Agenda and minutes

It was with sadness that the Mayor announced the recent deaths of former Councillors and past Mayors Bert Tyrell and Alf Langley. All stood for a minute silence in their memory.

 

The Mayor informed the meeting of the events that had taken place since she had been Mayor and, in particular highlighted the following:

 

i)       A very successful Veterans’ Tea Party had been held to celebrate Armed Forces Day along with a display of army vehicles on the Forecourt.

ii)      An event for dedicated carers had been held in Ruislip.

iii)     The Mayor informed Members that the launch of her Charities for the coming year would be held on 14 July in the Pavilions.

 

To take questions submitted by members of the public in accordance with Council Procedure Rule 10.

Question 5.1 from Tony Ellis to the Cabinet Member for Improvement, Partnership and Community Safety – Councillor Mills.

 

What were the details of the cost/benefit analysis that was produced prior to the introduction of the Hillingdon First card?”

 

Question 5.2 from Valerie Mellor to the Cabinet Member for Improvement, Partnership and Community Safety – Councillor Mills

 

With regard to the Hillingdon First Card, what is the total cost and the cost of the various elements, in particular:

·         Computer set-up costs

·         Number and cost of cards

·         Cost of distribution of cards

·         Cost of consultation

·         Cost of publicity

·         Cost and number of new parking machines

·         Staff costs for set-up of scheme and number of staff employed directly on administration

o             of card

o             Annual running costs - staff

o             maintenance

o             computer systems

o             other

 

Question 5.3 from Lesley Davis to the Cabinet Member for Improvement, Partnership and Community Safety – Councillor Mills

 

Can you please let me know when does the Council propose to review the success or failure of the Hillingdon First Card scheme and how will that be measured?”

 

Councillor Mills gave a detailed response to questions 5.1 to 5.3 which he hoped would enable residents to better understand the introduction of the Hillingdon First Card. The cost of the implementation of the card was a material consideration for residents but it is hoped that in future it would become self funding. Councillor Mills highlighted the various consultations undertaken with residents, stakeholders and the Older People’s Assembly with a number of comments being received from a large part of the borough. During the consultation residents had informed the Council of what they would like to see the card used for and a vast majority of residents welcomed the Card.

 

Currently the card could be used at Libraries, for reduced parking and a discount scheme through local businesses. In the future this would be extended to use at Leisure Centres and would replace the Council Tax Card, which in turn would mean efficiency savings.

 

The replacement of parking meters was something that would have been required in the next 2 to 3 years and bringing this forward had enabled the Council to negotiate a significant saving. The meters that had been installed were solar powered, which would generate significant savings on electricity costs in the future.

 

The administration wanted to put Hillingdon residents first and Councillor Mills believed that the Hillingdon First Card did that. A review would be carried out next year with feedback being sought from residents and business. Councillor Mills was convinced that history would prove the Hillingdon First Card to be a well thought through and excellent scheme.

 

Questions 5.4 from Lisa Maclay to the Leader of the Council

 

At a recent committee meeting of Northwood Residents’ Association, attended by the Leader of the Council, Ray Puddifoot, I understand he claimed that libraries would be used more with the introduction of the card. Please could he say why this would be so?

 

Councillor Puddifoot replied that this authority was the only authority that was refurbishing its libraries where as others were closing them. At the Northwood Residents’ Association meeting their members had been informed that the Hillingdon First Card would make it easier for residents to join the Library. It was hoped that by the end of the month the card would enable residents to join without requiring any additional proofs of identification. The refurbishment of Northwood Library would start very shortly and should be complete by the end of September.

 

Question 5.5 from Gay Brown to the Cabinet Member for Improvement, Partnership and Community Safety – Councillor Mills

 

In 2007 Nick Hurd’s Sustainable Communities Bill was passed. This legislation would allow us to get government funding to carry out renewal projects throughout the declining areas across the South of the Borough. Over 120 local authorities have signed up to the Bill. Can we please have an explanation of why, since Nick is one of our local MP’s, Hillingdon seem reluctant to sign up to the Act?

 

Councillor Douglas Mills responded that the questioner had been misinformed about the Sustainability Act as there was no sign up process and no new money from the Government to carry out renewal projects. Cabinet earlier this year asked Council to agree to use the Sustainable Communities Act 2007 where there were proposals for a revised pattern of spending that would give demonstrable benefits to local residents or businesses or, which would assist with implementation of the Council Plan or the Sustainable Community Strategy.

