Agenda item

 

Question (a) from Cllr Convery to Cllr Watts, Leader of the Council:

 

What is the purpose of the Council's Twitter account? Whilst it is self-evidently an "outbound" communication channel from the Council to the public, is it also an "inbound" channel for our residents to speak to the Council?

 

Response:

 

Thank you for your question. It is both, inbound and outbound. The outbound speaks for itself, sending key messages, promoting events, promoting services and relaying important information on behalf of others such as the emergency services. As an inbound service, we answer questions, take complaints about services, and those elements of the service are handled by Contact Islington. We try as far as possible to refer people back to the relevant service. I can talk to you offline if there are elements of this you’d like to see changed. I think two-way communication is really important and even on this pandemic we’ve carried that on through virtual Leader’s Question Time sessions on Facebook Live, many wards have had online Ward Partnership meetings, virtual council meetings like this too. It is important that we carry that on at all times.

 

 

Question (b) from Cllr Poyser to Cllr Shaikh, Executive Member for Inclusive Economy and Jobs: 

 

I would like to thank the Heritage Team for finding the 'Upon Reflection' sculpture, thought to be lost, in the basement of the Town Hall, and Cllr Shaikh, for organising meetings, despite lockdown, of all the many interested parties, including our local MP, to get the sculpture 'resurrected' in our local Peace Park, part of Elthorne Park, N19. I would also like thank Parks and Heritage for getting a quote to resurrect the statue in a way that makes it less likely to be stolen for a third time.

 

Hillrise has far, far lower S106 funds than most Wards but, for our part, the local councillors are happy to put money aside for 'resurrecting' this sculpture as it helps our Philip Noel-Baker Peace Park maintain its atmosphere as a place for meditation and reflection - particularly on Peace. 

 

When can we expect the sculpture back in its rightful place, at the end of the fountains, rather than lurking, unloved, in the basement of Town Hall? Thanks to all concerned, particularly our MP Jeremy Corbyn who was present when the statue was unveiled in the 1980s.

 

Response:

 

Thank you. I’d like to commend you for your excellent work on the missing Peace Statute and for your tenacity and perseverance in making sure we move forward positively to return the statute to its rightful place in the Peace Garden.

 

The garden was opened in 1984 and is dedicated to peace in the memory of Philip Noel-Baker who was a British politician, a campaigner for nuclear disarmament, and Nobel Peace Prize winner. Five cherry trees were planted in the garden in memory of the 1945 atomic bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. The endeavour to replace the statute has been a whole council and community effort and I want to thank our Heritage Team for tracking down the statute in the basement of the Town Hall. Once this was done, it’s been a concerted effort between Heritage and Parks departments, the whole community, local councillors, and our local MP Jeremy Corbyn, whose strong connection to the history of the statue, together with his long and well documented record of working  for peace, social justice and nuclear disarmament, has meant that he has been a strong supporter of our efforts to restore the statue to its rightful place. In fact as Cllr Poyser mentions, Jeremy Corbyn was present at the unveiling, along with Bruce Kent, who is another resident of the borough. The Heritage Team have tracked down a wonderful photograph showing the unveiling as well. I am delighted to report that the Parks Department are ready to start work in January to return the statue to its rightful place by the pond in the garden. We hope it will be ready for a spring unveiling, bringing together the local community, councillors, Jeremy Corbyn, Bruce Kent and artist Kevin Atherton so again we can celebrate the council and community coming together to reiterate our commitment to supporting peace in the world. 

 

 

Question (c) from Cllr Heather to Cllr Ward, Executive Member for Housing:

 

At a Council Housing Scrutiny Committee meeting, Partners for Improvement indicated that the Council could propose changes to them regarding their housing services performance reporting system and its measures, including their Key Performance Indicators.

 

In my view the current system of KPIs used by Partners does not allow for adequate scrutiny of their housing services performance, and consequently this detracts from achieving service improvement for tenants; and this is especially the case in relation to their housing repairs service.

 

Therefore, do you agree with me that the Council needs to approach Partners to adopt a revised performance measurement system whereby they learn from job failures in order to improve the housing repairs service that they provide to tenants? This would include deeper qualitative analysis of the population of repair jobs that they fail to fix first time, so as to identify the causes of failure and solutions, in order to improve their housing repairs service to tenants.

 

Response:

 

Thank you for your question, Gary. I share your frustration with the current KPI’s provided by Partners and the need to ensure that their performance can be fully scrutinised by the council, so local people can see repairs fixed first time.

 

It would be possible to change the KPIs in the contract by agreement with Partners, but any change could lead to increased financial penalties for the company if the KPIs are not met, which means they are less likely to agree. Staff from the housing needs service are now speaking to Partners about performance measures and how they may be reported to the council in future and, in particular, they are looking at measures which give greater understanding of how many repairs were able to be fixed the first time. There is an opportunity with the contract to negotiate the provision of non-contractual performance data.

