Agenda and minutes

Apologies for absence were received from Councillors Peacock, Stewart and Williams.

At this point in the proceedings the Chief Whip – Councillor Egan requested a variation in the proceedings to consider agenda Item 13 – Motion A after agenda item 4, due to the large number of public attendees for this item.

The meeting agreed the variation to the order of business nemine contradicente.

See Minutes 22, 27 and 28.

A member with a personal interest in a matter who attends a meeting of the authority at which the matter is considered must disclose to that meeting the existence and nature of that interest at the commencement of that consideration, or when the interest becomes apparent.

A member with a personal interest in a matter also has a prejudicial interest in that matter if the interest is one which a member of the public with knowledge of the relevant facts would reasonably regard as so significant that it is likely to prejudice the member's judgment of the public interest and if this interest affects their financial position or the financial position of a person or body as described in paragraph 8 of the Code of Conduct and/orif it relates to the determining of any approval, consent, licence, permission or registration in relation to them or any person or body described in paragraph 8 of the Code of Conduct.

The Chief Whip, Councillor Egan, advised that following discussions with Councillor Whyte, all Planning Sub-Committee Members plus two substitutes from each side would not take part or vote in the debate on Motion A. Additionally the Labour members of Planning would leave the Council Chamber during the debate.

Councillors Basu, Beacham, Browne, Demirci, Erskine, Hare, McNamara, Newton, Reid, Rice, Schmitz and Waters declared personal and prejudicial interests in Item 13 Motion A as either Members or potential substitutes on the Planning Sub-Committee.

Councillors Amin, Butcher, Bull, Browne, Demirci, Engert, Goldberg, Jenks, Khan, Mallett, Newton, Reid, Reith, Scott, Strickland, Whyte, and Winskill declared a personal interest in Item 13 Motion B as Members of the Local Government Pension Scheme.

Councillors Canver and Meehan declared a personal interest in Item 13 Motion A as members of the North London Waste Authority and indicated they would leave the Chamber during the debate.

Councillor Dogus declared a personal interesting Item 13 Motion A as she lived in close proximity to the Pinkham Way Site, and indicated that she would leave the Chamber during the debate.

Councillor Khan declared a personal interest in Item 12(a) as a Member of the Local Government Pensions Scheme.

Councillor Wilson declared a prejudicial interest in Item 13 Motion B as he was an employee of the National Association of Pension Funds which campaigned on issues relating to public sector pensions and Local Government Pension Scheme at a national level.

Councillor Gibson declared a personal interestas a carer in LB Haringey.

RESOLVED:

That the minutes of the meeting of the Council held on 23 May 2011 be signed as a true record.

The Mayor advised that Item 13 Motion A would next be considered.

Motion A (2011/12)

Councillor Solomon has given notice that she will move in the following terms:

“This Council is opposed: 

·        To the use of the Pinkham Way site as an industrial scale waste plant

and

·        To the proposed relocation of Barnet Council’s waste lorry depot (which provides no advantages to Haringey’s residents)

This Council notes:

·        That there needs to be a long-term solution to the waste problem

·        The motion passed by the Muswell Hill, Fortis Green, Alexandra and Highgate Area Committee on 16th June 2011 against the proposals at Pinkham Way which said “That this Area Committee opposes the North London Waste Authority (NLWA) plans for a waste facility at Pinkham Way, and calls on the NLWA to drop the plans.”

·        Lynne Featherstone MP and local residents’ and residents’ groups campaigns against the plans for Pinkham Way

This Council deplores:

·        The secrecy with which the plan, proposal and change in land-use designations has been developed over the last two years

·        The lack of communication with residents and members by Haringey Council’s Labour representatives on the North London Waste Authority (NLWA)

·        Labour’s change of the land designation in November 2010, without wide consultation of local residents, which facilitated the progress of the Pinkham Way plans

·        The failure of Labour members on the NLWA to object to the Pinkham Way plans and represent the interests of our community 

This Council is alarmed:
   

·        At the scale of the proposed development at Pinkham Way and likely impact on local residents and schools

This Council resolves:

·        That the Leader of the Council should write to the Chief Executive of the NLWA to express councillors’ concerns over the consultation and the lack of information provided to residents and to request the application be withdrawn

·        To ask current and past Haringey Council members of the NLWA to detail their role in the decision-making process on the Pinkham Way development

·        To reaffirm the ecological designation of Pinkham Way and provide the maximum protection

·        That contrary to the process involved with the waste plan and this proposal that the interests of residents become central to decision-making”. 