 

One way the Council had brought this to residents was the Streets Ahead Scheme, which provided a successful way of engaging with the local community. Currently the Council were rolling out a comprehensive Streets Ahead Project across all wards by the end of March 2010.

 

Question 5.7 from Mrs Siobhan Bryan to the Cabinet Member for Education and Children’s Services – Councillor David Simmonds

 

Was the Stables building (on the Manor Farm Complex) included in the bid for National Lottery Funding?

 

Question 5.8 from Sally Ferri to the Cabinet Member for Education and Children’s Services – Councillor David Simmonds

 

What assessment of the demand for pre-school nursery provision in the North Ruislip area has the council made within the past two years and will it publish the results?

 

Question 5.9 from Cecil Wood to the Cabinet Member for Education and Children’s Services – Councillor David Simmonds

 

What planning or listed building consents relating to The Stables were required for the refurbishment of the Manor Farm site and what conditions, if any, were specified in the contents?

 

Question 5.10 from Mrs Norman to the Cabinet Member for Education and Children’s Services – Councillor David Simmonds

 

What is the council's policy on the provision of pre-school nursery places?

 

Question 5.11 from Mrs Apuzzo to the Cabinet Member for Education and Children’s Services – Councillor David Simmonds

 

Does the Council acknowledge that pre-school nursery provision is beneficial to children's education?

 

Question 5.12 from Emilie & Shammi Malik to the Cabinet Member for Education and Children’s Services – Councillor David Simmonds

 

In the current environment LBH should be doing everything within his power to maximize revenues. How does it make sense to reduce income by not renewing a lease and at the same time using the hard earned money of local tax payers to provide kitchen facilities to feed our local councillors? This would not even happen in a third world country.

 

Question 5.13 from Kamal Julka to the Cabinet Member for Education and Children’s Services – Councillor David Simmonds

 

This school is not a prime time commercial property, if the children, parents, staff and everyone in the community is happy and support the school - why should you / council not intervene and help instead of closing it down- after all you own the lease and have the power to decide the school's future?

 

 

Question 5.14 from Steve Bunce to the Cabinet Member for Education and Children’s Services – Councillor David Simmonds

 

What undertakings relating to The Stables and/or its future use were included in the National Lottery application?

 

Question 5.15 from Angela O’Shea to the Cabinet Member for Education and Children’s Services – Councillor David Simmonds

 

Why did it take over seven months for the council to respond to my letter dated 24 November 2008 requesting "first refusal" of the future use of The Stables at the Manor Farm Complex in order to continue the provision of a pre-school nursery on the site?

 

Question 5.16 from Mrs Gill Ewing to the Cabinet Member for Education and Children’s Services – Councillor David Simmonds

 

How many pre-school nursery places are there currently in the North Ruislip area and how many will there be in September 2009?

 

Question 5.17 from Mrs C Vardy to the Cabinet Member for Education and Children’s Services – Councillor David Simmonds

 

Why was the Stables the only building not to benefit from the National Lottery funded refurbishment on the Manor Farm site in North Ruislip?

 

Question 5.18 from Nicola Mott to the Cabinet Member for Education and Children’s Services – Councillor David Simmonds

 

What is the council's statutory duty in the provision of pre-school nursery places?

 

Councillor Simmonds provided a single comprehensive response to questions 5.6 – 5.18 and stated that, initially he would provide a general response concerning the situation at Manor Farm and secondly provide answers to a few of the more specific questions asked.

 

Councillor Simmonds informed the meeting that the Council had granted a licence, which was personal to an individual and not owned by a business, to allow a Montessori School to be run at the Stables Building on the Manor Farm Site in Ruislip. This business, by all accounts, gained a good reputation and attracted high ratings from OfSTED and although small in size, had clearly been highly valued by its users. On 28 October 2008, the licensee wrote to the Council, informing it that she intended to terminate her licence on 15 July 2009 and as a result of this, she would be closing the Montessori School. Councillor Simmonds could not comment on the reasons for this decision, nor on any discussions she may or may not have undertaken with parents, staff or prospective purchasers of the business. He wished to make it quite clear to all those raising questions that the licensee had exercised her right to make this decision. The licensee had her own reasons for doing so; she acted fully in accordance with her rights and it is important to note that the Council did not in any way attempt to influence her, or to play any part in her decision to close the school. Once the licence was terminated, the Stables Building would revert back to the Council and it would not be legally possible for the licensee to try and sell it on to a third party. The reason for this is that the licence was personal and not capable of being assigned to another person or business. Therefore, another party could not simply step into the shoes of the licensee and take over the running of the School as a going concern. Councillor Simmonds read from a letter received by Councillor Higgins from the licensee which he believed shed further light on the matter. It was not marked as private and confidential and described the licensees’ perspective on the situation.