 

The recent social housing White Paper suggests ‘first time fix’ as a new measure of tenant satisfaction and this may be a requirement for all landlords in future.  We can use this as an opportunity in our discussions with Partners as we prepare with them for the forthcoming changes. I have also raised the issue of a more qualitative approach with the Partners Chief Executive several times and have asked that in future reports to Housing Scrutiny explain how difficult repairs are dealt with, showing communication with residents and satisfaction. We want more on first time fix, but also a more qualitative approach on the most difficult cases, and how residents are informed throughout. I will report back on progress at a future meeting.

 

Supplementary Question:

 

Thank you. I anticipated the answer on financial penalties, and I would hope that they wouldn’t issue penalties. At the last Housing Scrutiny meeting they seemed to be willing to engage on this, I know I can rely on you to progress this with them, and it would be to their advantage. It would lead to an increase in satisfaction from residents and everyone would benefit. The question is, if we do get to that stage, would you be able to argue that a qualitative approach would include involvement from councillors and from Partners residents?

 

Response:

 

I think that’s a really good idea. I’ve been working with Partners on how they present to Housing Scrutiny, you may remember that the last time they attended the Town Hall we had partners staff in the room next door who would be able to deal with individual longstanding casework. I want to see more creative approaches like that in all future engagement. I think that’s a good idea.

 

 

Question (d) from Cllr Ismail to Cllr Lukes, Executive Member for Community Safety:

 

Metropolitan Police figures from 2019 showed that half of all knife crime offenders in London are teenagers or even younger children. As knife crime continues to rise consistently, the number of young people directly or indirectly involved in violent knife crime will only continue to grow sadly. Islington is not immune to this trend, as we have lost far too many young people, there has been tragic example in September in my ward Holloway.

 

My question is, as a newly appointed Community Safety Executive member, what are your priorities and how are you going to engage young black and brown boys, who are often marginalised, misunderstood and far too often this Council ignored parents crying out for support?

 

Response:

 

Thank you for your question. I wanted to correct one thing in your question, you say that Islington is not immune from the trend of increasing knife crime across London. In fact, the figures show the opposite. We have made substantial improvements in youth safety in recent years. Since 2017 the number of knife crime injuries of those under 25 have fallen by 46%. The number of first time entrants into the youth justice system has reduced by 24%. We are very proud of the improvements we have made, but we have made them in spite of the government making it far more difficult for us. They have made cuts to local government, cuts to community safety, cuts to police budgets over the last decade, and despite that we have made those improvements.

 

I am proud that we have made those improvements, but every time I receive a message about an incident in our borough, I worry that it will be another young person who is injured or has lost their life. One victim of knife crime is one too many, and we have to engage with what is causing knife crime and how we can change that. It’s a complicated problem. It’s a systemic problem and it also involves racism. We know you are 10 times more likely to be stopped and searched if you are black. We know that 40% of young people in custody are black. A quarter of adult prisoners are black, but only 12% of the population. There is clearly a massive disproportionality and we want to work with the Mayor of London to resolve the lack of confidence and trust in the police by many of our black populations. I am engaging as you know with those communities. We have both been in meetings with the Somali community, and this is resulting in an action plan we are discussing with community groups. I hope you will join me and other councillors will also work with us to keep our communities safe.

 

Supplementary Question:

 

Thank you. I would be very interested to see those figures as the figures I have are slightly different. However, I’d like to ask a further question. Islington Council has made a £2million commitment to tackling the root causes of serious youth violence in the borough and has commissioned two charities to work on this. With such a huge amount spent over the last four years, and with youth violence being such a significant ongoing issue, what has been achieved with the £2million and why has the council not worked with local organisations that know Islington and young people on this?

 

Response:

 

As I explained earlier ,we have succeeded in reducing knife crime incidents and the number of entrants into the youth justice system. We have done that by diverting them away from the sorts of activities that get them involved in crime. We have invested and we have seen results. In terms of who we work with, we are working with many locally based organisations, some of them funded by the council, some funded elsewhere, some not funded at all. As executive member, I will always start with our local communities, look to define what community safety is, and we start from the assumption that no-one is safe unless everyone is safe. Knife crime affects us all, it doesn’t just affect the friends and family of the victims. It affects everyone and I hope that by working with our communities we get to a place where none of us have to worry about knife crime and we will not see any more victims of this sort of crime. It is a huge ambition but is one shared by all of our communities and I hope we get there.

