The Mayor (Councillor David Berry) the Deputy Mayor (Councillor Rohan Yoganathan)

MEETING OF THE COUNCIL

15 JULY 2008

(7:00 pm - 9:38 pm)

The Mayor (Councillor David Berry) The Deputy Mayor (Councillor Rohan Yoganathan)

Councillors

Mick Amson Howard Jones Geoff Austin Don Jordan Sue Baker Nick Kilby Patricia Bamford Rob Lee * Janet Bowen-Hitchings Steve Mama * Mary Clark * Ian McDonald * Patrick Codd Shiraz Mirza David Cunningham Frances Moseley Rolson Davies Barry O'Mahony Dennis Doe Derek Osbourne David Edwards Kevin O’Connor David Fraser Ian Reid Ian George Mary Reid David Glasspool Rachel Reid * Liz Green Bart Ricketts Sheila Griffin David Ryder-Mills Vicki Harris Penny Shelton Chrissie Hitchcock Ken Smith Adrian Holder Bob Steed Richard Hudson Robert-John Tasker Eric Humphrey Frank Thompson * Simon James James White Paul Johnston Yogan Yoganathan

* Absent

Reverend Seok Hee Lee opened the meeting with prayers .

Apologies for absence were received from Councillors Mary Clark, Patrick Codd, Liz Green, Simon James and Ian McDonald.

DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST

Councillor Eric Humphrey declared a personal interest in minute 19 – Motion on School Admissions .

Reason: He sits as a Council appointee on the Governing Body of a school in the Borough.

23 COUNCIL ROYAL BOROUGH OF KINGSTON UPON THAMES 15 JULY 2008

15. MINUTES

RESOLVED that subject to the amendment set out below, the minutes of the meeting of the Council held on 7 May 2008, be confirmed as a correct record:

Minute no.10, Membership and Functions of the Standards Committee and Changes to the Constitution. Add to resolution (2) the following wording which was inadvertently omitted from the Minute:

Part 3a - Amend the Standards Committee’s Terms of Reference by adding Para 10. - The granting and supervision of exemptions from political restrictions under Section 3 of the Local Government and Housing Act 1989 (as amended).

16. MAYOR'S ANNOUNCEMENTS

Queen’s Birthday Honours The Mayor congratulated all those who live or work within the Borough who were recognised in this year’s birthday honours list. In particular, County Councillor Nick Skellett, Leader of Surrey County Council who was awarded a CBE and Lynda La Plante, the well-known author and scriptwriter, who lives in Kingston and was also awarded a CBE.

Mayor’s Charity The Mayor reminded Members of two forthcoming events in aid of Mayor’s Charities, the Forces Children’s Trust and Combat Stress:

• On Sunday 20 July, as part of this year’s River Celebration, the Dragon Boat Challenge takes place on the river at Canbury Gardens. There will be a Mayor’s Charity stall located in Canbury Gardens on the day.

• On Sunday 3 August, a picnic and polo at Ham Polo Club. The first match of the afternoon starts at 2pm and tickets are available at £30 per person which includes a luxury picnic.

17. TOPICAL STATEMENTS

There were no topical statements.

18. PETITIONS

The following petitions were presented in accordance with Standing Order No. 7 by the Councillors indicated:

Councillor Howard Jones on behalf of local residents requesting that the Council ‘save their weekly rubbish collection’

Councillor Steve Mama on behalf of users of the Market Place requesting that the decision to close the lower end of the Market

24 ROYAL BOROUGH OF KINGSTON UPON THAMES COUNCIL 15 JULY 2008

Place to vehicular traffic, except for loading periods, be reversed

Councillor David Fraser on behalf of residents of Pembury Avenue, requesting that the Council undertake repair work to Pembury Avenue

The petitions will be referred to the appropriate bodies.

19. MOTIONS

(1) Councillor Nick Kilby proposed and Councillor Dennis Doe seconded the following motion:

This Council

i. is concerned that the Executive was so unprepared for the number of applications for Reception places in September 2008 in Kingston’s maintained Infants & Primary schools; ii. regrets that the indications of increases in pupils were not acted upon as early as they should have been; iii. regrets that warnings of likely increases in Forms of Entry and the need for extra accommodation were not made available soon enough to parents, especially where the increases were highly likely; iv. remains concerned that the Executive still has no plan for how to deal with the desires of North Kingston parents for a Secondary education in a Kingston school; v. un-reservedly apologises for the additional stress and worry that has been experienced by parents and their children caused by the Executive’s failure to manage the admissions crises in a manner acceptable to parents.

(2) After debate the Motion was put to the meeting and was declared lost.

20. QUESTIONS

By Councillor Derek Osbourne, Leader of the Council To Councillor Howard Jones, Leader of the Opposition

Question At the last Maldens and Coombe Neighbourhood Committee meeting, Councillor Codd who regrettably is absent this evening, said there was no such thing as global warming, and that, in fact, the earth is getting cooler. Is this the policy position of the Conservative Group, and does it mean that we can expect no initiatives on climate change to be put forward by the Conservative Group whether in or out of power?