 

Councillor Simmonds then referred to the number of available childcare places. A Childcare Sufficiency report, produced by the Education and Children Services Department, stated that there were sufficient childcare places available in the area. The Education and Children Services Department had also clearly stated that, even if the 28 places at the School were removed, there would still be sufficient childcare places available not only in the Eastcote and East Ruislip Ward but also surrounding Wards, in accordance with established guidelines.

 

Councillor Simmonds confirmed that the Heritage Lottery Fund bid did not include the Stables building but had focussed on key aspects of the heritage and history of the site. Because of the age of the heritage buildings and the high costs of renovating the Great Barn, Manor House and Library, the Lottery funds had to be targeted very precisely. The Council would need now to decide what steps it should take in respect of the future of the Stables Building. In formulating its plans, the Council recognised that the Heritage Lottery Fund had identified the Manor Farm Site as one of its top fifteen projects in London it had worked with over the last fifteen years. The Council wished to make it clear that it planned to continue to maximise the potential of the Manor Farm site by investing in the future and putting into place a sustainable business plan that would ensure that the site could be fully utilised for public enjoyment. The business plan would need to carefully reflect on the potential uses of the building vacated by the Montessori School. This in turn would establish the site's potential as a cultural hub for both residents and visitors to the borough.

 

Councillor Simmonds then referred to some of the more specific questions asked as follows:

 

“What assessment of the demand for pre-school nursery provision in the North Ruislip area has the council made within the past two years and will it publish the results?” Councillor Simmonds reiterated that the full childcare sufficiency assessment was published in March 2008 and was available on the Council website.

 

"What is the council's policy on the provision of pre-school nursery places?" Councillor Simmonds stated that the Council had a statutory duty to secure the provision of free early education places. The sufficiency assessment, published in March 2008, reflected that there was sufficient childcare provision in the ward in which the Montessori is located. The Council also had a duty to improve outcomes for all young children, particularly the most disadvantaged. The Council worked extensively with all registered group provision to raise the quality of provision.

 

“Does the Council acknowledge that pre-school nursery provision is beneficial to children's education?” Councillor Simmonds acknowledged that good quality pre-school provision was fundamental to raising standards. The Council had been working with the private, voluntary and independent providers of pre-school provision over the last 11 years to raise quality and increase provision, particularly in areas of the Borough where there was insufficient provision.

 

“Why did it take over seven months for the council to respond to my letter dated 24 November 2008 requesting “first refusal” of the future use of The Stables at the Manor Farm Complex in order to continue the provision of a pre-school nursery on the site?” Councillor Simmonds stated that he understood that officers had verbally contacted the questioner to respond to the query and informed her that they would respond at the appropriate time which they then did in early April.

 

“How many pre-school nursery places are there currently in the North Ruislip area and how many will there be in September 2009?” Councillor Simmonds responded that, currently the total number of places in the Manor, Northwood, West Ruislip and Eastcote & East Ruislip ward areas combined was 891 places. In the Eastcote and East Ruislip ward, which is where the Montessori school was located, there were currently 220 childcare places. Of these, 168 were provided by group providers and were specifically for children aged 0-5. This did not include provision in nursery classes. Councillor Simmonds was unable to specify how many there would be in September 2009 but if Manor House Montessori closed and no other providers opened or closed, there would be a loss of 28 places, making a total of 192 childcare places available overall.

 

“What is the council's statutory duty in the provision of pre-school nursery places?” Councillor Simmonds stated that the Council had a statutory duty to secure the provision of free early education places. The sufficiency assessment, published in March 2008, reflected that there was sufficient childcare provision in the ward in which Manor House Montessori is located.

 

i) Membership Changes and appointments to Outside Bodies

 

Councillor G Cooper moved the changes to appointment to Committees and Outside Bodies as set out on the Order of Business. This was seconded by Councillor Markham.