Motion B (2011/12)

Councillor Watson has given notice that he will move in the following terms:

Local Government Pension Scheme

“This Council Believes:

·        The arbitrary 3.2% increase in employee contributions to the Local Government Pension Scheme (LGPS) announced by George Osborne will force many current members of the scheme to leave. This will have damaging consequences for them as individuals and for the future viability of the scheme itself.

·        The characterisation of local government pensions as ‘gold plated’ is unjustified and in 2009/2010 the average LGPS annual pension was just £4052.

·        The LGPS, being a funded scheme, can be sustainable and affordable.       

This Council Resolves:

• To write to the chancellor asking he looks again at his proposals and demand the government enters into substantial dialogue with Local authorities and the trade unions to secure the future of the LGPS”.  

Motion A (2011/12)

It was moved by Councillor Solomon and seconded by Councillor Jenks that:

“This Council is opposed: 

·        To the use of the Pinkham Way site as an industrial scale waste plant

and

·        To the proposed relocation of Barnet Council’s waste lorry depot (which provides no advantages to Haringey’s residents)

This Council notes:

·        That there needs to be a long-term solution to the waste problem

·        The motion passed by the Muswell Hill, Fortis Green, Alexandra and Highgate Area Committee on 16th June 2011 against the proposals at Pinkham Way which said “That this Area Committee opposes the North London Waste Authority (NLWA) plans for a waste facility at Pinkham Way, and calls on the NLWA to drop the plans.”

·        Lynne Featherstone MP and local residents’ and residents’ groups campaigns against the plans for Pinkham Way

This Council deplores:

·        The secrecy with which the plan, proposal and change in land-use designations has been developed over the last two years

·        The lack of communication with residents and members by Haringey Council’s Labour representatives on the North London Waste Authority (NLWA)

·        Labour’s change of the land designation in November 2010, without wide consultation of local residents, which facilitated the progress of the Pinkham Way plans

·        The failure of Labour members on the NLWA to object to the Pinkham Way plans and represent the interests of our community 

This Council is alarmed:
   

·        At the scale of the proposed development at Pinkham Way and likely impact on local residents and schools

This Council resolves:

·        That the Leader of the Council should write to the Chief Executive of the NLWA to express councillors’ concerns over the consultation and the lack of information provided to residents and to request the application be withdrawn

·        To ask current and past Haringey Council members of the NLWA to detail their role in the decision-making process on the Pinkham Way development

·        To reaffirm the ecological designation of Pinkham Way and provide the maximum protection

·        That contrary to the process involved with the waste plan and this proposal that the interests of residents become central to decision-making. 

The meeting agreed to waive Council Procedure Rule 15 to permit the debate to extend beyond the 30 minute guillotine for an individual motion.

An amendment to the motion was moved by Councillor Strickland and seconded by Councillor Egan that:

(delete all after “This Council” and insert)

This Council “notes:

·        The proposed use of the Pinkham Way site by the North London Waste Authority (NLWA) as an industrial scale waste plant

·        The proposed relocation of Barnet Council’s waste lorry depot to the Pinkham Way site

·        That the North London Waste Plan will be subject to an Examination in Public by a Planning Inspector, commencing in February 2012

·        Haringey Council’s Constitution makes clear that Full Council is not the appropriate forum to make a decision on a particular planning application. The Constitution delegates this responsibility to the council’s cross-party planning sub committee.

·          

This Council further notes:

·        That there needs to be a long-term solution to  ...  view the full minutes text for item 21.

1. The Mayor gave her congratulations to all those who were nominated for the Haringey Carer of the Year Award and especially the  joint winners Maria Wood and Hervin Forbes.  This was the fifth year that Haringey had organised the event to highlight the commitment and dedication of the estimated 16,000 unpaid carers in the borough.  The Mayor stated her commitment to fund raising for the Haringey Carers Association.

