Minutes of a meeting of the Council held at The Town Hall, Hornton Street, W8 7NX at 6.30pm on 6 December 2017

PRESENT

Members of the Council

THE MAYOR: CLLR. MARIE-THERESE ROSSI

ADDENBROOKE, Sarah LIGHTFOOT, Warwick AHERN, Tim LINDSAY, David ATKINSON, Robert LITTLER, Harrison BAKHTIAR, Mohammed MASON, Pat BERRILL-COX, Adrian MOYLAN, Daniel BLAKEMAN, Judith NICHOLLS, David CAMPBELL, Barbara PAGET-BROWN, Nicholas CAMPBELL, Elizabeth PALMER, Matthew CAMPION, David, BA (Arch), Dip PASCALL, Will TP, FRIBA, MBCS, CITP PRESS, Monica COATES, Professor Sir Anthony Bt, RINKER, Andrew BSc, MD, FRC Path, FRCP RUTHERFORD, Elizabeth COLERIDGE, Tim SPALDING, Malcolm COLLINSON, Deborah TAYLOR-SMITH, Kim CONDON-SIMMONDS, Maighread THOMPSON, Robert CYRON, Anne WADE, Linda FAULKS, Catherine WARRICK, Paul FREEMAN, Robert WEALE, Mary HARGREAVES, Gerard WILL, Emma HEALY, Pat WILLIAMS, Charles HUSBAND, James

A G E N D A

1. MAYOR’S ANNOUNCEMENTS

The Mayor welcomed everyone to the meeting and explained the format for the meeting. She said that the Leader would give an oral report on further progress with the response to the Grenfell tragedy. The Council had set up the Grenfell Recovery Scrutiny Committee – chaired by Cllr Thompson – as the key forum where members of the public could continue to contribute and she encouraged people to make comments on issues relating to Grenfell at those meetings.

The Mayor said that the main topic for discussion at the meeting would be how the Council was reviewing its decision-making and how best to involve

1

local people in this. The debate would cover emerging themes from the review. Contributions from the public would be welcome.

The Council would also be discussing a petition on Police Station and four Motions, including one on the Hillsborough report and one on the Grenfell Nursery.

2. MINUTES

The minutes of the meeting held on 25 October were confirmed as a correct record and were signed by the Mayor.

3. CHIEF EXECUTIVE’S COMMUNICATIONS

(i) Apologies for absence

Apologies for absence were submitted on behalf of Cllrs Allison, Aouane, Dent Coad, Feilding-Mellen, Lasharie, Lomas, Marshall, Mills and Powell and for late arrival from Cllr Husband.

(ii) Declarations of Interest

No declarations were made.

4. LEADER’S UPDATE ON GRENFELL RESPONSE

Pursuant to Standing Order 42, it was proposed by Cllr Hargreaves, seconded by Cllr Blakeman and

RESOLVED - to suspend Standing Order 30 insofar as it related to the speeches made by the Leader, Cllr Atkinson and Cllr Wade so that they may speak without time limit.

The Leader gave an oral update on progress since the October Council meeting. She said people would receive support for as long as they needed it. External experts had been brought in to help the Council. She hoped to hear increasingly positive reports about key workers. She paid tribute to the Heads and teachers of the affected schools for their response.

The Task Force had submitted an interim report and the Council was working on its recommendations. The priority was to find permanent accommodation for 209 households. 42 were in new homes and 49 more had accepted offers. The Council had completed on 217 homes and was on track for 300 by Christmas.

The Leader expressed sympathy for those still in hotel accommodation but added that the Council would only move at the pace dictated by the survivors. Such decisions could not be rushed. The Council was on track to meet its target for rehousing all survivors by June. It had committed all its reserves to the recovery effort and had requested further financial

2

assistance from the Chancellor. The Leader welcomed the £28m extra which had been received. The DCLG was also being asked to allow the Council to borrow more.

In response, Cllr Atkinson commended the Leader for her humility. However, he said that the Council would be judged by its deeds not its words. There had been insufficient progress. The Government’s extra £28m was welcome but was not enough over three years. He paid tribute to the response by schools and also by the NHS.

Cllr Wade spoke of the priority for social housing in future. The governance review should examine how finances were allocated. She wanted to see transparency in the bidding system for accommodation and expressed concern about the reasons why some accommodation was being turned down.

