LEADER’S QUESTION AND ANSWER SESSION AT THE WESTMINSTER SCRUTINY COMMISSION
Monday 14 July 2008
Section One – Questions from members of the public:
Question 1
Can anything be done to reduce the number of helicopters flying over central Westminster? The noise is invasive and oppressive and seems to be on the increase. Sometimes it feels as though we are living in a war zone.
Councillor Colin Barrow - I know exactly how the questioner feels. I used to live just by the Houses of Parliament, which is pretty much on the flight path of the commercial helicopters that fly up and down to Battersea. Apparently, we don’t have the power at Westminster to control where these helicopters go, but I suspect that we will be able to put pressure on the Civil Aviation Authority to regulate the height at which these helicopters travel. Helicopters are a good deal noisier at 500 feet than it is at 1,000 feet, and I suggest that we do that. From what I’ve been told, I don’t think that that is something that we have done, but I do know that the CAA does listen to local councils, because the City of London managed to get a helipad that was at Swan Lane in the City moved, for the very reason that it felt like being in a war zone. The main helicopter route is up and down the Thames for good and valid reasons of safety, and I suspect that we are not going to change that notion.
Questioner - Apparently that only applies to single engine helicopters, and double engine helicopters can fly over buildings and are noisier aircraft. We do live in tall buildings, and they tend to have a funnel effect whereby the sound reverberates off the walls and it can be very noisy.
Councillor Colin Barrow - We are certainly not going to be able to do anything about the Chinook helicopters, as we know who they belong to, but we are preparing a Noise Strategy that will take this into account. I think it’s a practical matter, and the best thing that we can do is to make direct representations to the Civil Aviation Authority to engage with them and see what we can do. To date, I don’t see any evidence that we have done enough in that respect, and feel that we should.
Questioner - There is also a Health and Safety aspect. A report was done for the Heathrow objectors and incidents of stress and heart problems are apparently on the rise with the increase of noise. It might be worth getting something like that to back up our argument.
Councillor Tony Devenish - Thank you. Can I also ask that you include the Police helicopters as well because I have other people have mentioned those as well.
Question 2
Why is it that we had three proposals to do something about Leicester Square and still nothing has been done? We’ve had promises over the years from Sir Simon and other Councillors that money would be spent on it. The traders are going crazy down there. All the buskers have been thrown off, so it’s now just a dead loss and a walk through. Sorry to be harsh, but it’s true.
Councillor Colin Barrow- It is true. It’s not true to say nothing has been done, although we have probably now got the best chance that we’ve had for some time in the sense that we have a plan with more funding behind it than there has been for previous aspirations. It’s an area of the City that’s very important. A lot of people have been involved in agreeing whether it’s the right thing to do for the area. I personally think it is a good thing to do for the area and that the area desperately needs to be fixed. Its one of the few iconic places that everyone in the country, and quite a large part of the world knows, and I think we’ve now got the best chance for some time to get something done. I can’t guarantee it, but if I remember rightly there was £18 million committed to doing this work, which I thought was a positive step forward, and one where we could see something happening in the next few years.
Questioner - If the plan goes ahead, what really does concern me are problems with street urination, and the proposal to take part of the gents toilets and turn it into a storage place for platform seats that are going to be there. What’s the point in taking away part of the only toilet there? It’s crazy. There are not enough facilities there for all the people anyway.
Councillor Colin Barrow-Well I think there is, provided it’s used as such. But you are quite right, I had not focussed on the fact that part of the toilets were going to be put out of action, if that is the case.
Question 3
Two questions. How is the Council getting on reviewing the use of the CCTV parking enforcement cameras so that that they are used in a fair and transparent manner, and is the Council going to adopt the Government’s protocol guidelines on the use of CCTV cameras?