25 COUNCIL ROYAL BOROUGH OF KINGSTON UPON THAMES 15 JULY 2008

Reply Can I say there are about three questions wrapped up in one there, but I will do my best to answer the three of them. Obviously, you know the first thing I am going to say, and that is that Councillor Codd is, of course, entitled to his own views and often you know does expound his own views which, of course, as a Party of many parts, it is to be expected and to be encouraged. We do not all just follow like sheep all the time. This Group as a whole you know we do take note of studies from authorities like the Nobel Prize winning Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, and that is why I would say that it is important to discern, in fact, between climate change and global warming, which actually the question doesn’t. Of course, the earth’s climate has changed many times in response to natural causes, and in this Councillor Codd is actually right in not fanning the flames of misinformation, which can only lead to, and does lead to, scare mongering. The Liberal Democrats always claim to be concerned with the environment and anything associated with it, but we ask ourselves how believable is their position, and how much of it is actually just posturing. Let us remember the Scrutiny Panel findings on the Hook Centre, where only the faintest nod to sustainability and environmentally friendly building practices and materials were attempted, and the carbon footprint of the building was hardly an issue for the developers and the Council in their rush to get this built. We would intend to ensure that these issues were taken into account in the planning process and all new buildings should be reviewed with an eye to sustainability.

Local residents really care about their own environment. They are concerned about pollution, about noise pollution, about green spaces, about yobbish behaviour and unsociable behaviour. The effect of climate change is on their agenda, but they do not at present, I think, see it as affecting their daily lives, although increasingly it obviously is. We are now for our side extremely concerned about environmental issues, both global, and just as importantly, local. We think it is important to have a planning policy that takes into account bio-diversity, ecology, sustainability and all those other ‘iliites’. Town centre management, urban conservation, tree coverage in our leafier areas of the Borough, planning for flooding have all become even more important issues in this Borough recently. These are all concerns of Kingston residents and it is the local environment the Conservative Group will develop policies to improve the lives of Kingston residents, and as far as climate change and global warming are concerned, we will continue to monitor the science based information from world leading authorities and act accordingly.

Supplementary I am just wondering, and I guess Howard, it is rhetorical, Mr Mayor forgive me, whether Zac Goldsmith would have answered that question in quite the same way, and whether you would not wish to refer Councillor Codd for ‘global warming 101’ from Zac Goldsmith?

Reply I happen to know that Zac Goldsmith and Councillor Codd get on very well, Mr Mayor. They do not share every single opinion as I said previously in common, and one would not expect them to, but as I said that is what good politics is about and that is what good debate is about and to decry somebody for the fact that they hold opinions different to yours is actually the lowest of the low I think.

26 ROYAL BOROUGH OF KINGSTON UPON THAMES COUNCIL 15 JULY 2008

By Councillor Dennis Doe To Councillor Derek Osbourne, Leader of the Council

Question What was the process and evaluation criteria adopted to identify the best value option for the recent acquisition of a new Mercedes E Class to replace the previous Rover 75?

Reply I understand that the process for replacing the Mayoral Car commenced over a year ago, in anticipation of the end of the leasing agreement for the previous vehicle, the Rover 75, at the end of March 2008.

Initially information was gleaned from other London Boroughs on the vehicles that they used and their experience with them. In searching for a suitable replacement a number of criteria were taken into account including fuel type, that is diesel or petrol, roominess, noise levels within the vehicle, CO2 emissions and economy. Cost was also a significant consideration together with the overall appearance/suitability of the vehicle for the purpose for which it was required, that is being a Mayoral car as opposed to something I might drive.

Initially around a dozen vehicles were identified as possibilities which, progressively, were narrowed down to a short list of three being the Lexus Hybrid, the Chrysler 300C and the E-Class Mercedes. One objective was to try and keep the leasing costs to around the level of those of the previous car, but obviously taking into account the effect of inflation over 5 years, and, for this reason, the Lexus Hybrid was eliminated as it was, on the basis of three quotes obtained, significantly more expensive than the other two. The Lexus had less leg room than the other two vehicles and very little boot space, that is boots in the boot as opposed to boot space for the legs, I assume.

Whilst the Chrysler 300C was a more roomy vehicle than the Mercedes the level of CO2 emissions was much higher and I understand, because I had no particular part in the process, that it was considered that the vehicle did not portray the right image for the Royal Borough. The Mercedes, on the other hand, benefited from lower CO2 emissions (177g per km as opposed to the Chrysler’s 215g per km) and the quote accepted from the leasing company was certainly comparable with that for the previous car.

Thus, in all the circumstances, it was concluded that the Mercedes represented the best deal for the Council and we subsequently entered into a three-year lease which commenced from the middle of April 2008.

