Agenda item

The Assistant Director for Commissioning introduced the report which responded to the Committee’s request for further consultation on the proposals for renaming Black Boy Lane before moving forward. In this context, the report detailed the council’s proposed approach to working with residents and communities on improving the diversity and representation in Haringey’s public realm. This report covered the range of issues where there were plans to engage with residents in relation to the public realm, the approach to co-production to be adopted, and a summary of work to date.

It was noted that a number of residents would be affected by street renaming and that the report considered the council’s approach to reviewing the council’s public realm and wider conversations. It was envisaged that the approach would be community led and would address systemic inequalities in the borough.

Cllr Ejiofor expressed his disappointment with the content of the report. He commented that the Committee had undertaken a long discussion at its meeting in March 2021 and that a number of recommendations had been made which were due to be implemented between March and October 2021. He stated that Black Boy Lane was offensive and that the report presented to the Committee appeared to delay the renaming of this street. He asked that the renaming of Black Boy Lane was separated from the broader review on street renaming across the borough. He added that the costs of renaming this street would be notional and would be met from existing budgets. Cllr Ejiofor expressed concerns that no action had been taken regarding the renaming of this street and stated that councils should lead change in relation to challenging racism.

Cllr Ejiofor moved the following motion:

This Corporate Committee has decided to separate the process for a broader buildings review from the process for moving forward with the renaming of Black Boy Lane.

The Committee recalls the comments made by the Corporate Committee at their meeting of 17 March 2021 and notes that the Committee has already agreed the following:

(i)            Considered the feedback from the Second Statutory Consultation ‘Notice of Intention’ on the renaming of Black Boy Lane to La Rose Lane, in particular, the Corporate Committee had noted the objections from residents and organisations directly affected by the proposed renaming;

(ii)          Considered and took into account the Equalities Impact Assessment of the proposed change on protected groups and the actions proposed to mitigate the impact including a commitment to provide support, a dedicated staff resource and resident/organisation payments; and

Furthermore, using the authority granted to this committee under the London Building Act (Amendment) 1939 Section 6(1) now agrees to the making of an Order to rename Black Boy Lane to La Rose Lane to take effect on 1 February 2022 and concurs that officers should now provide the necessary assurances to residents of Black Boy Lane for the change of this street name. The Committee also instructs officers that the support package offered to the residents be further explained and clarified.

Cllr Amin seconded the motion. She noted that the majority of residents were in favour of the renaming of Black Boy Lane and that the response rate from residents on Black Boy Lane had been low. She commented that the pub nearby had undergone a name change previously to remove the offensive name, following a campaign. She added that, following the Committee’s discussions and decisions at the meeting in March 2021, it was expected that the name change could be progressed today.

The Chair noted that this was a lengthy amendment and that the Committee would need some time to consider it. It was explained that the report aimed to bring communities together; it was acknowledged that residents in the immediate area had voted three to one against the name change and that work was required to respond to this. The report sought an approach that would include residents in the immediate area and involve them in the work to tackle racism across the borough.

Cllr Ibrahim expressed disappointment that the renaming was not being moved forward and stated that the name of the road was offensive and was a reputational issue for the council. She added that there were other road names that required review and change and that this name change should be undertaken as soon as possible with a distinct timeframe.

Cllr Tabois commented that a number of local people were offended by this street name and had asked him to change it. He believed that racism, in particular Black racism, should be tackled effectively rather than with ineffectual actions. He asked that this issue was resolved immediately rather than deferred.

Cllr Barnes suggested that this street was renamed imminently whilst the wider street naming review was undertaken. It was considered that explaining the implications for the renaming clearly might assist in gaining local support for the renaming.

Cllr Berryman stated that a statutory consultation had been undertaken which showed the residents in the immediate vicinity to be against the name change and he enquired whether the Committee had the power to make this change at the meeting. The Deputy Monitoring Officer noted that, following questions from the Committee, it would be helpful to have a short adjournment for him to review and consider the proposed motion.

Cllr Ejiofor highlighted that the statutory consultation was not against the proposal to rename the street but that the majority of respondents from Black Boy Lane had been against the renaming. It was added that the consultation had been boroughwide rather than specific to the street and he believed that it was within the power of the Committee to balance the views expressed. He noted his concerns that the previous decision of the Committee had not been implemented and stated that it was within the power of the Committee to amend the motion to separate the renaming of Black Boy Lane from the wider street naming review.

The Chair clarified that there had been delays in undertaking the period of consultation that was previously agreed by the Committee. This had been due to a number of factors, including Covid restrictions, the pre-election period, and the resource implications as the Committee had asked for face to face consultations and for the review of the support package.

With the consent of the Chair, Cllr Hakata spoke as ward councillor. He stated that the proposals in the report would deliver a strategic approach to reviewing the council’s public realm and he believed that this was the correct course of action. He explained that there were a number of streets which showcased the names of people whose actions were now considered to be concerning but that this would need to be addressed strategically. Cllr Hakata commented that he believed that Black Boy Lane should be renamed but that there would need to be a decision on the new street name. He noted that there had been several proposals and that La Rose Lane had been the most popular in the consultation but that the Trustees of the George Padmore Institute, which had strong connections to John La Rose, had written to the council to state that the renaming arrangements would not have been supported by John La Rose. Cllr Hakata felt that the process for choosing a new street name was an important element of the process and should be carefully and strategically decided.

With the consent of the Chair, Cllr Tucker spoke as ward councillor. He commented that, when he had first moved to the area, he had been shocked that there was a street named Black Boy Lane and that many other people felt this way. He stated that this was a racist street name and that it should be changed. He noted it had been possible to change the name of the local pub, which had been similar, following a campaign and that the street name should be changed as soon as possible. Cllr Tucker explained that the consultation had included some options for an alternative street name and that La Rose Lane had been the most popular option. He stated that this would be an excellent alternative that would commemorate the work of John La Rose. He felt that a proposal to delay a decision was a proposal to  never change the street name.