 

Resolved: That the following appointments to Committees and Outside Bodies be agreed:

 

·        Friends of Eastcote Coach House Gardens - Appoint Councillor Lavery to the Conservative vacancy.

·        Hillingdon Sports Council - Remove Councillor Simmonds and replace with Councillor Buttivant.

·        Relate - Appoint Councillor Seaman-Digby to the Conservative vacancy.

·        Internal Member Body - Early Years Development and Childcare Forum - Appoint Councillor Elizabeth Kemp to the Conservative vacancy.

·        Brigginshaw & Others Charitable Trusts - Cllrs Allen, Macdonald and Way.

·        Colne Valley Partnership – Councillor Way will replace Michael Craxton.

·        Hillingdon Arts Association – Councillor Macdonald will replace Michael Craxton.

·        Uxbridge United Welfare Trusts – Re-appoint Councillor Routledge and Mrs P Crawley.

·        West Drayton and Yiewsley Aid In Sickness Fund – Re-appoint Councillor Banks.

 

(i)     Proposed Amendments to the Constitution and Timetable of Meetings

 

Councillor Ray Puddifoot moved the amendments to the constitution as set out on the Order of Business.  This was seconded by Councillor David Simmonds.

To consider further the level of increase for the current financial year

Councillor Corthorne moved and Councillor Simmonds seconded and it was:

 

RESOLVED: That Council:

 

a)     Rescind its previous decision made on 26 February 2009 to set an annual average increase of 6.2% in rents payable by its tenants in respect of the 2009/10 financial year.

 

b)     Agree that there should be an annual average increase of 3.1% in rents payable by its tenants in respect of the 2009/10 financial year with effect from 6 April 2009.

To take questions submitted by Members in accordance with Council Procedure Rule 11

8.2 Question from Councillor P Kemp to the Cabinet Member for Environment – Councillor Jenkins

 

Could the Cabinet Member for the Environment tell me the cost of removing the unsightly fly posting in Yiewsley High Street placed by one of the political parties represented in this chamber during the recent elections?”

 

Councillor Jenkins responded that the Council took fly-posting very seriously. Street furniture in particular could be affected by illegal and unsightly material that could lead to the blight of a particular area. Fly-posting was an offence under the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 and the Highways Act 1980. Offenders could be fined up to £2,500 on conviction for this offence and over the last year Hillingdon Council had dealt with:

 

·                    45 incidents of fly-posting on private land

·                    228 incidents on highways land and;

·                    16 incidents on litter bins

 

As for the case referred to in this question, on being made aware of fly posting in Yiewsley High Street, the Council’s Waste Division dispatched a street cleansing team to remove them. Operatives were near to the area and therefore only marginal costs were incurred of £30 in relation to manpower and vehicle costs. Councillor Jenkins stated that she understood that photographs taken of this fly-posting showed that it was party political in nature. This is not only unacceptable behaviour and potentially a prosecutable offence; but more significantly for the Cabinet Member for Environment it was an irresponsible use of public resources as professional street cleaning staff were diverted away from other duties.

 

Councillor Kemp, by way of a supplementary question asked if the Lead Member agreed that this showed a total disregard for the law to, which Councillor Jenkins responded she absolutely agreed.

 

8.5 Question from Councillor Garg to the Leader of the Council – Councillor Puddifoot

 

While accepting that the planning application for the construction of up to 3750 homes on the former Southall Gas Works site will be decided through the normal planning process, can the Leader of the Council say whether he agrees that the impact of this development on Hayes Town could be so great that the Council should refuse to sell the land it owns, which is needed for access to the site from the Hayes By-Pass, until any detrimental impacts have been addressed and maximum benefits secured for the people of Hillingdon?

 

Councillor Puddifoot responded that to refer to the outline planning application and comment on it would be inappropriate as the matter was still to be considered by the Council. On a general concern regarding the impact of any development on Hayes Town Centre this would be taken into account when considering any development in the surrounding area.

 

There was no supplementary question.

 

8.3       Question from Councillor Cox to the Cabinet Member for Education and Children’s Services – Councillor Simmonds

 

In relation to the continuation of an excellent Pre School nursery at the Stables in the Manor Farm Complex for how long has it been the administration’s policy to allow a good school facility to close in order to prioritise outside catering kitchen facilities?

 

Councillor Simmonds responded and referred to his comprehensive response to a number of public questions earlier in the meeting. He reiterated that the closure of the school was the decision of the principle and not that of the Council.