Supplementary My supplementary question arises partly from what Councillor Osbourne said and also because I have actually been driven in the Mayoral car, which I believe is too short and too narrow, so the question is this: which males and females tested the suitability of the car for a seemly entry and exit when dressed for a Mayoral occasion, and how was the leg room tested for the representative Deputy Lieutenant with his serious physical impediment, and as a consequence what are the insurance implications of the Mayor now needing to sit behind the passenger seat?

27 COUNCIL ROYAL BOROUGH OF KINGSTON UPON THAMES 15 JULY 2008

Reply I have to give my second apology of the evening. Tonight we are discussing primary school places, and a whole lot of other stuff and you want me to decide which men and women climbed into the back of the Mayoral car to decide whether or not they had sufficient leg room and, well, I don’t know actually, and I am not sure that anybody did, and I am not sure either that anybody did that with the last one, or the one before, or though you Dennis probably did, which probably says more about other things than me. Can I just point out that once upon a time, we had a Daimler. Do you remember how we got to the point where we had leased cars? It is because we had a Daimler, and this Daimler was on the road about a third of the year, because the rest of the time it was broken down, or unusable. It moved about 10 miles to the gallon and was an absolute disaster, and every Mayor including David made this point year after year after year and eventually went into a leasing agreement and got something sensible. Now, now we seem to be getting into a point about whether a car is too narrow, or whatever. I have set out the criteria that they went into. I have no idea Dennis, although I am sure that there is somebody somewhere in the organisation who will be able to answer that question for you, and I am sure they will, and I will guarantee it to you, guarantee to you Dennis that somebody will answer that question, but I can’t. All I can say is that when we are talking about Post Offices this evening and we are talking about primary school places this evening I have to tell you that one of the things that has not registered on my radar over the last six months has been the choice of the Mayoral car and whether people can get into it and whether it is too narrow.

By Councillor Derek Osbourne To Councillor Howard Jones, Leader of the Opposition

Question Does the Conservative Group support the Mayor of London’s decision to abandon the 50% affordable housing policy? Can he, with the help of the press release that has Boris Johnson’s face on the top of it, explain why?

Reply Certainly, Mr Mayor and thank you for the supplementary question. I was going to actually answer the first question with a long reply, but rather than do that, I will use the press release, and actually what I was going to say is actually reflected in the press release, and I think it makes common sense. The Mayor has actually published tonight, you can see it on the web, a document Planning a Better London. It is a report that sets out how he intends to improve the quality of life for Londoners through the planning system and specifically through revising the London Plan. The Mayor wants to see a slimmer plan which deals with strategic issues without sacrificing London’s need for more homes and economic success, and which treats inner and outer London as equal priorities, and I think that is quite important when you compare the policies of the last Mayor and Mayor Johnson.

The document proposes several key changes including the abolition of the 50% London wide affordable housing target, but committing to an expanding programme of 50,000 affordable homes over the next three years by agreeing individual and affordable housing targets with boroughs, so rather than imposing, the Mayor intends to negotiate and to agree with boroughs realistic targets and responses to a

28 ROYAL BOROUGH OF KINGSTON UPON THAMES COUNCIL 15 JULY 2008

consultation which has just begun must be submitted by the 10 November and then the formal process for reviewing the London Plan will then begin. I also noticed on this that I am sure everybody will be pleased to know, that the Mayor has also announced this evening £60m to be made available to London Councils to tackle empty homes, and I think that is a problem of empty homes and I think that is a magnificent advance which we also support very much from this side.

By Councillor David Cunningham To Councillor Bob Steed, Environment, Sustainability and Climate Change

Question When did the Council’s noise abatement control cease and what were the reasons behind this?

Reply It has not ceased. The Council provides a noise abatement service, but I assume your question relates to the Environmental Health Department’s out of hour’s noise service. Environmental Health have previously provided an out of hours noise service operating between 23.30 hours and 04.30 hours on Saturday nights for ‘one off’ noise events. As Members will recall the Council had to make some very tough choices on savings last year and one of the decisions made in the last budget was to remove funding for this service - this out of hours service. Where there are persistent problems Environmental Health have a number of measures to take action and, of course, where incidents are associated with noise, but not only noise, the Police can take action.

Supplementary Actually he was correct. The question I had meant to ask was when did the Council’s noise abatement patrol cease, but I read it over the ‘phone and they took it down as when did the Council’s noise abatement control cease. Anyway, my supplementary is actually very serious and there is no smirking on my part as far as this is concerned. The noise patrol have ceased. Nobody was notified of this, and there was no notification given as far as the Council was concerned. There was no notification that we as Members were aware of, but my supplementary is quite clear. Does the Member appreciate how disturbing it is for residents if there are very noisy disruptive parties going on late at night and that you have ceased the one noise abatement control that was able to do something about it and will he give the third apology this evening for cancelling it?

Councillor Bob Steed Well, I would be interested in what Councillor Cunningham would do, but the thing is there is no doubt that everybody had an opportunity to look at the budget and all the items in the budget and I am sorry that Councillor Cunningham has missed that one, but it is there and clearly where there are persistent problems there are a number of measures that can be taken. This is one off events, which I do accept are unfortunate, but it was a decision we made and openly made in terms of the budget. It was clearly listed in the budget.