5. PETITIONS

(i) Petition on Notting Hill Police Station

The Mayor informed the Council that a debate at Council had been triggered by the receipt of a petition in excess of 2,500 signatures about Notting Hill Police Station.

Amanda Frame addressed the meeting on behalf of the petitioners. She spoke against the closure of such stations given the increasing population of London and rising crime rates. She also spoke of the need for the Council to work with residents to prevent the sale of such community assets. The station had already closed but as it had been designated as an Asset of Community Value (ACV), it would give the Council time to explore options in case MOPAC decided to sell the building. She called on the Council to endorse joint working with the community so that the sale could be prevented.

Cllr Mason also welcomed the designation of the building as an ACV. He hoped that Nick Hurd, Home Office Minister, would not cut MOPAC’s budget by £400m at a time of rising crime rates. Cllr Press supported a cross- party working group on this matter. Cllr Warrick was not persuaded about the need to sell the building and expressed concern that police performance would slip if they lost such property.

In response, Cllr Weale said this was a good example of co-operation and welcomed the collaborative approach which had been demonstrated. The Council had written to the Minister about its opposition to the closure and had generated publicity. The consultation had been a sham. She spoke of the importance of keeping residents safe and considered that losing a police station sent the wrong message at a time of rising crime rates.

3

RESOLVED – to note the petition and comments made and to take these into account when responding to the petition.

(ii) Presentation of other petitions

Cllr Coates presented a petition signed by 39 residents of Cranley Mews to install traffic-reduction bollards in the Mews. The petition had the following prayer:

“We, the undersigned, are concerned citizens who urge the Council to act now to restrict traffic-flow through the mews by: (i) installing traffic- reduction bollards, or some such similar measure, at the south end of the street, where it intersects with Cranley Gardens; and (ii) installing both a ‘width restriction’ and ‘no right turn’ sign at the north end of the mews where it intersects with .”

Pursuant to Standing Order 10, the petition was referred to the Lead Member for Planning and Transport for consideration and reply.

6. ORDER OF BUSINESS

The Mayor announced that, in accordance with Standing Orders, the order of business would be as set out in the agenda.

7. INDEPENDENT REVIEW OF GOVERNANCE

The Mayor said that the main topic for discussion at the meeting would be the review which the Council had commissioned in response to a motion at the July Council meeting. The review would look at how the Council made decisions and how it involved local people in them. The debate would cover emerging themes from the review and would contribute to that review.

After Cllr Lindsay had introduced the debate, Jacqui McKinlay, Chief Executive of the Centre for Public Scrutiny (CfPS), drew attention to the paper which had been circulated around the Chamber setting out the role of the CfPS and its contact details. She asked for as many voices as possible to be heard during the consultation period. The review would consider decision culture, scrutiny and public involvement. Evidence was now being gathered. Emerging themes included a need to improve openness and transparency; a need for a more joined-up approach to decision-making; and better resident and community involvement. There would be a report back to the Executive and Corporate Services Scrutiny Committee in January and to Council in March.

The Mayor then invited the guest speakers to address the Council.

Mary Gardiner spoke of the need for the Council to listen to the right people in responding to the Grenfell tragedy. Local government had been progressively stripped of its power and finances but the Council did well in

4

spite of this. However, it should not base its decisions on finance alone and needed to listen more to its residents.

Michael Bach said that post-Grenfell the Council should rethink its mission and values, and the relationships between it and the Borough’s communities. This would need a change in governance arrangements, but above all, in external relationships. There was a need for major change:

 Complete change in community engagement  New social contract with residents o Set out residents’ rights and obligations, as well as opportunities o Set out Council’s responsibilities o Greater/earlier community engagement  Need to design new approach with the community  A more transparent, open and responsive governance process  A more effective and challenging scrutiny process, including co- opted residents/customers.

He asked, as a first sign of a change in practice, for the CfPS to engage with the community to discuss the options so that the community could make an input to the final decision.

Sophia Lambert said that, as Chair of the former Standards Committee, she had found no convincing evidence of any corrupt practices in the Council but did notice complacency and a lack of sensitivity to Labour wards. The Cabinet system vested a lot of power in individuals. There was a lack of scrutiny before decisions were taken. The role of backbencher members was reduced, when compared with the former committee-system. This made it less likely to attract high calibre councillors. She spoke of the North-South divide in the Borough. There had been little effort to explain strategies, such as high–levels of reserves or low-levels of Council Tax, to residents.