 

Question (e) from Cllr Ismail to Cllr O’Halloran, Executive Member for Community Development:

 

Since 2010 this Council has been supporting and funding our voluntary organisations who do some excellent work in Islington. Has the Council made a proper review of tangible outcomes holistically to see what has been achieved and the gaps to improve future Council services and Voluntary Community sector delivery for Islington residents?

 

Response:

 

Thank you for your question Cllr Ismail. I am immensely proud of our ongoing commitment to Islington’s voluntary sector through our VCS Partnership Grants Programme, our Local Initiatives Fund and Community Chest. The response of Islington’s VCS to the current crisis has been incredible and indicative of the value of the sector to life in the borough. I’d like to thank all partners, their work is incredible.

 

We have recently agreed £2.7 million per-annum of core grant funding for Islington’s voluntary sector through our VCS Partnership Grants Programme 2021 to 2024. We have continued providing this funding, despite being forced to make significant cuts to our budget each year since 2010 as a result of Government austerity. Throughout the assessment, recommendations, and decision-making process, an ongoing assessment of all funding applications is made considering equalities impacts and the even spread of initiatives across the borough. Details of this are included in the Equalities Impact Assessment of the report to Islington’s VCS Committee in September 2020.

 

Through this grants programme we undertake detailed and in-depth monitoring visits, which assess the tangible impact of each organisation as well as taking an overview of each organisation’s contribution to the Council’s priorities. This work includes a holistic assessment of each funded organisation, including the services delivered, governance, financial viability, safeguarding, communications and staff and volunteer development. This approach has helped develop a strong and vibrant voluntary sector that responds flexibly to resident need. We are always keen to work with our increasingly diverse voluntary sector to ensure funding is evenly distributed across the borough and encourage all organisations to apply for funding and support.

 

But, after a decade of government cuts to local services, this is becoming ever more challenging. I’m sure you will join me Cllr Ismail in calling for more funding from central government to ensure we can better support our wonderful VCS organisations across Islington.

 

Supplementary Question:

 

Thank you. Part of my question was if there has been a review done in the last ten years, and I don’t think that has been answered. Of course I support the voluntary sector and I have been working for a long time in the field. In the last ten years has there been a review, and in the last four years of funding to make organisations sustainable, has any organisation become sustainable? What have we achieved as a council in those four years? The council must be accountable. Have you done that review in terms of accountability, are they sustainable or are they dependent on the council?

 

Response:

 

Thank you. We have done a review, we have lots of organisations that bring money into the borough and stand on their own. I am proud of our voluntary sector. I’d be happy to meet you and discuss this. We are aware of the gaps that we are still working on, but I assure you, every single voluntary organisation is assessed and we are very proud of the sector. We have strict monitoring procedures. I visit every organisation and meet and understand their problems. But we have been cut year on year by the government, I would welcome your support to get more government funding so we can do more.

 

Question (f) from Cllr Russell to Cllr Champion, Executive Member for Environment and Transport:

 

The newly adopted transport strategy policy 1C committing “to provide alternatives to car ownership” is welcome. The policy commits to reduce the number of privately owned cars in the borough by 6.9% from a baseline of 37,372 cars by 2041. That is a reduction of just 2,578 cars over twenty years to 2041 leaving 34,794 cars still being parked in Islington in 20 years time. The policy states you expect car ownership to be down by 3.7% by next year, that's 1,382 fewer cars parked in Islington compared to the baseline.  Do you expect to meet this target?

 

Response:

 

Thank you. The answer is yes, we do.

 

Supplementary Question:

 

Thank you. My supplementary question is that, why is the 2041 target only for a 6.9% reduction when we can achieve 3.7% by next year. Especially when reducing car ownership is so vital to achieving the other targets in the transport strategy. Will you review that target?

 

Response:

 

My understanding is that the targets in the strategy are in line with the Mayor of London’s strategy, but I agree we can do better than that. I think we will be standing by our figures, but that doesn’t mean we can’t do better. 

 

 

Question (g) from Cllr Russell to Cllr Gill, Executive Member for Finance and Performance

 

Over recent years council tax arrears have increased year on year for the cohort of residents eligible for council tax relief. The number of cases of arrears has increased, the amount these households owe has increased and the council’s overall net liability has increased. How many open cases are there for council tax relief arrears for the year 2019/20 and what is the value of the open cases?

 

Response:

 

Thank you. The total value of 2019/20 arrears in relation to households in receipt of Council Tax Relief is £900,264 consisting of 3,162 open cases as at the 30^th October 2020.

 

Supplementary Question:

 

Thank you. I’ve been speaking to officers today about these figures and I realise that the numbers of the year we are different to what they would be, as the government has been providing support as part of the Covid response. What I’m worried about is these arrears growing year on year amongst a cohort of people who are eligible for working age benefits and we know that as we come out of the pandemic we will be in a very different and difficult economic situation. Will the council have a good look to see if it is possible to find a way to relieve this cohort of residents of the burden of paying that 8.5% council tax they are expected to pay, when in a normal year those arrears would have grown year on year?