29 COUNCIL ROYAL BOROUGH OF KINGSTON UPON THAMES 15 JULY 2008

By Councillor Sheila Griffin To Councillor Robert Steed Environment, Sustainability and Climate Change

Question Is this Administration taking any steps to reduce the Council’s carbon footprint?

Reply Yes, there is general acceptance that emissions leading to increasing levels of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases in the atmosphere contribute to global warming – a cause of climate change. You will be aware, as you were at the London Councils Summit last Saturday, that in her speech Hazel Blair, the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government, recognised the efforts this Council is making towards reducing our ecological footprint.

The approach we have taken is both strategic and practical to reduce the Council’s carbon footprint. The principle contributions to our carbon footprint are the use of fossil fuel energy in the delivery of our services both direct and indirectly through our contractors and the way we treat and dispose of our municipal waste.

By Councillor Steve Mama To Councillor Vicki Harris, Chair, Development Control Committee

Question Having a special meeting of the Development Control Committee with the express purpose of granting planning permission for the latest application on the former power station site, we were informed that when planning consent was given, the planning appeal on the earlier scheme would be withdrawn. Could she please explain what went wrong, and what additional costs to the Council might be incurred as a result of this?

Reply Yes, the special meeting was not held expressly to approve the application - it was to allow the Council to make a timely decision whether to approve, or refuse. The applicant had not given any written assurance that the appeal would be withdrawn, and consideration of the application at Development Control Committee was undertaken on that basis. Notwithstanding that, it is disappointing that the applicant has chosen not to withdraw the appeal. Each party will need to cover their own costs in the normal manner on Public Inquiries.

Supplementary Does the Chairman not recall that we as Members of the Development Control Committee received information in written form to say that if the application, the current application, were approved the planning appeal would be withdrawn on the earliest application and thus saving money, and is she not aware that by misleading us in this direction, the Council has incurred costs amounting to something like £27,000 or more and what is more it has discredited the Development Control process and misled Members of the Committee.

30 ROYAL BOROUGH OF KINGSTON UPON THAMES COUNCIL 15 JULY 2008

Reply Councillor Mama’s memory is obviously far better than mine. I do not recall seeing anything written down to say that the appeal would be withdrawn, but if Councillor Mama does have that maybe he could forward it to me.

By Councillor David Ryder Mills To Councillor Derek Osbourne, Leader of the Council

Question Could the Leader up-date Councillors on the progress of the new waste collection contract?

Reply The new waste contract is progressing well. We are expecting in the next month that all households will receive a major statement from the Council to outline what it is that the new contract will be delivering. The important thing, of course, that we must recognise is that the reason that we have done this is twofold. One is to increase the amount of recycling and therefore, increase the sustainability of the nature of waste within the Borough, and secondly, that we do that as cost effectively as we might do. We have, therefore, set out very clearly what our policy is and the services that we are going to create. It is very clear, I think, to me as we have moved forward on this that the position that within the debate on what it is that we are providing has been somewhat skewed by a series of well, interesting disinformation campaigns about what constitutes weekly or fortnightly collections, and I imagine that when we get to the point of which the petition that Councillor Jones referred to this evening, we will get yet another opportunity to set straight some of the disinformation that has been floating around. But certainly it is beginning in September and during the course of August every household in the Borough affected by the change in the waste contract will receive a detailed explanation of what the new Contract will be, at which point incidentally I think they will be rather surprised because it isn’t what they have been told it might be by some of the people opposite And at that point we will then move forward to release the containers that people will put their recycling in, and then we will head forward into a brave new age of sustainability and recycling.

Supplementary Is it not hypocritical and irresponsible for the Conservatives to mislead and frighten our residents into signing the petition presented earlier this evening when they know full well that as a result of the new collection service, a greater proportion of household waste will be collected weekly than before than currently, since only the minority of non-recyclable and non-compostable landfill will be left for the fortnightly collection. Are they really so against making the quantum leap forward in this Borough’s recycling rates that this will bring and that our residents, as people concerned for our environment, want?

Reply Well this is terribly interesting actually because we have had a whole new set of information from the Conservative Party about what it is that they are going to do in terms of recycling and encouraging people. George Osborne, not spelt my way, he’s not a relative, but he has launched this whole policy, which is very, very interesting, which is if you recycle more than you did before, which actually you only

31 COUNCIL ROYAL BOROUGH OF KINGSTON UPON THAMES 15 JULY 2008

have to do by buying more packaging and, therefore, can show that you are recycling more of whatever that was, you would get up to £25 per month. Now as a rebate off your Council Tax. Now it sounds great of course, because if you add £25 per month that is £25 times 12 per 64,000 households, worse case scenario I accept, you are giving back to the council tax payers about £20m. Now heaven knows actually how you would fund that. I assume, well I assume that you know local authorities faced with this new Conservative national policy would have to raise taxes higher in order to pay the rebate. But it is kind of interesting actually, because this is an American policy and let us just say that whilst some parts of America are actually not bad at recycling, the fact is that Americans and sustainability and recycling are not actually terribly…Now Richard you have spent some years, haven’t you campaigning on this in your area, haven’t you? Are you really going to tell, go out tomorrow, and tell your residents that the only way your national policy on recycling can work if you have, now, they don’t call it chips in bins, they call it something else, but the contractor who does this in America puts a chip in a bin to measure whether or not people are recycling more, so the national policy the Conservatives now have are recycling… The interesting thing about this is that the only way that this policy, that’s been launched by the Shadow Chancellor can work, is if you put chips in bins. So, Richard, I am expecting you to put out a leaflet in your ward to say we disagree with George Osborne, we continue to oppose chips in bins.

