Agenda, decisions and minutes

Resolved: that the minutes be agreed, subject to the clarifications discussed.

The Committee agreed the following clarifications to the minutes of the meeting held on 29 June 2016:

1.1    On page three, the wording of the referral to Mayor and Cabinet was meant to have read: ‘The Committee recommends that the strategy be formally adopted as Council policy and should also referred to in the local development management plan.’

1.2    On page seven, ‘the Committee felt strongly about the benefits of a potential piazza in Catford’ (in the vicinity of the current location of Laurence House)

1.3    On page eight that the referral was intended to have read: ‘The route down from the station will feel processional and engender a sense of expectation of what is to come.’

1.4    The Committee also noted that, at Members’ insistence, there had been a trial of street light dimming in a whole polling district.

1.5    The Committee also noted that their strongly worded and highly passionate discussion about the re-routing of the road in Catford. Members felt that this may not have been adequately reflected in the minutes. Members reiterated their strong feelings about the importance of the relocation of the road to the vision for the redevelopment of the town centre.

Councillor James-J Walsh declared a non-prejudicial interest as the founder of the Bakerloo line extension.com

Resolved: that the Committee refer its views to Mayor and Cabinet.

3.1       Kplom Lotsu (SGM Capital Programme Delivery) and Emma Talbot (Head of Planning) introduced the report, the following key points were noted:

·         The Committee had been carrying out quarterly monitoring of the scheme. This was the third update report.

·         Work (set out in section 4.2 of the report) was being carried out on options for the relocation of the road. Officers were in dialogue with TfL, which had assembled a project team to work on Catford.

·         Officers were keen to highlight to TfL that the Council did not want Catford merely to be a confluence of roads.

·         TfL understood that the theatre was a central part of the regeneration of Catford and had started amending their plans to ensure access and prominence.

·         Officers had met with senior people in TfL to discuss the importance of regeneration in Catford and to emphasise the importance of long term solutions for the town centre.

·         Officers at City Hall were interested and receptive to the efforts being made by council officers.

3.2      In the discussion that followed, Kplom Lotsu, Emma Talbot, Jessie Lea and the Mayor responded to questions from the Committee, the following key points were noted:

·         TfL was a large organisation with parts that were unconnected to each other. One part did not always know what the others were working on.

·         Members gave examples of instances in which small issues (such as the relocation of a bus stop) had generated problems between partners and expressed the hope that by starting early and working with officers across TfL, issues in Catford could be avoided.

·         One of the key issues in Catford was the high volume of busses travelling though it on a daily basis.

·         Officers and Members were in agreement that there were many positive things about Catford, yet it was easy to focus on the negative.

·         Housing zone negotiations were still in there early stages. Key documents had been drawn up and accepted in broad terms. A paper requesting  decision from the Mayor on the next stage of the development of the housing zone would be presented to Mayor and Cabinet at the end of September.

·         Changes to the London plan would likely require more affordable homes, which would likely have implications for the density and scale of future developments.

·         The new Mayor of London would be revising elements of the London Plan. At the end of this year or the beginning of next, he would be giving his opinion about the implementation of existing policies.

·         The Committee was concerned about the timetable, vision and strategy for the development of Catford as well as the level of engagement with members of the public. The Committee was frustrated by the seemingly piecemeal nature of the approach being taken.

·         Before March 2018 most of the key decisions would have been made by the Mayor.

·         People were enthused and excited by the future of Catford. Dates were being agreed for future consultation events and a series of sessions to meet with local people for  ...  view the full minutes text for item 3.

Resolved: that the Committee refer its views to Mayor and Cabinet.

4.1    David Austin (Head of Corporate Resources) introduced the Lewisham Future Programme report. The following key points were noted:

·         The Council had made £138m of savings to its budget from 2010/11, which meant the whole savings programme was projected to save £200m to 2019/20.

·         Members had already agreed £17m of savings to be implemented in 2016/17.

·         A further £45m of savings would be needed in the three years to 2019/20, equivalent to £15m per year.

·         The Lewisham Future report brought forward £7m of specific savings proposals for 2017/18. A further £14m of proposals should be anticipated.

·         This still left a gap of £21m of savings to 2019/20.

·         The report also included an efficiency plan for the coming four years based on the Lewisham 2020 priorities.

·         It was as yet unclear what the change of government might mean for the local government finance settlement, due in November.

·         Social care was still the largest areas of spend, followed by leisure and environment. It was these areas that could produce the largest level of savings.

4.2       In the discussion that followed, the following key points were noted:

·         The Lewisham Future Programme board would be holding challenge sessions to look at the Council significant areas of spend.

·         Work was taking place to improve income generation and make services self-sustaining.

·         Work was also taking place to determine how the Council might make additional funds from the use of assets.

·         Work was also taking place to release funds from the leisure centre contract. The intention would be to make the contract self-financing.

·         The Council might need to develop its capacity and skills in certain areas in order to make the most of its assets.

·         In existing schemes, the Council has sometimes opted to buy-in expertise.

·         The planning services required an update to its technology in order to produce revenue. At present, it was hampered by outdated systems and lack of access to industry standard software.

·         Some parts of the changes to the enforcement service were not being implemented, other parts were taking time to come in to effect.

·         The next stage of the decision making process was for the Mayor to make a decision about the £7m of savings being proposed for the 2017/18 and to implement the £17m of savings already agreed for next year.

4.3      The Committee resolved to advise the Public Accounts Select Committee of the following:

·         The Committee recommends that action be taken to improve the IT used by the borough’s planning teams. Members recognise that planning officers could provide substantially improved services and make more efficient use of resources if the IT offer was brought up to industry standards.

·         The Committee recommends that the proposal to cut or reduce the assemblies fund be rejected.

·         The Committee would welcome further proposals about the potential to generate revenue from the use of the Council’s assets.

·         The Committee is concerned about the lack of information provided about the equalities dimension of a number of the savings proposals. It asks that officers pay close attention  ...  view the full minutes text for item 4.

Resolved: that the work programme be agreed.

5.1    Timothy Andrew (Scrutiny Manager) introduced the report the following items for the meeting on 25 October 2016 were agreed:

·         Planning obligations and regulations update

·         Planning key policies and procedures

·         Annual parking report

Resolved: that the work programme be agreed.

Resolved: that the Committee’s views under items three be referred to Mayor and Cabinet – and that its views under item four be referred to Public Accounts Committee.

Resolved: that the Committee’s views under items three be referred to Mayor and Cabinet – and that its views under item four be referred to Public Accounts Committee.