 

Response:

 

Thank you. I think the real problem is not that we are not prepared to look at ways to alleviate the difficulties our residents face, we are happy to look at it and try to help them in any way we can. The difficulty is the government will not provide us with the money required to fully fund council tax support and they have refused to provide it for seven years now. Every year we have to increase the amount we put into the resident support scheme. What we need to do is support the most vulnerable, those who are in the most difficulty, and that’s what we will do. Even if the government were to come up with a 2% increase I would happily allocate it to providing additional support. If there is any way of finding the extra money I’d be happy to look at it.

 

 

Question (h) from Cllr Smith to Cllr Gill, Executive Member for Finance and Performance

 

This year, more than any other, public sector workers have been the everyday heroes keeping our borough running. From carers looking after those in need, to paramedics keeping people safe and refuse collectors keeping our street clean, they have all played their part throughout the pandemic.

 

In light of this, will the Council condemn the Government’s shameful public sector pay freeze, putting the burden of paying for the pandemic on those everyday heroes?

 

Response:

 

Thank you for your question Paul and I completely agree that the Government’s decision to freeze public sector pay next year is utterly shameful. Throughout this pandemic, the Government has handed out public money to their mates in the private sector. In September, it was estimated that the UK had spent £2.5bn on procurement contracts related to Covid-19, with at least £1bn of Covid-19 contracts awarded without a competitive process. That figure is only likely to have increased in the months since.

 

During this time, as you say, it has been the public sector workers keeping our borough safe, healthy and clean. It is simply wrong that refuse collectors and carers will be left with less money next year than this year. Rather than clapping for them each Thursday and then announcing a real-terms pay cut, they should be receiving a pay rise, fully funded by government, to reflect the hard work and dedication they have undertaken this year. This just goes to show how useless this government is and that austerity is still very much alive for our public sector workers. We will do everything we can to fight this government and stand up for our public service heroes in Islington.

 

 

Question (i) Cllr Ozdemir to Cllr O’Halloran, Executive Member for Community Development

 

The Windrush scandal was a racially-motivated Government-led disaster on our Black community. People who had lived their whole lives here were put through misery and some deported to places they had never lived in their lives. That was bad enough but the fact that the Government’s supposed compensation scheme is delaying payments and then offering derisory amounts of money rubs salt in the wounds for those who suffered so much.

 

Will the Council agree to write to the Home Office, expressing its dismay with this process and calling on the Government to immediately provide adequate funding for those who have been wronged?

 

Response:

 

Thank you for this important question Gulcin and for the work you do as Migrants Champion. I completely agree with you regarding the tragedy of the Windrush scandal and the impact it has had on the lives of many local people. When the Government consulted on the Windrush Compensation Scheme, the Council responded expressing our view that the proposed eligibility criteria did not stretch far enough and the compensation would not cover all of the losses felt by the victims. Since then, this has been proven to be the case. These are people who have every right to be here, some who have lived in the UK their whole lives – they are part of our wonderful community and it is completely unacceptable that they have been put through misery by the Government in recent years. This is shameful.

 

I agree to write to the Home Office to express the Council’s opposition to the process and restate our recommendations for improving the scheme that we included in our consultation response. This whole scandal has made people a misery and we need to do all we can to support people. It’s a disgrace. 

 

 

 

The Mayor advised that the time allowed for questions had expired and the following question would receive a written response.

 

 

Question (j) from Cllr Graham to Cllr Ward, Executive Member for Housing

 

As the Government’s policy which requires leaseholders to get an ESW1 form is clearly not fit for purpose, what is the Council doing to support leaseholders in this?

 

Written Response:

 

Resident safety is our top priority. All Islington homes meet current fire safety regulations and up to date assessments are available on our website.

 

The EWS1 form, which is used by mortgage lenders to assess their preparedness to lend on buildings with external wall systems, such as cladding, has caused a range of issues for leaseholders. Despite being created in an attempt to simplify the system, it has caused problems for many leaseholders who have been unable to secure a mortgage.

 

There are a number of fundamental issues with the form and its application, including clarity on the size of building which needs the form, a national shortage of independent professionals that are both suitably technically qualified and have a suitable level of professional indemnity insurance, and issues with the costs associated with the form and who should pay them.

 

The council is not planning to complete any EWS1 forms until further guidance is received from central government. In the meantime we will assist leaseholders where possible by providing fire risk assessments, providing information relating to completed and planned fire safety works, advocating for leaseholders with their lender and campaigning through local members to petition parliament to make the system work.