21. K+20 KINGSTON TOWN CENTRE AREA ACTION PLAN (Executive - 24 June 2008 - Appendix C)

Following Council approval in April 2007, the K+20 Kingston Town Centre Area Action Plan was submitted tot the Secretary of State. The submitted Plan is set out on Council’s website at www.kingston.gov.uk/kingston_aap_2.pdf .

The approval process included a Public Examination by a Planning Inspector to determine whether the Plan has been prepared in accordance with certain statutory requirements relating to procedure and process, and also whether the Plan is ‘sound’. The Inspector concluded that the Area Action Plan has been prepared in accordance with the relevant Act and Regulations and finds it to be ‘sound’ subject to the Council making some changes, the six most significant of which are set out in the report.

On 24 June 2008, the Executive approved the K+20 Kingston Town Centre Area Action Plan, which has been amended to accord with the Inspector’s report and recommended it to the Council for adoption.

RESOLVED that the K+20 Kingston Town Centre Area Action Plan, as amended, be adopted .

32 ROYAL BOROUGH OF KINGSTON UPON THAMES COUNCIL 15 JULY 2008

22. DEVELOPMENT ON GARDEN LAND (DEVELOPMENT CONTROL Appendix A COMMITTEE - 2 APRIL 2008 - APPENDIX B)

At its meeting on the 2 April 2008, the Development Control Committee resolved that the following motion be submitted to Council for debate:

It is the Council’s view that in principle, we are opposed to development on garden land.

(1) Councillor Vicki Harris proposed and Councillor Frances Moseley seconded the motion.

(2) After debate the Motion was put to the meeting and was declared carried.

23. APPOINTMENT OF INDEPENDENT MEMBERS TO THE STANDARDS COMMITTEE

At its Annual meeting on the 7 May the Council, on the recommendation of the Standards Committee, agreed to increase the size of the Committee to 12 members to facilitate the establishment of separate sub-committees to deal with the various stages of the new responsibility for the Local Handling of Complaints. The number of elected members on the Committee was increased to seven and the number of independent members to five by ‘promoting’ to full membership the two alternate members, Mr Ray Austin and Mr David Nicolson.

A recruitment exercise was then undertaken to recruit additional independent members, as a result of which five Borough residents were recommended for appointment as alternate independent members of the Standards Committee.

RESOVLVED to appoint Mr Andy Algar, Mr Christopher Foulkes, Mr Brian Laidler, Mr Stephen Russell and Mr Barry Sorrell as alternates for the existing Independent Members of the Standards Committee as follows:

ALTERNATES Independent Member 1 2 3 Ray Austin Andy Algar Christopher Foulkes Brian Laidler Hiralal Banerjee Christopher Foulkes Brian Laidler Stephen Russell David Nicolson Brian Laidler Stephen Russell Barry Sorrell Jim Taylor Stephen Russell Barry Sorrell Andy Algar Jean Weir Barry Sorrell Andy Algar Christopher Foulkes

Reason To appoint alternative Independent Members for the Standards Committee to allow the Committee to discharge its functions under the Local Handling of Complaints arrangements.

33 COUNCIL ROYAL BOROUGH OF KINGSTON UPON THAMES 15 JULY 2008

Note: Councillor Steve Mama wished his dissent from this decision to be recorded.

24. APPOINTMENT OF MEMBERS TO PANELS, COMMITTEES AND OTHER BODIES

a) APPOINTMENTS TO THE STANDING ADVISORY COUNCIL FOR RELIGIOUS EDUCATION (SACRE)

RESOLVED that the following appointments be approved:

• Raju Pandya and Mike Thakar as joint representatives of the local Hindu community on the Standing Advisory Council for Religious Education (SACRE) • Durdana Dean and Neelofer Ziauddin as first and second deputies for Hamida Syed, who represents the local Muslim community on the Standing Advisory Council for Religious Education (SACRE)

b) LONDON COUNCILS GRANTS COMMITTEE

London Councils have received legal advice that members appointed to the Grants Committee, including Deputies, should all be Executive Members as the Committee is in effect, exercising executive functions on behalf of Boroughs.