2. The Mayor reported that Homes for Haringey had won two national excellence awards at the National Federation of ALMOs award ceremony. Mary Keane, HfH’s Learning and Development Advisor, had won the ALMO Team Member of the Year award for her work with apprentices and 19 year old Derekston James, one of Homes for Haringey's Young Advisors, had won Most Outstanding Young Person of the Year for his extensive work in his local community.

3. On behalf of past Mayors the Mayor gave her sincere thanks to Margot Ferris, Nigel Lindsey and Kay Hinds who were leaving the Council’s service. All Mayors past and present had appreciate the hard work and efforts of all 3 officers in supporting the Mayoralty of Haringey over many years. 

4. The Mayor presented Councillor Eddie Griffith with the Past Mayor’s Certificate, the contents of which read “with sincere thanks and appreciation for the services rendered to the borough during the past year by both Cllr Griffith and Hazel Griffith the past Mayoress”.

The Mayor agreed to the admission of this report as urgent business. The information contained in the report was not received until 13 July 2011 and changes to proportionality need to be notified to the Council at the earliest opportunity.

Councillor Egan advised that the proposal to replace Cllr Weber with Cllr Winskill as Chair of the Crouch End, Hornsey and Stroud Green Area Committee, had arisen from a request by the Liberal Democrats, whose members nominate the Chair, in consequence of Cllr Weber resigning her local whip. It was no reflection on Councillor Weber’s performance as Area Assembly Chair or her previous role as a member of the Area Forum. Councillor Egan advised that Cllr Weber would remain as a member of the Area Committee and Cllr Weber had  confirmed her resignation as Area Chair on the basis of the proposal by the  Liberal Democrats to replace her as Chair following her resignation of the local  party whip.

Councillor Whyte advised that Councillor Reid would replace Councillor Reece as Member on the Regulatory Committee.

The Chief Whip Moved and it was:

RESOLVED

1. That the changes to Political Group composition as detailed in paragraphs 8.1 & 8.2 of the report be noted; and
   
   
2. That the resultant changes to Council body memberships as detailed in  paragraphs 8.7, 8.8 and 8.9 of the report be agreed, with the additional amendment to the membership of the Regulatory Committee by the replacement of Councillor Reece with Councillor Reid.

There were no matters to report.

There were no matters to report.

There were no deputations or petitions to report.

To consider how and what the Council can do to tackle health inequalities whilst seeking to embed public health work generally in all aspects of the Council's work.

The Chief Executive outlined the procedure for the first occasion where the Council had a Haringey Debate.

The Cabinet Member for Health and Adult Services, Councillor Dogus, gave an introduction of the debate on how and what the Council could do to tackle health inequalities whilst seeking to embed public health work generally in all aspects of the Council’s work.

Councillor Dogus introduced Mr Jason Strelitz who would address the meeting, and advised that he had held a number of public policy and research roles, and was a senior research fellow on the Marmot Review and currently a speciality trainee in public health with Southwark Primary Care Trust.

The Mayor invited Mr Strelitz to give his 10 minute presentation in respect of health inequalities.

The Mayor then asked Councillor Waters to give a 5  minute presentation on the priorities of the Cross-Party Working Group in her capacity as Chair of the Working Group.

Following this the Mayor announced that there would be 40 minutes for debating, with a maximum of 3 minutes speaking time for each speaker.

At the conclusion of the debate, the Mayor invited Councillor Dogus to respond.

The Mayor thanked members for their participation.

ORAL QUESTION 1 - TO THE CABINET MEMBER FOR THE ENVIRONMENT FROM COUNCILLOR  BRABAZON:

With the continued proliferation of betting shops on our local streets, does the cabinet member welcome the recent Select Committee inquiry into the 2005 gambling act, particularly around it looking into how children and vulnerable people are protected from the adverse affects of gambling?

ORAL QUESTION 2 – TO THE CABINET MEMBER FOR HEALTH AND ADULT SERVICES FROM COUNCILLOR WINSKILL:

In light of the planned savings and possible closure of day centres planned by the administration, what discussions has the Council had with the voluntary and independent third sector to create capacity to ensure a seamless transition on day centres to best ensure continuity of provision?