Cllr Ejiofor noted that a proposed package of financial support for residents affected by the street renaming for Black Boy Lane had been through consultation and was considered to be reasonable and appropriate. It was stated that the Committee had the legal authority to take decisions on street renaming and that the amendment proposed asked the Committee to make this decision.

The Chair noted that a significant amendment had been proposed and explained that he would provide an opportunity for officers to respond and that it might then be necessary to request comments from Legal and Finance. The Assistant Director for Commissioning explained that the report proposed an approach which centred around engaging with the community, contextualising the proposals for street renaming, and addressing inequalities alongside street names. It was highlighted that the approach was not to delay decisions but to have a process which aimed to tackle racism.

The Chair asked whether Cllr Ejiofor could clarify any comments on the financial support package. Cllr Ejiofor noted that the support package had been through consultation with officers, members, and wider consultees to determine what was appropriate. It was acknowledged that, in March 2021, the Committee had been open to further changes to the support package and this could still happen but the outline arrangements had been set out. Cllr Ejiofor commented that, although the members of the George Padmore Institute had expressed concerns with the proposed name, the family of John La Rose supported the proposal.

At 9.25pm, the Committee agreed an adjournment to allow for the consideration of the proposed motion and amendment by the Deputy Monitoring Officer. Cllr Ejiofor supplied a copy of the written motion for consideration. The meeting resumed at 9.55pm.

The Chair proposed to invoke Standing Order 63 to suspend Standing Order 18 so that the meeting could continue after 10pm; this was agreed by the Committee.

At 9.58pm, the Committee agreed a short adjournment to allow the further consideration of the proposed motion and amendments by the Deputy Monitoring Officer. Cllr Berryman left the meeting at this point. The meeting resumed at 10pm.

The Deputy Monitoring Officer provided advice to the Committee. He advised that the meeting be adjourned to 23 November 2021 as the motion and amendment put forward contained material that required additional information and officer consideration, specifically financial considerations, to ensure that the proposed option was still possible. It was explained that the motion and amendment proposed an action that was significantly different from the published intention in the report and that, from a governance perspective, it would be proper to consider this issue at a reconvened meeting on 23 November 2021 with more appropriate information and public awareness.

Cllr Ejiofor highlighted that the proposed amendment asked for the street renaming to take effect from 1 February 2022 and it was enquired whether the Committee would be able to make a decision at the reconvened meeting on 23 November 2021. The Deputy Monitoring Officer explained that additional information and consideration was required to determine whether the Committee could take this decision on 23 November 2021. He highlighted that it would be contrary to the legal advice to take a decision at this meeting. The Chair clarified that the proposal was not to delay a decision but to adjourn the meeting for one week in order to obtain the advice that would normally be available to the Committee when considering this type of issue.

Cllr Ibrahim stated that the Committee should receive the relevant advice, including the financial implications but that it was possible to question any advice that was provided. She added that she would like advice on whether the Committee could pass a motion to say that it supported Cllr Ejiofor’s motion in principle. The Deputy Monitoring Officer explained that any decision would need to be taken on its merits but that it would be possible for the Committee to provide direction to officers on the information and proposals that were requested. In response to a question about why the Committee could not make a decision now, the Deputy Monitoring Officer explained that it was uncertain whether any legal, financial, or other matters had changed since the advice that was provided to the Committee in March 2021. It was noted that no prior warning had been provided about the significant amendment to the proposals set out in the report and it was advised that it was prudent for the Committee to wait one week for additional information to be provided.

Cllr Ibrahim accepted that additional information was required but suggested that the Committee could support Cllr Ejiofor’s motion in principle whilst being clear that this did not amount to pre-determination on any future decision which would be considered based on the information provided at the time.

Cllr Ibrahim moved that the Committee agreed in principle to support the proposal made by Cllr Ejiofor and seconded by Cllr Amin (which was set out below) and asked officers to provide additional information on 23 November 2021, including financial information and a potential timeline for implementation, which would allow the Committee to make an informed decision on the way forward. It was also noted that any decision would be made based on the information that had been requested.

This Corporate Committee has decided to separate the route forward for moving forward with the building and street names review and has decided to move forward with the process of renaming Black Boy Lane.

The Committee recalls the comments made by the Corporate Committee at their meeting of 17 of March 2021, and notes that the committee has already agreed the following:

(i)            Considered the feedback from the Consultation #2 (Statutory) ‘Notice of Intention’ on the renaming of Black Boy Lane to La Rose Lane, in particular, the objections from residents and organisations directly affected by the proposed renaming;

(ii)          Considered and took into account the Equalities Impact Assessment (EqiA, Appendix 6 of the report) of the proposed change on protected groups and the actions proposed to mitigate the impact including a commitment to provide support, a dedicated staff resource and resident/organisation payments; and

(iii)         “…requested that a further period of consultation should be carried out in order to provide further assurances to residents of Black Boy Lane and elicit their support for the change of street name. The …. support package offered to the residents be reviewed as part of the further consultation work”.

Following a vote with 7 votes for and 2 abstentions, the motion was agreed. Each Committee member asked for their vote to be recorded.

Votes for: Cllrs Amin, Barnes, Blake, Demir, Ejiofor, Ibrahim, and Tabois.

Abstentions: Cllrs Mitchell and Dogan.

At 10.20pm, the Committee agreed to adjourn the meeting to 23 November 2021. It was noted that this would be confirmed in writing.