Agenda and minutes

Please note: This meeting may be filmed for live or subsequent broadcast via the Council's internet site - at the start of the meeting the Chair will confirm if all or part of the meeting is being filmed. The images and sound recording may be used for training purposes within the Council.

Generally the public seating areas are not filmed. However, by entering the meeting room and using the public seating area, you are consenting to being filmed and to the possible use of those images and sound recordings for webcasting and/or training purposes.

If you have any queries regarding this, please contact the Committee Clerk

at the meeting.

The meeting was not web-cast.

An apology for absence was received from Councillor Dhiren Basu (substituted by Councillor George Meehan).

Under the Council’s Constitution – Part 4 Section B paragraph 17 – no other business shall be considered.

As it was a special meeting no urgent business was permitted.

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/or if 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.

Councillor Canver declared a prejudicial interest in agenda item 6 (Call-in of Decision of the Cabinet of 16^th November 2010 regarding CAB75 Parking Charges Report) as she was present at the Cabinet meeting on 16^th November where the original decision had been agreed.  Councillor Canver left the meeting at the appropriate time.

i)                    Report of the Monitoring Officer (Attached)

ii)                  Report of the Director of Urban Environment

TO FOLLOW

iii)                Appendix (For information only):

a)     Copy of the ‘call in’

b)     Draft minutes of the meeting of the Cabinet of 16^th November 2010 (subject to confirmation by the Cabinet)

c)      Parking Charges report from the Cabinet meeting on 16^th November 2010.

A decision on the above item was taken by the Cabinet on 16^th November 2010. The decision has been called in, in accordance with the provisions set out in the Constitution, by Councillors Weber, Allison, Engert, Gorrie and Schmitz.

The Overview and Scrutiny Committee is requested to decide what further action it wishes to take regarding the Call In.

The Overview and Scrutiny Committee may deal with the Call-In in one of three ways:

i)                    The Overview and Scrutiny Committee may decide not to take any further action, in which case the decision is implemented immediately.

ii)                  The Overview and Scrutiny Committee may decide to refer the decision back to the decision taker, in which case the decision taker has 5 working days to reconsider the decision before taking a final decision.

iii)                The Overview and Scrutiny Committee may decide to refer the decision to Full Council.

It is proposed that consideration of this item be structured as follows:

(i)                 A brief outline by the above Members on the reasons for the Call-In.

(ii)               Response by the Cabinet Member for Neighbourhoods.

(iii)             Debate by Members on action to be taken.

(iv)              Decision.

The Committee received the documentation in relation to the Call-in of the decision of the Cabinet of 16^th November 2010 regarding CAB75, Parking Charges report, and the comparison of existing and new parking charges document tabled by Councillor Lyn Weber, representing the Councillors who had called-in the decision.

Councillor Weber addressed the Committee to introduce the reasons for the call-in including that:

·        The was no evidence that the decision was taken with all the relevant evidence and facts.

·        The Council failed to carry out a full impact assessment of how an increase in parking charges will impact local residents, businesses and shops including the potential effect on the local economy, particularly the increase of 114% on stop and shop charges

·        The change might affect residents with lower income and could push more shoppers away from Haringey’s businesses.  

·        Many of Haringey’s shopping centres had an array of independent shops.  Crouch End, Muswell Hill and Green Lanes had unique characters and many relied on passing trade as well as local footfall.  Increasing parking charges will impact on the character of the Borough’s town centres and harm, to a greater extent the independents shops and businesses. 

·        Shoppers could move to larger, out of borough shopping centres or supermarkets who offered free parking rather than stopping and paying leading to less trade for our shops and businesses, a fall in money in our local economy, a possible reduction in local employment and a knock to traders at the worst possible time when they were only starting to recover from the recession.

·        The Council failed to undertake any consultation with traders.

·        An increase in visitor permit charges that may mean less visitors to the borough. Yet the Council has failed to take any of this into consideration during their decision to increase parking fees.

·        The report stated that “small businesses which employ less than 24 people account for 42.5% of the total employment in the borough”. Therefore the local economy was not comparable to the London average, which the charges were based on.

Councillor Weber urged the Committee to consider recommending to the Cabinet that a full impact assessment be carried out on the affects of the parking charges. She recommended that a review should take place after 3 months to assess the impact on local businesses, shops and town centres with a commitment to adjust the charges if they were found to be damaging the local economy.

In response to questions to Councillor Weber it was noted that:

·        Councillor Weber was not opposed to parking charges being raised in general but emphasised the need for a more detailed impact assessment to be conducted to ensure clarity about the impact the charges will have on traders and the local economy.

·        Councillor Weber had sought the views of shop keepers herself and was not aware that the Council had conducted any consultation with traders in Crouch End or with the Ward Councillors of Muswell Hill and Fortis Green.  Methods such as focus groups, Haringey’s established  ...  view the full minutes text for item 135.