Councillor Colin Barrow- CCTV cameras, as everybody knows, are used for two purposes. One is for law enforcement by watching people at the scene of crime and using it to task Police to arrest them. The other is to observe people who are putting their cars in the wrong places, and making sure that they are given a ticket and encouraged not to do it again. That second respect has become more controversial. But in both respects you have to pay attention to the privacy of the people against whom those cameras are directed, and it’s not right that the cameras should look through the windows into people’s private property. I know that my colleague, Danny Chalkley, has taken steps to make sure that the cameras used for parking enforcement contain the same device as those used for Community Protection, which prevents them looking into people’s windows. That particular matter of privacy is being dealt with late, it has to be said, but it is being dealt with. The matter of whether we should issue parking tickets by camera is, if I may say so, not a matter of the camera, but a matter of what we issue parking tickets for. If we start using CCTV cameras to take pictures of taxis that stop for a minute and a half to drop off passengers, we will not be doing ourselves any credit and we will lose the public support for the invasion that cameras actually represent for legitimate law enforcement purposes. However, that said, if somebody leaves their car in a place where it obstructs the traffic for extended periods of time, and there isn’t a Warden passing, then I have no problem with the fact that a camera takes a picture of it. Although it’s a question of protocols and of how sensitive we are about taking pictures of people, I do support, with proper governance, the use of CCTV to assist the agencies of law in Westminster. There was an incident near Oxford Street recently, where individuals who were being detained stabbed two Store Detectives before running off. Without CCTV cameras, the Police would not have seen them leaving the store.
Questioner -I agree with the sentiments of the Leader, and applaud him that the Council is going to look into the parking issue and use the cameras sensibly. From mine and others’ experience, I don’t think they have done this in the past when, as in my case, somebody stops for one minute five seconds to deliver a package on a single yellow line on a Saturday lunchtime, causing no harm.
Question 4
Can the Council please consider increasing the investment in the highways infrastructure, in particular to get rid of tired old street signs and plates and notices so that we can take a step forward in becoming a world class city?
Councillor Colin Barrow- Yes. There is a lot of stuff on our streets ranging from old signs in old liveries, wrong signs, signs for traffic schemes that have long since been completed and bits of parking equipment that have long since been sawn off, not to mention all the debris of public works projects that has been left behind. I think we have to pay our attention to getting rid of all that stuff and it involves, funnily enough, some camera technology in spotting things. Its an important piece of work because if it does not look as though somebody is taking care of the City, people will stop taking care of it themselves as well. It’s not a matter of zero tolerance, but that we treat it as we would our own homes and not just as somebody else’s problem. So yes, you will see me picking up bits of portable street furniture and bringing it into City Hall and leaving it in Reception and hoping that the Director of Transportation will get the picture.
Questioner - I again welcome that, and think that’s setting a good example. Just out of interest, I saw a sign this week which said “mobile library stops here” with a 798 number, and I hate to think how many officers have walked past that in the last 15 years.
Question 5
My question relates to the admissions criteria in Westminster secondary schools. I understand that you have to act in accordance with the Schools Standards and Framework Act of 1998. I don’t believe part of that Act gives provision for schools to benefit financially from agreeing admissions, and yet Quintin Kynaston has been offered a £2m endowment subject to them agreeing admissions with Westminster. This seems to be an anomaly and a misuse of taxpayers’ money.
Councillor Colin Barrow- I must say I don’t agree with the deduction you draw from the facts. The facts I think are that Quintin Kynaston is considering, but has not yet decided, applying for foundation status, and as such would then be effectively an independent though state funded school. It would then agree its admissions criteria with the City Council, which is entirely right for someone who is providing state education in the City of Westminster. The fact that we are proposing to give them a sum of money strikes me as being wholly good news, and I would disconnect it from the foundation status, except for the fact that I’m sure we would be widely criticised for giving a large sum of public money to a school which did not want to agree its admission criteria with us.
Questioner -I understand that it would get that £2 million whether or not it goes to foundation status.
Councillor Colin Barrow- The legalistic question that you ask is one that I’m not qualified to answer. The political question that you implicitly ask, is whether it is right to give £2 million to a public education institution in Westminster and also expect it to agree its emission criteria with the City Council. I think that it’s perfectly right.
Questioner -PimlicoSchool has not been able to have any say at all in its change of criteria. That’s been forced upon it as regards admissions. Not one parent or governor was consulted, and yet Quintin Kynaston benefits financially.
Question 6:
How are we progressing with the re-let of the Cleansing contract? I trust we will be looking to maintain good standards and encourage more recycling. How is that progressing?
Councillor Colin Barrow- I think we are going to be speaking with them later on about some of the performance criteria of that contract, which is due for re-let in 2010 if I remember right, with perhaps a possibility of a year’s extension. I don’t think there is really any secret of the fact that there is still too much rubbish left behind on the streets, and I think that the principle issue with that contract is clienting rather than re-letting. We have to make sure that we get what we’ve asked for from the contractor, and get all the stuff picked that we’ve asked them to pick up. I’m not suggesting they are falling down on the job, but I think we have to be in making sure that the streets of Westminster are clean. It’s part of our job as clients to demand the best.
