Venue: Committee Room (B6) - Lambeth Town Hall, Brixton, London, SW2 1RW. View directions
Contact: Wayne Chandai, Head of the Chief Executive's Office and Democratic Services Manager, Tel: 020 7926 0029 Email: firstname.lastname@example.org
Declarations of Pecuniary Interest
Under Cabinet Rule 1.5.2, where any Cabinet Member has a Disclosable Pecuniary Interest (as defined in the Members’ Code of Conduct (para. 4)) in any matter to be considered at a meeting of the Council, a committee, sub-committee or joint committee, they must withdraw from the meeting room during the whole of the consideration of that matter and must not participate in any vote on that matter unless a dispensation has been obtained from the Monitoring Officer.
There were none.
The report was introduced by the Cabinet Member for Finance and Investment, Councillor Andy Wilson. He highlighted that:
· Performance moving in the right direction, quarter one has seen an improved performance.
· Some areas saw budget pressures, and improvement plans were already in place to address these pressures.
In response to questions from Councillor Pete Elliott, Officers and Cabinet Members advised that:
· The overspend in the Chief Executive’s Directorate was being addressed through redesigning the service, which would give effect to the savings target. Some more work was also underway to reduce the overspend in Legal Services.
· The council performed well on residual waste but struggle with food and other types of waste and recycling. The core principal of the Councils waste strategy was centered around recycling.
· To note the latest performance outturns for the Borough Plan Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) as detailed in Appendix 1 and for the Priority Service KPIs, detailed in Appendix 2
· Endorse the production of improvement plans for those performance indicators listed in Appendix 3 that have met the required threshold due to poor performance
· Consider the budgetary risks going forward.
The report was introduced by Councillor Paul Gadsby, Cabinet Member for Housing who highlighted that
· A substantial process had been undertaken to develop the proposals.
· He thanked the resident task and finish group for the work that they undertook to develop the proposals.
· Resident engagement can be challenging, however the framework set out would help that process and improve engagement.
Representatives from Tenant’s Council, Lambeth Homeowners Association and other residents addressed Cabinet and made the following comments:
· Tenants Council were unhappy with the proposals and were not involved with the wider development.
· A number of questions raised were not responded to or taken into account.
· Concerns were raised on how the proposals were develop, as they felt that those involved made decisions in isolation.
· There was no real engagement since the pilot and the structure did not work.
· There was a significant reduction in the people that attended the area forum meetings.
In response to Cabinet Members and other queries raised, officers stated that:
· Views from a wide range of residents had been taken into consideration in developing the proposals.
· The Resident Assemblies were well received by local people, the meetings were well structured and dealt with the top concerns of residents.
· The online forum needed more utilisation which had been recognised through developing these proposals.
· The recommendations and final proposals came from the residents and the coordinating committee, and all were confident that engagement would improve.
· The Central Strategic body would have a wider representation, which was not the case with the previous structure.
1. To approve the new resident engagement structures as set out in Appendix 1, noting the full list of recommendations at paragraph 2.5.
2. That the key recommendations in paragraph 2.6 including paying resident members of the Coordinating Committee stipends and re-configuring the Area Boards to reflect the current Housing Services structure of North and South, be approved
3. To note that the Council’s Constitution will need amending to reflect the new resident engagement structures.
The report was introduced by Simon Phillips and Deputy Leader (Clean Air and Environment), Councillor Claire Holland who highlighted that:
· The creation of a London-wide Byelaw would require Lambeth with other boroughs to delegate their Byelaw making functions on this matter to London Council’s Transport and Environment Committee. This would also need to be approved by Full Council.
· Each participating Council will be able to decide whether to ensure that appropriate parking spaces are designated, or opt to provide no parking provision at all.
1. That the making of a pan-London Byelaw that would regulate dockless cycle hire schemes by, amongst other things, compelling dockless operators to use designated parking spaces and to prohibit cycles being left anywhere other than as stipulated by boroughs, be approved.
2. That officers be authorised to present a report to Full Council recommending that they also agree to the delegation of the Council’s byelaw making powers to London Council’s Transport and Environment Committee and that they authorise an appropriate officer or member to sign the declaration on its behalf.