In Kingston’s case our representative on the Committee (Councillor Bob Steed) is an Executive Member, but three of the four Deputies (Councillors Barry O’Mahony, Shiraz Mirza and Yogan Yoganathan) are not and, thus, needed to be changed. Nominations for these positions are as follows: Councillors Derek Osbourne and Rolson Davies as first and second deputies respectively, leaving the other two places vacant.

RESOLVED that Councillors Derek Osbourne and Rolson Davies as first and second deputies respectively for Councillor Bob Steed on the London Councils Grant Committee.

Signed…………………………………………………….Date………………… Chair

34 COUNCIL QUESTIONS – WRITTEN RESPONSES ANNEX 1

By Councillor Mick Amson To Councillor Derek Osbourne, Leader of the Council

Question What alternative provisions are being made to supply vital services to the community previously provided by the six closing Post Offices that the MP for Kingston failed to save?

Reply As Councillor Amson will know, Conservatives, Labour and Liberal Democrat Councillors and candidates, as well as local MPs, campaigned to save the post offices. In that sense, we have all collectively failed, although as we know Edward Davey has secured the re-opening of a post office in Tolworth. At this stage, no alternative provision has been made by the Council to replace services previously provided by the six post offices in the borough that have recently closed. This is perhaps not surprising as we were only notified within the last month or so of the closure dates and the closures themselves have only recently taken effect.

It is, of course, regrettable (but perhaps predictable) that Post Office Limited disregarded the strong representations made by this Council, both our local MPs, and many others opposing the proposed closures.

When the closure proposals were discussed at Executive in March, I made reference to the then proposals from Essex County Council to take over and run some of the post offices proposed for closure in that county. Since then the Essex plans have developed further and we are keeping a close eye on how that goes to see if there would be any scope for doing something similar here in Kingston. However, I should point out that there are relatively significant costs involved and, clearly, we would want to have a better idea of the impact of the closures within the borough before taking any action.

Much more recently (on 3 July) Post Office Limited published Guidance for local authorities, and others, who might be considering the provision of replacement post office services. The Guidance is fairly detailed and there isn’t time to go into it here but I am hoping that the Overview Commission Working Group that is looking at Community Hubs, and the possible provision of replacement post office facilities within them, will be taking it on board.

Post Office Limited has also provided details of what they have called ‘out reach services’ which enable access to be maintained to post office products and services, particularly in rural communities. An outreach service involves Sub-Postmaster’s of larger branches providing, or arranging for the provision of post office products and services to nearby communities through various methods including home delivery, drop-in sessions at nearby locations and a mobile post office van service. It seems unlikely, however, that Post Office Ltd would provide such services in a predominantly urban area such as ours, but we are pursuing the matter with them.

35 Finally, anecdotally I can certainly report an increase in the numbers queuing for postal services at the New Malden Post Office following the closure of the branch near to me in Burlington Road.

By Councillor Steve Mama To Councillor Chrissie Hitchcock, Chair of the Kingston Town Neighbourhood

Question When did the designation controlling alcohol consumption at the Fairfield Recreation Ground change, and who authorised such a change to the Designation Order?

Reply At no point has the designation controlling alcohol consumption at the Fairfield Recreation Ground and surrounding area changed. However, when new signage was recently installed at the site there was incorrect wording on the signage in relation to the consumption of alcohol. Corrections are being made to the wording to reflect the true nature of the designation but Councillor Mama already knew that before he submitted this question.

By Councillor Steve Mama To Councillor Ian Reid, Executive Member for HR Policy

Question Having mounted a “recruitment campaign”, including the engagement of the Executive Search Consultants to help with the search for the appointment of the Head of Learning and School Effectiveness, would he inform the Council how much the whole operation cost, and why did the Panel fail to make an appointment?

Reply The Senior Staff Panel considered the circumstances carefully before deciding that there was a need to recruit to the position of Head of Learning and School Effectiveness when the post became vacant. The Panel recognised that this was a key role which is fundamental to achieving success in schools and the wider Children and Young People’s agenda. As part of the normal practice for the appointment of Chief Officer posts, the assistance of recruitment search consultants was commissioned to assist in the appointment process. The costs are set out below:-

Recruitment Search fee £ 15,000 Testing of 2 shortlisted candidates 1,100 Advertising Agent costs – insertion in Times Educational Supplement, the Guardian and creation of a micro- Website 18,000 ------TOTAL £34,100

Advice from the outset of the process indicated that finding a suitable candidate would be challenging taking into account market conditions for this type of role and the RBK’s requirements for an inspirational and talented individual. The search

36 exercise involved direct contact with individuals in London boroughs, a range of County and Metropolitan Councils, Central Government departments eg Ofsted and some commercial organisations.

Following interview of a ‘long list’ of 5 preliminary candidates, a shortlist of two was presented to the Senior Staff Panel. It was unanimously concluded that neither was suitable.

However, the exercise is not completed. The search consultants have appointed a new consultant, with a strong background to take a fresh look at the market following a short interval. The brief will be refined, the attractive website is still live and further candidates will be resourced this autumn. The continuing campaign will incur no further advertising or consultancy costs. In the meantime interim arrangements have been made to cover the vacancy.