Rosemary Baker spoke of relationships with the Council at operational levels. Most residents interacted with the Council at operational level so it was important to get this right. She asked for more time for residents and businesses to respond to planning applications. The Council should employ a designated officer to help residents and businesses with planning applications, to be paid for by the applicants. She added that there was a general view that the Council did what it wanted. Consultation fatigue had led to cynicism.

Members of the public then addressed the Council. There were views that the Council did not listen to its residents and that a change in culture was needed. Good governance should be about accountability and must take account of the whole of the Borough. Decisions taken with local people following consultation was needed. There needed to be a move away from a parent-child relationship between the Council and residents and a drive to empower people.

5

Stephen Mackenzie, a fire risk management expert, demanded a formal statement that the Council’s fire safety, business continuity and civil emergency plans were robust and fit for purpose. He added that it was the Council’s statutory duty to do this. The Chief Executive undertook to meet Mr Mackenzie in the next 2-3 days to discuss.

Councillors were then invited to contribute. Cllr Mason considered community ‘engagement’ was a sop and that community ‘empowerment’ was needed. The Council should stop telling people what was good for them. Cllr Taylor-Smith accepted that mistakes had been made in the past. Projects would not now continue unless the local community was involved.

Cllr Thompson referred to the North-South divide in the Borough. The CfPS review should look at the current Cabinet/Cabinet Member system. Cllr Wade called for a return to the Committee system. Residents should be at the centre of decision-making.

Cllr Lindsay welcomed all the contributions and then closed the debate.

8. REPORT OF THE LEADERSHIP TEAM

(i) Annual Treasury Strategy – mid-year review 2017-18

The reception of the report was moved by the Leader and seconded by Cllr Lindsay.

RESOLVED – that the Annual Treasury Strategy mid-year review be approved.

9. REPORTS FROM COUNCIL-SIDE COMMITTEES

Report of the Administration Committee

The reception of the report was moved by the Leader and seconded by Cllr Hargreaves.

Paragraph 1 – Voting rights of co-opted members.

RESOLVED – that the recommendation in paragraph 1.10 be adopted.

Paragraph 2 – Investment Committee co-optees

RESOLVED – that the recommendation in paragraph 2.2 be adopted.

10. MATTERS REFERRED TO THE COUNCIL BY SCRUTINY COMMITTEES

None.

6

11. QUESTIONS TO LEAD MEMBERS

None.

12. MATTERS RAISED UNDER STANDING ORDER 11

Portobello Road anti-terrorism safety measures

Cllr Press said that Portobello Road was vulnerable to terrorist attacks. Anti-terrorism measures had been installed in Exhibition Road within a month of the Borough Market attack. Councillors had been told that installing measures in Portobello Road was more challenging and that it would take six months. Seven months had now passed. She called on the Lead Member, the Director of Transportation and Highways, the Chief Community Safety Officer and market represenatives to draw up and implement plans as a matter of urgency.

The Council noted the matter raised.

13. MOTIONS FOR DEBATE

(i) Air quality and climate change

It was moved by Cllr Nicholls and seconded by Cllr Addenbrooke that:

“This Council welcomes the work on strategy, targets, actions and measured outcomes to date by the EH and ELRS teams on both Air Quality and Climate Change.

The Council asks that:

 these two streams of work be further integrated;  progress is maintained in working with regional and national partners, (NHS, Public Health, London Mayoralty, DCLG etc);  where practicable enforcement is fully planned, targeted and measured;  Strategy, means and outcomes are communicated to residents, schools and other public/private sector stakeholders.”

Debate ensued.

The Motion was then put to the vote and was declared by the Mayor to be carried unanimously.

The time being 9:30pm, it was moved by Cllr Hargreaves, seconded by Cllr Blakeman and

RESOLVED – that Standing Order 24.01 be suspended and that the meeting terminate at 10pm.

7

(ii) The Hillsborough report

It was moved by the Leader and seconded by Cllr Taylor-Smith that:

“This Council notes the publication of the report by the Rt Rev James Jones, Bishop of Liverpool and Chair of the Hillsborough Independent Panel, entitled ‘The Patronising Disposition of Unaccountable Power – a report to ensure the pain and suffering of the Hillsborough families is not repeated.’