Councillor Tony Devenish - Thank you. The Built Environment Policy and Scrutiny Committee will look at that at its meeting on 3rd September. Do you want to comment Angela?
Councillor Angela Harvey- Thank you Chair. On 3rd September we will be looking at the preliminary feedback on initial responses from local residents and businesses on the whole contract re-let, so I hope that you or as many members of the Westminster public will comment. After 3rd September, the Built Environment Policy and Scrutiny Committee will be looking at it again in December. We have really got our eye on this, so we are looking for as much public involvement as possible on what the customers want from this contract.
Questioner - To my knowledge we haven’t been consulted at all.
Councillor Angela Harvey- Not yet. The original plan was that it would come to Policy and Scrutiny in December, but I have brought it forward to make sure that we can have a really good go at this.
Questioner - Can we comment after December?
Councillor Angela Harvey- I think you can comment before, comment between and comment after.
Section Two – Questions from Members of the Scrutiny Commission
Question 1
Councillor Mark Page- How do you feel it’s gone so far?
Councillor Colin Barrow- Well. I am new into the job. Very new into the job and you have all been very kind to me and I’ve made a lot of new friends. It’s important, I think, to raise the game and to raise the rate at which we address problems that face the Council, although we may not always succeed in getting where we want to be as quickly as elected Members would like. We need to be showing every sign of being impatient with the Council, in order for the Council to be driven forward. I don’t think we need to be too worried about the disloyalty aspects, as long as we are all being reasonable about it. I think you wanted also wanted to raise the point about the very devastating group of pictures that show rubbish in Walton Street. Anybody who goes up and down Walton Street would see the appalling behaviour of the residents of that street.
Councillor Mark Page- Although I was not going to mention those pictures, you will obviously have noted that I have put rubbish as my special topic on Council debate. I had decided to put myself through the personal experience of a resident from Marylebone High Street and their difficulties, and now have all the performance figures and will be drawing my conclusions. I was just going to ask you more general questions about it, but am pleased that has been brought to your attention. When I went with the Chief Executive around Marylebone High Street Ward, he pointed out to me the litter and asked if it was always like that. I presume you’ve had a look at the performance figures? Do they mirror your experience?
Councillor Colin Barrow- Yes, they do. I have to say that since moving towards this job I have been paying more attention to these matters outside my Ward than I have done hitherto. There is quite a lot to pick up and quite a lot to do and the City does look sometimes a bit tatty as a result. I think this has an effect, as I’ve mentioned before, on people’s behaviour. Once you have one bag of rubbish in the wrong place there is an enormous temptation for somebody to put their’s alongside it, and there is then an enormous temptation for people not to take appropriate care of the City as we would like them to. I think it is central and important that we get the business for refuse collection right, and ask people to put their rubbish out at a reasonable time of day and enforce against them, even though we will be accused of being petty bin Inspectors for looking to see who put the rubbish out.
Question 2
Councillor Nickie Aiken- I have a question on behalf of Councillor Nemeth, which I will forward to you because it’s quite a long question. Basically, if I can paraphrase it, what are your thoughts on the arrangements for the future funding of care for Westminster’s older residents?
Councillor Colin Barrow- There is no question that the last ten years of life are expensive. Happily, the last ten years of life are deferred because people are living longer, and the good news is that people, 65, 75 and 80 are living quite healthy lives not particularly dependant upon anybody. Beyond that, they can require quite expensive packages of care, partly delivered by Social Services and part delivered by the Health Service. For the part delivered by Social Services, we are being increasingly encouraged to work on the basis of direct payments, which means that the older person will have the freedom and independence to engage their own carers and devise their own package of care. That regime does not apply in the Health Service. Therefore, you get what the Health Service has chosen to give to you and that could create a disconnect which is not necessarily helpful. This matter is actually quite topical, because at a recent meeting of London Councils, the NHS London Chief Executive, Ruth Carnall, pointed out that she felt that quite a lot of Primary Care Trusts were not performing to the level that they should, and therefore needed to be reorganised. I don’t know whether she included Westminster, but we vigorously protested against the principle of losing a PCT that only covers Westminster. We did feel that it would be a very good idea to join up the NHS in Westminster with Social Services and Adult Services, so that what we do could be provided in a seamless function to individuals in the area. I will be forwarding a long and detailed explanation going to Councillor Nemeth, but we have to make sure that we get a decent formula for providing a decent old age for those who need to rely on public support.
Question 3