 

Councillor Cox then asked if the Cabinet Member could confirm if the Guide Troop had been given notice to quit? Councillor Simmonds responded absolutely not.

 

8.1 Question from Councillor Bishop to the Cabinet Member for Improvement, Partnerships and Community Safety - Councillor Mills

 

How many pupils who live in Northwood Hills Ward attend Ruislip High School?

 

Councillor Mills responded that the information to answer this question was not available to him.

 

Councillor Bishop then queried the use of S106 monies from developments in Northwood Hills that had been spent in the Ruislip area. Councillor Mills responded that he thought this was an interesting question as the decision was taken when the Member was a Conservative Councillor and had voted in favour of these proposals.

 

8.4 Question from Councillor Hensley to the Leader of the Council – Councillor Puddifoot

 

The Mayor of London has established an Outer London Commission to report to him in July about the particular needs of Boroughs such as ours and to assist him in his policy to rewrite the London Plan. What involvement has Hillingdon had in this process?

 

Councillor Puddifoot replied that there had been a change of approach since the election of the new Mayor of London with all London Boroughs being included.  Suggestions had been put forward that would benefit Hillingdon residents.  These include the Super Hub, flexible parking standards, local planning decisions and crime prevention, so the current Mayor of London was a breath of fresh air.

 

There was no supplementary question.

 

8.6 Question from Councillor Khursheed to the Leader of the Council – Councillor Puddifoot (the question was answered by Councillor Douglas Mills)

 

Can the Leader of the Council explain why the system set up by the Council and the Police, to monitor community tensions in the Borough, fails to include all Ward Councillors and Members of Parliament as both potential sources and recipients of information and will he give an undertaking that this will be remedied immediately?”

 

Councillor Mills responded that the system set up by the Council and police to monitor community tensions relied upon reports from the police and members of the public, including elected Members. Any member of the public, including Councillors and MPs could go onto the Council's website and follow the links in the Community and Living section to make an on-line report or call the Stronger Communities Manager directly. These reports were then included in the discussion at the community tension meeting. The Council were currently rolling out a programme of Safer and Stronger Communities training to all staff to alert them to how they could report community tension. It was intended to hold a similar session and produce a briefing note for Councillors later in the year. In addition it was planned to improve the access to the on-line reporting form to make it even easier for members of the public, officers and elected representatives to send in their concerns about community tension.

 

Where appropriate, members of the public were contacted to let them know any outcomes of their reports. This was not always possible, however, due to the sensitive nature of both the information given and the actions taken by the police, council or other partners.

 

Councillor Khursheed stated that when the system was first introduced it was agreed that councillors would be involved in this system from the beginning and asked why had this not happened? Councillor Mills replied that the system had only been introduced within the last 6 months and the police made a judgement as to the sensitivity of the information they received. Officers would be asked to include the Leaders of the opposition and Ward Councillors in the circulation list.

 

8.7 Question from Councillor Allen to the Cabinet Member for Culture, Sport and Leisure – Councillor Higgins

 

Seeing that the Council has conspicuously failed to erect a signboard to tell the people of Hayes about the Botwell Green Sports and Leisure Centre, will the Cabinet Member for Culture, Sport and Leisure give a commitment that local residents will be given the opportunity to shape the programme of activities so that the Centre meets local needs and at prices they can afford to pay?

 

Councillor Higgins responded that this Council remained committed to ensuring residents had access to affordable sports and leisure opportunities and that was why the current fees and charges had been frozen at last year’s level as one of the ways in helping residents during the recession. The new leisure centre and library at Botwell Green due to open early next year would provide residents in Hayes with fantastic new sports facilities. Alongside this there would be extensive health and fitness facilities and a specialist gymnastics centre. The Sports and Leisure team would be working with local clubs, groups and organisations to ensure that the centre had a wide and varied programme of activities that would have something for everyone to enjoy and take part in.

 

Councillor Allen asked if the Cabinet Member had visited the site recently and was he aware of the land grab that had taken place form Botwell Bowling Club? Councillor Higgins replied that he visited the site regularly and he would ask officers to investigate the issue raised by the Councillor and report back to her.

 

8.8 Question from Councillor Harmsworth to the Cabinet Member for Culture, Sport and Leisure – Councillor Higgins

 

Would the Cabinet Member confirm or otherwise, the information that I have received from a resident that a number of members of staff were instructed to use the ice rink in the early days of the Christmas period to make it look popular and that one member of staff suffered broken bones as a result?