This Council notes that the report has many valuable lessons for us as we deal with the aftermath of the fire at , and we pledge to act on these as quickly as we can.

This Council notes the report makes clear that following a major disaster not only must public authorities care for the bereaved, injured and others affected to the maximum extent possible, but must support them by being as open and candid as possible in dealing with inquiries and inquests into the disaster.

In line with the report’s recommendations, this Council pledges to care for our residents who are bereaved, injured or otherwise affected by the Grenfell Tower tragedy as comprehensively and sensitively as possible, learning both the lessons of the Hillsborough report and from our own recent experience.

In line with the report’s recommendations, this Council reaffirms its commitment to be open, transparent and fully co-operative with the Public Inquiry into the , the inquests into the deaths in the fire, and the police investigation.

This Council affirms its commitment to the Hillsborough report’s Charter for Families Bereaved through Public Tragedy, and its determination to live by the letter and spirit of the Charter’s commitments, as follows:

Charter for Families Bereaved through Public Tragedy

In adopting this charter we commit to ensuring that Royal Borough of and Chelsea learns the lessons of the Hillsborough disaster and its aftermath, so that the perspective of the bereaved families is not lost.

We commit to the Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea becoming an organisation which strives to:

1. In the event of a public tragedy, activate its emergency plan and deploy its resources to rescue victims, to support the bereaved and to protect the vulnerable.

2. Place the public interest above our own reputation.

8

3. Approach forms of public scrutiny – including public inquiries and inquests – with candour, in an open, honest and transparent way, making full disclosure of relevant documents, material and facts. Our objective is to assist the search for the truth. We accept that we should learn from the findings of external scrutiny and from past mistakes.

4. Avoid seeking to defend the indefensible or to dismiss or disparage those who may have suffered where we have fallen short.

5. Ensure all members of staff treat members of the public and each other with mutual respect and with courtesy. Where we fall short, we should apologise straightforwardly and genuinely.

6. Recognise that we are accountable and open to challenge. We will ensure that processes are in place to allow the public to hold us to account for the work we do and for the way in which we do it. We do not knowingly mislead the public or the media.

This Council commends the Rt Rev Jones’s report to all its Members and Officers and recommends they each read it carefully and reflect on its lessons for them as public servants.”

Debate ensued.

The Motion was then put to the vote and was declared by the Mayor to be carried unanimously.

(iii) Grenfell Crèche

It was moved by Cllr Blakeman and seconded by Cllr Healy that:

“This Council recognises the devastating effect that the Grenfell Tower Fire had on services previously provided to Lancaster West and Henry Dickens Court families at the Grenfell Crèche. It acknowledges that the emergency alternatives put in place do not meet community needs and therefore asks the Leadership Team urgently to review the commissioning contract with a view to:

• handing over and developing the vacant provision beside the Ilys Booker centre to provide more space and capacity; • providing funding for the Family Support work; • rebuilding the staffing structure; • inviting the Grenfell Early Years’/Lancaster West Children’s Network service to run the crèche at The Curve; and • improving the service at Little Wormwood Scrubs and the Kensington Memorial Park.”

9

It was then moved by Cllr Will and seconded by Cllr Cyron:

To amend the Motion so that it reads:

“This Council recognises the devastating effect that the Grenfell Tower disaster had on services provided by the Grenfell Nursery (previously known as the Grenfell Creche) and have actively supported the Grenfell Nursery and the Ilys Booker Stay and Play, both of which have been displaced and are in temporary sites. Together, the Council, Nursery and Stay and Play are in continuing discussion about finding both provisions a permanent home.

Additionally, since the tragedy, Early Years providers in the immediate area who have asked for extra support and funding have received it, including extra funding to extend their services and care into the holidays.”

Debate ensued.

The amendment was then put to the vote and was declared by the Mayor to be carried.

The Motion, as amended, was then put to the vote and was declared by the Mayor to be carried.

The time being 10pm, the Mayor advised the Council that Motion (iv) would be dealt with at the next meeting of the Council.

14. APPOINTMENTS

None.

The meeting ended at 10pm.

Mayor

10