Our remuneration policy is to engage our Chief Officers at the mid-point.

By Councillor Paul Johnston To Councillor Rolson Davies, Executive Member, Health and Social Inclusion

Question Please confirm whether you support the MP for Kingston & Surbiton in suggesting that all users of Springboard will be able to continue to enjoy the activities supplied by Springboard when these services are re-provided by other organisations and that he is content that adequate annual financial running costs and start up capital investment are being met by the Primary Care Trust?

Reply The Council has monitored the situation with regard to Springboard very closely. I am aware that the Health Overview and Scrutiny Panel has played a strong role in ensuring that people who attend Springboard continue to receive a service. Our local MP, Edward Davey, has also played a key role throughout.

Kingston PCT have developed a set of plans in partnership with third sector providers, including the Fircroft Trust, Kingston Voluntary Action and Kingston MIND. I believe these plans can represent a positive way forward for people who attend Springboard, but they will need to be implemented with care to ensure all existing Springboard users are offered suitable future support. That's why I welcome the implementation and monitoring panel established by the PCT, that includes Council and service user representation, following a recommendation in the report of the consultant, engaged by the Local Action Group set up by Edward Davey MP. The mix of activities for Springboard's service users may change, but overall is expected to both develop and increase, with the main activities continuing. While contract packing, for example, was to go, pressure from service users and Edward Davey's group, has ensured this will continue, and the Council is working with the PCT to provide this. Gardening is set to expand, and new "social" activities are to be offered.

While it is not for the Council to answer for the local MP, it is understood that estimates for running costs and capital investment costs largely came through

37 discussions between the PCT and the third sector providers. Since Edward Davey and the Local Action Group's consultant considered these could be too low, Edward Davey asked for and received a special ring-fenced contingency fund from the PCT, in case the estimates proved inadequate .

By Councillor David Fraser To Councillor Ian Reid, Executive Member, Adult Services

Question Please advise the Council as to what advice we should give to elderly residents who already face the highest council tax in London and now face a projected 40% rise in energy bills next winter?

Reply There is a real problem with rising fuel bills for many older people. Both nationally and here in Kingston a great deal of information and advice is available, though the keep warm keep campaign. There is detailed information on Kingston’s website and written material will be made available as we get closer to the winter. The advice covers insulation grants, getting energy efficiency checks and economising effectively, whilst staying warm.

By Councillor Richard Hudson To Councillor Simon James, Planning and Regeneration (Olympic Champion)

Question In your capacity as Olympic champion please confirm what role the Royal Borough will be playing in the 2012 Olympics; what potential costs to RBK are expected and what he hopes will be the legacy residents will experience in future years from RBK’s involvement and investment in the 2012 games?

Reply We want to maximise the benefits of the Olympics to local residents without increasing the burden to Council Tax payers.

Kingston residents currently contribute around £1.225 million directly to the Olympics through their Council Tax bills via the Olympics levy. The only contribution the Council provides directly itself is £10,000 per annum through the South London Partnership collaboration between the Boroughs of Bromley, Croydon, Kingston, Merton, Richmond, Sutton and Wandsworth and Connexions, towards a partnership sub-group - Go South Go.

Go South Go has brought an additional £239,000 into south London, with a further £200,000 approved in principle. This funding relates to a number of benefits including: a programme of business seminars, capacity building for the voluntary sector, street arts programmes, festivals brochures and a Pre Games training camp brochure. Kingston has benefited from these programmes and we expect these benefits to accumulate once the torch passes to London 2012.

38 Go South Go was established to ensure that south London’s interests are represented and that they share in any benefits to be gained. The Go South Go website gives details of the ways in which the Partnership is seeking to maximise local benefits, see www.gosouthgo.co.uk.

The advocacy of South London Partnership/ Go South Go was successful in ensuring that Surbiton Racket and Fitness Club and New Malden Bowmen / King’s College London are included in the London 2012 Pre-Games Training Venues programme, as is the nearby Surbiton Hockey Club.

In addition to the benefits of Go South Go partnership, Kingston has also drawn in additional resources through the sponsorship of Mears Group of three young athletes with their eyes on a place in the 2012 team.

Edmund Figueiredo (gymnast), Jonathan Smith (wheelchair racer) and Richard White (archer) all have a genuine chance of winning a place in Team GB for the 2012 Olympics. Thanks to the deal brokered by Kingston Council they will each receive at least £6,800 of sponsorship over the next four years.

The funding is being provided by Mears Limited, the company that is responsible for repairs to Council owned properties, and Sport Aid, a charity which helps the next generation of young athletes to succeed. Mears will sponsor each athlete to the tune of £1,200 - £2,000 per year, and Sport Aid will add a further £500 - £1,000.

Kingston has actively supported the development of SOS (Special Olympics Surrey) which is chaired by Councillor Yogan Yoganathan and covers most of Kingston as well as parts of some other south London boroughs.