 

Councillor Higgins advised that because of the serious nature of this question it had been investigated and the accident record books passed on by the supplier of the ice rink checked. There was no record of such an incident where a member of staff had suffered broken bones and at no point had staff been encouraged to use the ice rink to make it look busy. Had this been the case the sessions during the day, Mondays to Friday would have attracted large numbers and sold out. In fact the opposite was true where these sessions’ attracted low numbers with the only bookings came from schools and uniformed groups. The only known accident involving a member of staff occurred during the VIP evening when an individual, who had chosen to skate, had slipped and fell which had led to the individual being taken to hospital with a suspected hairline fracture of the wrist. This was diagnosed by the hospital as severe bruising and a bad sprain. Councillor Higgins expressed his desire for Members to celebrate the success of the event instead of constantly seeking to be critical and trying to capitalise on it.

 

There was no supplementary question.

 

8.9 Question from Councillor Way to the Cabinet Member for Social Services, Health and Housing – Councillor Corthorne

 

Can the Cabinet Member for Social Services Health and Housing reassure Members and Hillingdon’s Council Tenants by confirming that there are no plans to knock down our Council Housing Stock and move out people on low income to other parts of London, as appears to be the case in the London Borough of Hammersmith and Fulham?

 

Councillor Corthorne stated that he was not aware of the situation in Hammersmith & Fulham and could not therefore refer to it. However he sought to reassure Members that there were no plans to knock down council housing stock in Hillingdon or to move people to other parts of London. In fact, Hillingdon had been one of the few Local Authorities in the country to continue to build new properties and had completed over 50 new units in the last few years. Lady Craig Court was a good example of this council continuing to build quality accommodation for local people and the Council continued to have plans to build more units of accommodation through the HRA Pipeline scheme. It was hoped that this would deliver up to 260 new units of accommodation in future years, including properties for rent and also low cost home ownership.  Of course, these plans had been impacted on by the current economic climate but the initiative would be continued, looking for opportunities to bid for the money Government had made available for house building and converting home ownership units for rent where appropriate in the short term.

 

As for people moving to other parts of London, the Council’s Choice Based Lettings system provided opportunities for people to bid for properties outside our area, thus giving people the opportunity to move should they wish, for economic or family reasons for example. The Council did not force people to move out of the borough for any reason.

 

Councillor Way asked if the Lead member would condemn the actions of the London Borough of Hammersmith and Fulham? Councillor Corthorne stated that he had no knowledge of the affairs of other Authorities.

 

To consider Motions submitted by Members in accordance with Council Procedure Rule 12

9.1 MOTION FROM COUNCILLOR JANET GARDNER

 

Councillor Gardner moved the following motion:-

 

“That this Council deplores the fact that two British National Party candidates have been elected to represent the interests of the United Kingdom in the European Parliament and believes that their divisive and ill-informed views are a danger to the cohesion of the nation.

 

While welcoming the failure of the BNP to secure a seat in London, this Council is alarmed to see that it received 4689 votes from Hillingdon residents. It believes that this demonstrates that there can be no room for complacency as a result of the BNP’s lack of electoral breakthrough in London and that all of us here must work together to prevent them advancing in the 2010 Borough Council elections.

 

The Council resolves to re-double its efforts to break down barriers between communities in the Borough and calls on the Cabinet to review the actions being taken by the Council and its strategic partners to achieve this objective.”

 

The motion was seconded by Councillor Garg.

 

Councillor Lewis moved an amendment as follows:-

 

Delete the last paragraph and replace with:

 

“The three leaders of the main political groups in Hillingdon, (Cllrs Puddifoot, Khursheed and Cox) formally undertake to support a target of selecting appropriate candidates to all 65 vacancies at next years Hillingdon Council elections. Furthermore the three named leaders above also support a target of their parties delivering council related election material to at least 70,000 (70%) of all Hillingdon households and in the following wards, where the BNP have tried to establish themselves to all households:

·         West Drayton

·         Yiewsley

·         South Ruislip

·         Manor

·         Harefield

 

In addition all the above named leaders write to the Head of Democratic Services in the week before the March 2010 Cabinet meeting in order that these commitments are publicly restated.”

 

The amendment was seconded by Councillor Andrew Retter.