ORAL QUESTION 3 - TO THE CABINET MEMBER FOR HEALTH AND ADULT SERVICES FROM COUNCILLOR GIBSON:

Can the cabinet member update us on the work being done by the council to provide more support for carers based in the borough? 

ORAL QUESTION 4 - TO THE CABINET MEMBER FOR COMMUNITIES FROM COUNCILLOR NEWTON:

What role will local residents and the Council have in the decision on which areas of the borough will be affected by the planned reductions of five sergeants for Haringey’s Safer Neighbourhood Teams?  

ORAL QUESTION 5 – TO THE DEPUTY LEADER AND CABINET MEMBER FOR CHILDREN FROM COUNCILLOR RICE:

Would the Deputy Leader join me in congratulating Living Under One Sun on their recent win in the Jubilee People’s millions big lottery awards?

ORAL QUESTION 6 – TO THE CABINET MEMBER FOR COMMUNITIES FROM COUNCILLOR SCHMITZ:

How will the Council continue to support the Youth Council now that funding has been withdrawn?

ORAL QUESTION 7 - TO THE CABINET MEMBER FOR HEALTH AND ADULT SERVICES FROM COUNCILLOR BULL:

Does the Cabinet member agree with me that, with the confusion and anxiety the Secretary of State for Health has brought to our local health service with his dithering on the BEH Clinical Strategy and the NHS White paper, he is not fit to be Health Secretary and the Tories still can not be trusted with our NHS?

ORAL QUESTION 8 - TO THE CABINET MEMBER FOR FINANCE AND CARBON REDUCTIONFROM COUNCILLOR ENGERT:

What is the carbon footprint of the printing, ink, paper, delivery and plastic packaging of the six issues per year of Haringey People?

The Mayor agreed to the admission of this report as urgent business. Under Standing Orders, notice of questions was not requested until eight clear days before the meeting, following which matters raised had to be researched and replies prepared in order to be given at the meeting.

There were 8 oral questions and 19 for written answer.

Oral Questions 4-8 were not reached in the allotted time and written answers would be supplied to these questions.

a)     Governance Review Delivery Group – Report No.1 – 2011/12

b)     Corporate Committee – Report No.1 – 2011/12

c)      Constitution Review Working Group – Report No.1 – 2011/12

At this point in the proceedings the Chief Whip, Councillor Egan, moved that given the late hour the remaining reports be adopted together with any recommendations contained therein, without further debate (Council Procedure Rule 7).

2 – COMMUNITY SAFETY PARTNERSHIP STRATEGY 2011 – 14 AND ANNUAL DELIVERY PLAN

The Mayor agreed to the admission of this report as urgent business. The Home Office required that a Partnership Plan be produced by local Community Safety Partnerships. The Council must endorse the Community Safety Partnership Strategy and Annual Deliver Plan, which had been discussed and endorsed at the Community Safety Partnership Board and Overview and Scrutiny.

RESOLVED:

That the three strategic priorities and seven objectives based on the content of the full strategy be noted and adopted.

That the approach and actions in the Annual Delivery Plan be endorsed.

a) GOVERNANCE REVIEW DELIVERY GROUP REPORT NO 1 – 2011/12

RESOLVED:

That the proposed changes as detailed in the report of the Governance Review Working Group meeting of 19 July 2011 be received and adopted.

b) CORPORATE COMMITTEE REPORT NO 1  2011/12

RESOLVED:

That Treasury Management activity and performance during 2010/11 be noted.

c)CONSTITUTIONAL REVIEW WORKING GROUP REPORT NO1 2011/12

The Mayor agreed to the admission of this report as urgent business.Consultation on proposed revisions to Contract Standing Orders was only concluded on 11 July 2011. The Council needed to consider the CRWG recommendations as it was proposed that the changes should be operative from 1 August 2011.

RESOLVED:

That the proposed amendments to the Council’s Contracts Standing Orders as detailed in the appendix to the report of the Constitutional Review Working Group be agreed and that these changes come into effect from 1 August 2011, and that the amendments be incorporated into the Council’s Constitution at part 4 J Contract Procedure Rules.