To recognise the progress made in delivery of housing developments on not only the small housing sites, but also Highmead and Ladderswood sites compared to the position inherited from the previous Conservative Administration.

 

·                To recognise the fact that it was the current Administration who were responsible for building the first new Council housing in the borough for over 40 years.

 

·                To highlight the innovative nature of the Housing Gateway Scheme and proposed establishment of a further new company (Enfield Innovation Ltd) to take forward the delivery of the wider housing development schemes.  These had generated a large level of interest nationally and regionally including both the current Conservative led Government and Mayor for London and were seen as a key driver in addressing the current level of households being placed in temporary accommodation.

 

·                To consider and recognise the background to the current housing crisis faced across outer London, which it was felt had been created by the Conservative led coalition Government’s reforms to Housing Benefit and policy on funding for social housing along with the impact of the Right to Buy policies over previous years.

 

During the above debate the Mayor advised that the time available for Opposition Business had expired.  In view of the nature of the discussion and number of members who had indicated they still wished to speak it was agreed that the time available should be extended for a further 15 minutes.

 

Councillor Neville summed up on behalf of the Opposition Group by highlighting what was felt to be the lack of any detailed explanation by the Majority Group for the limited progress made in delivery of housing development on the Meridian Water and small housing sites.  It was felt the call-ins referred to during the debate had been fully justified and had not caused any significant delay in progress being made, with the Conservative record in terms of delivering the Highlands and Enfield Island developments and initiating the Ladderswood scheme cited as specific examples of what could be achieved.

 

In response Councillor Taylor highlighted what he felt to be the incoherent nature of the Opposition Business paper and the commitment of the Majority Group to ensure that the various housing schemes currently on track were delivered on the basis of a co-ordinated and commercially sound programme, having been subject to the required governance processes.  For these reasons the recommendations in the Opposition Business paper were not supported.

 

As an outcome of the debate the Leader of the Opposition requested that a vote to be taken on the following recommendations within the Opposition Business Paper:

 

(1)    that officers be instructed to bring forward a report to an early meeting of the Cabinet to consider the making of a Compulsory Purchase Order under the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 in respect of such land as was required to secure the redevelopment of Meridian Water.

 

(2)    that officers be asked to bring to Cabinet a viable timescale for the redevelopment of the Meridian Water site, with critical points identified.

 

(3)    that as regards the estate regeneration programme and other housing developments the Council should immediately put in place appropriate systems to facilitate monitoring by Members and management of cost and other programme issues in a transparent way.

 

(4)    that the Gateway Scheme be abandoned and that instead the Council should use such resources as it has, including Right to Buy receipts to encourage Housing Associations to develop additional low cost housing in the borough, so that in turn they could use their borrowing powers to lever in private finance to provide additional social housing in Enfield.

 

(5)    that the Council reviews and strengthens its policies on encouraging relocation and rehousing outside of London.

 

The above recommendations were put to the vote and not approved.  In accordance with section 15.4 of the Council Procedure Rules the Opposition Group requested a roll call vote, with the result on each recommendation as follows:

 

For: 20

 

Councillor Erin Celebi

Councillor Lee Chamberlain

Councillor Jason Charalambous

Councillor Lee David-Sanders

Councillor Don Delman

Councillor Nick Dines

Councillor Peter Fallart

Councillor Alessandro Georgiou

Councillor Elaine Hayward

Councillor Robert Hayward

Councillor Ertan Hurer

Councillor Joanne Laban

Councillor Michael Lavender

Councillor Andy Milne

Councillor Terence Neville

Councillor Ann Marie Pearce

Councillor Daniel Pearce

Councillor Michael Rye

Councillor Jim Steven

Councillor Glynis Vince

 

Against: 37

 

Councillor Abdul Abdullahi

Councillor Daniel Anderson

Councillor Dinah Barry

Councillor Chris Bond

Councillor Yasemin Brett

Councillor Alev Cazimoglu

Councillor Bambos Charalambous

Councillor Guney Dogan

Councillor Sarah Doyle

Councillor Christiana During

Councillor Pat Ekechi

Councillor Nesimi Erbil

Councillor Turgut Esendagli

Councillor Krystle Fonyonga

Councillor Achilleas Georgiou

Councillor Ahmet Hasan

Councillor Suna Hurman

Councillor Jansev Jemal

Councillor Doris Jiagge

Councillor Nneka Keazor

Councillor Adeline Kepez

Councillor Bernie Lappage

Councillor Dino Lemonides

Councillor Derek Levy

Councillor Mary Maguire

Councillor Don McGowan

Councillor Ayfer Orhan

Councillor Ahmet Oykener

Councillor Vicki Pite

Councillor George Savva

Councillor Toby Simon

Councillor Alan Sitkin

Councillor Andrew Stafford

Councillor Claire Stewart

Councillor Doug Taylor

Councillor Haydar Ulus

Councillor Ozzie Uzoanya

 

Abstention: 0

 

Councillor Smith declared a Disclosable Pecuniary Interest in this matter and withdrew from the meeting for the duration of the debate and decision on the item.