 

Following debate (Councillors Harmsworth, Major, Simmonds, Mills, Puddifoot, Barnes, Allen, Curling and Cox) a further amendment to the amendment was moved by Councillor Lewis as follows:-

 

In the 2^nd line of the amended paragraph delete ‘formally undertake’, insert ‘aspire’ and in the 5^th Line delete ‘related’ in the 6^th line after ‘election’ insert ‘related’.

 

The amendment was seconded by Councillor Andrew Retter.

 

Following further debate (Councillors Khursheed, MacDonald, Major) and on being put to the vote the amendment, as amended was agreed.

 

The substantive motion was then put to the vote and agreed.

 

RESOLVED: That this Council deplores the fact that two British National Party candidates have been elected to represent the interests of the United Kingdom in the European Parliament and believes that their divisive and ill-informed views are a danger to the cohesion of the nation.

 

Whilst welcoming the failure of the BNP to secure a seat in London, this Council is alarmed to see that it received 4689 votes from Hillingdon residents. It believes that this demonstrates that there can be no room for complacency as a result of the BNP’s lack of electoral breakthrough in London and that all of us here must work together to prevent them advancing in the 2010 Borough Council elections.

 

The three leaders of the main political groups in Hillingdon, (Cllrs Puddifoot, Khursheed & Cox) aspire to support a target of selecting appropriate candidates to all 65 vacancies at next years Hillingdon Council elections. Furthermore the three named leaders above also support a target of their parties delivering council election related material to at least 70,000 (70%) of all Hillingdon households and in the following wards, where the BNP have tried to establish themselves to all households:

·                                West Drayton

·                                Yiewsley

·                                South Ruislip

·                                Manor

·                                Harefield

 

In addition all the above named leaders write to the Head of Democratic Services in the week before the March 2010 Cabinet meeting in order that these commitments are publicly restated.

 

 

9.2       MOTION FROM COUNCILLOR EGINTON

 

Councillor Eginton moved the following motion:-

 

“Enhancing the competitive position of businesses in the Borough and thereby improving the prospects for employment is one of the aims of the Council.

 

The introduction of higher parking charges for non-Hillingdon residents is likely to affect the number of shoppers and businesses in town centres in Hillingdon. If the number of shoppers and businesses fall in our town centres, it is probable that our town centres will suffer to the benefit of those in neighbouring authorities.

 

The Council calls on the Cabinet to immediately consult with retailers, businesses, town centre partnerships and residents’ associations throughout the Borough so as to gauge the effect of the higher charges. As a result of the consultation, Council asks the Cabinet to review the level of charges within six months.”

 

The motion was seconded by CouncillorSid Garg

 

Councillor Paul Harmsworth moved an amendment as follows:-

 

After the first paragraph add:

 

“The issue of Hillingdon First cards appears to have been an unmitigated disaster which has reduced the Council to a laughing stock. It is not possible to start again but the Council asks Cabinet to sort out the problems, commission a report for presentation to the next meeting of Council detailing the failures in the implementation of the scheme, the additional costs incurred, the lessons which have to learnt from the exercise and how these lessons can be used in future improvements in Hillingdon services.”

 

The amendment was seconded by Councillor Khursheed.

 

Following debate (Councillor Puddifoot, Mills, Burrows, MacDonald, Courtenay and Barnes) the amendment was put to a recorded vote as follows:-

 

Those voting in favour: Councillors Allam, Allen, Bliss, Cox, Curling, Duncan, Eginton, Gardner, Garg, Harmsworth, Jarjussey, Khursheed, MacDonald, Major, Oswell, Rhodes, Sandhu, Sansarpuri and Way.

 

Those voting against: Councillors Baker, Bamber, Banks, Barker, Barnes, Barrett, Bartram, Bianco, Bishop, Bull, Burrows, Buttivant, G Cooper, J Cooper, Corthorne, Courtenay, Crowe Dann, Dhillon, Harper-O’Neill, Hensley, Higgins, Horn, Jackson, Jenkins, Kauffman, Kelly, E Kemp, P Kemp, Lewis, Markham, Melvin, Mills, O’Connor, Payne, Puddifoot, Retter, Riley, Simmonds, Stead, White, Willmott-Denbeigh and Yarrow.

 

The amendment was lost by 19 votes to 43 with no abstentions.

 

The original motion was then put to the vote and lost.