Special Olympics Surrey (SOS) was formed on 26 September 2007 and is part of Special Olympics Great Britain (SOGB). The mission of Special Olympics Surrey (SOS) is to provide year round sports training and competition for people aged eight years and older with a learning disability, giving them continuing opportunities to develop physical fitness, demonstrate achievement and experience enjoyment . SOS athletes recently returned from the Winter Special Olympics with 13 medals, including five gold medals.

The legacy benefits form the Olympic Games will become clearer as the Games approach. However at this stage Kingston has expressed its interest and we will strongly argue the case that any legacy benefits should be weighted towards outer London and south London in particular.

By Councillor Nick Kilby To Councillor Rolson Davies

Question Please advise the Council of the current programme of events and activities being run by KVA with the grant provided following the termination of the Community Action project?

39 Reply The question implies that the funding was given to KVA in order that they continue the work of the CAP by running a programme of events on the Cambridge Road Estates. This was never the intention.

KVA’s role is a wider one, to: • Co-ordinate and play a leadership role in effective community development and engagement across the Borough, building on the lessons learned from the pilot Community Action Partnership and • Identify the focus and priorities of this work in liaison with Neighbourhood Chairs, Safer Neighbourhood teams, extended schools and health providers.

Within this role, KVA will be supporting the Community Development Worker based on the Cambridge Road Estates and the Cambridge Road Community Group, which is itself successfully providing a range of events and activities.

As part of developing community development across the borough, KVA has been meeting with key partners including Safer Neighbourhood Teams, Neighbourhood services managers, community groups and Kingston Primary Care Trust.

Additional funding for two community development workers has been allocated by Kingston PCT and the recruitment process is almost completed (interviews taking place in the week beginning 7 th July). Discussions have taken place with the PCT and the Council to identify the areas of the Borough in which to focus their work initially.

KVA’s five year Funding Agreement includes a Performance Framework which sets out objectives and outcomes for this aspect of their work as well as the wider work of the organisation. It has been agreed that an Annual Report on KVA’s community development work will be made to the Executive each year. As we learnt from the CAP, community development and engagement is a long term investment and it is important to lay the groundwork. Work with local residents and communities, as well as local partners, takes time to show results.

By Councillor Frank Thompson To Councillor Derek Osbourne, Leader of the Council

Question What is the cost to Kingston council taxpayers to provide the Council’s Free Tenant Finding Service?

Reply The Tenant Finder Service (TFS) forms one part of the Council’s strategy to provide cost-effective and good quality temporary accommodation for homeless households in the Borough as an alternative to Bed and Breakfast. The scheme places households in housing need in private sector tenancies in the Borough. TFS costs the Council £300,000 per annum. There are currently 214 active lettings. If these 214 households were not supported with private landlords and had to be housed in Bed and Breakfast accommodation there would be a cost to the public purse of £3million of which £500,000 would fall upon our council tax payers.

40 The scheme therefore represents a substantial saving to the council tax payer.

By Councillor Ken Smith To Councillor Derek Osbourne, Leader of the Council

Question Please confirm whether it is an Executive or delegated decision to use the Regulation of Investigatory Power Act to address thefts from borough parking meters and how the council assess the level of alleged criminal activity needed in order to use an Act primarily introduced in the interests of national security?

Reply To quote the Home Office, “The Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act (RIPA) legislates for using methods of surveillance and information gathering to help the prevention of crime, including terrorism.” It is therefore incorrect to assert that the Act was primarily introduced in the interests of National Security. In fact, the primary reason RIPA exists is because without it covert and targeted surveillance would be illegal under the Human Rights Act. RIPA provides a mechanism for legalising covert surveillance methods. Under the Act, the Council can only carry out directed (targeted) surveillance for the purposes of preventing or detecting crime or preventing disorder.

In this particular instance the Head of Legal Services acted in accordance with the Act and Regulations under delegated powers to authorise a targeted surveillance while the Council was the victim of a sustained series of thefts from its on-street parking meters. These thefts resulted not only in a loss of public revenue but also damage to equipment and associated repair and replacement costs. The revenue losses cannot be quantified but weekly collection returns during this period were, on occasions, £1,000 below normal. The on-going nature of the thefts made it imperative that action be taken to stem the losses.

Parking Services reported the incidents to the Police and the Audit Department. Internal investigations concluded that the thefts were being carried out by persons unconnected to the Council or any of its contractors that might have access to the equipment. With the agreement of Audit, the Head of Legal Services was approached to authorise a directed surveillance of parking meters in Old London Road; these being the only meters in the borough within direct view of a CCTV camera. It is worth noting that it was a location, not an individual, which was being targeted. The thefts continued throughout Kingston and Surbiton and, eventually, the meters in Old London Road were attacked. This activity was recorded through the CCTV. The recording was handed over to the Police for use in any subsequent court case. Eventually the Police apprehended the thieves and subsequently charged them for the offences.

As a result of this cooperative working between Parking Services, Audit, the CCTV Control Room and the Police two persons have been sentenced to 15 months imprisonment. The series of thefts has now ceased.