Agenda and minutes
PDF 87 KBVenue: Amigo Hall, St. George’s Cathedral, St George's Road, London SE1 6HR
Contact: Gerald Gohler, Constitutional Officer
| Note | No. | Item |
|---|---|---|
|
Welcome and introductions
Minutes: The chair welcomed councillors, members of the public and officers to the meeting. |
||
|
Apologies
Minutes: There were apologies for absence from Councillors Paul Fleming, Claire Maugham and Adele Morris; and from Councillor Karl Eastham for lateness.
Councillor Vijay Luthra gave his apologies for having to leave the meeting early. |
||
|
Disclosure of members' interests and dispensations
Minutes: Councillor Neil Coyle declared a non-pecuniary interest in items 8 to 11, as he is a trustee of Cooltan Arts, which may be relevant to the health or mental health items on the agenda. |
||
|
Items of business that the Chair deems urgent
Minutes: The chair agreed to accept the following item as urgent:
Item 16 - Mint Street and Quilp Street Amendments to Parking Arrangements. |
||
|
Minutes
The minutes of the meeting held on 2 April 2014 to be agreed as a correct record and signed by the chair.
Supporting documents: Minutes: RESOLVED:
That the minutes of the meeting held on 2 April 2014 be agreed as a correct record, and signed by the chair. |
||
7.10pm |
Youth Community Council
To provide feedback on recent activities and projects.
Minutes: Representatives from the Borough, Bankside and Walworth Youth Community Council reported that there would be a summer programme of activities running from 28 July to 22 August. This was designed to give young people something to do over the summer months. It would include discussions and workshops around mental health, bullying about weight and appearance, sexual harassment, sexual health, as well as t-shirt printing and a language swap shop where young people would teach each other their languages. Volunteers were still needed for the language swap shop.
At this point Councillor Karl Eastham joined the meeting.
Responding to questions from the floor, the representatives of the youth community council explained that the hub where the summer programme would be taking place, was on Walworth Road near the Tankard pub. The age group targeted by the scheme was 11-19. They would distribute leaflets at stations to promote the service.
The meeting heard that these activities should tie in with other council initiatives on sexual harassment and women’s safety.
The chair invited the representatives of the youth community council to come back to the next meeting to feedback on the project. |
|
7.20pm |
Community Announcements
Minutes: Busking consultation John McHenry, markets and street trading manager, informed the meeting that the street trading team were currently conducting a consultation about introducing a busking licence for a designated area near the Millennium Bridge, and to ban any other busking and street entertainment activities from the OXO Tower to the east side of Southwark Bridge, and south of Southwark Street. The questions were around how many performers would be allowed, and at what times they would be allowed to engage in busking. A busking exclusion zone was also proposed. He explained that there was a list of over 1,000 addresses in Cathedrals ward, which would be written to and sent a consultation form, at the back of the hall. The report on the consultation would be presented at Licensing Committee, which would be making the final decision on the area and specifics.
Responding to questions from the floor, John said that the proposal was for pitches to be designated west of the Millennium Bridge, and for a registration fee to be charged. Enforcement action would be taken against unlicensed buskers. The council was working with Better Bankside on this. A registration fee of £35 had been floated, which would mirror the licence fee for temporary street traders. A balance would have to be struck between the interests of buskers, other street entertainers and residents, which is why the consultation was taking place.
Community Infrastructure Project List The chair announced that ideas were still being sought to go on the community infrastructure project list (CIPL) for local publically accessible improvements that could be funded by Section 106 or the future local community infrastructure levy (CIL). Ideas could be sent to zayd.al-jawad@southwark.gov.uk. The updated CIPL would be coming to September’s community council for consideration.
Elephant and Castle shopping centre consultation Kim Humphreys, Richard Chambers and Steve Burgin representing Delancey addressed the meeting and fed back about the recent listening exercise that had twice been conducted in the shopping centre with the aid of consultation forms. This questionnaire was also available online, and represented the beginning of the exercise. Steve explained that he was responsible for the operations of the shopping centre, and that he was currently dealing with some inherited issues. There were currently 71 tenancies in the centre. A large proportion of tenants had holding-over agreements, but these were in the process of being regularised. They would be given 18 to 24-month leases. A programme of fixing doors and escalators was also in progress. The six currently vacant units would soon be let. The shopping centre had 12 million visitors last year.
Responding to questions from councillors, they said that the consultation would include the Latin American businesses, both inside and outside the shopping centre. This would intensify as the process went on. The shopping centre was in favour of improving cycle facilities in the area, and would aim to provide “best in class” cycle facilities as part of the regeneration of the centre. Engagement with Southwark Cyclists would ... view the full minutes text for item 7. |
|
7.50pm |
Health and Well-being in Southwark
Minutes: Councillors Rebecca Lury and David Noakes addressed the meeting in their capacity as chair and vice-chair of the healthy communities scrutiny sub-committee, and explained that their sub-committee would be looking at the council’s public health services, hospitals and other commissioned health provision. The meetings were open to the public. Councillor Lury encouraged all those interested to attend. There would be three enquiries into: public health, personal budgets (in adult social care) and into the health of the borough. As part of this, the sub-committee would be looking at four themes: financial health (banks and credit unions, payday loans, financial awareness), environmental health (parks, open spaces, cleanliness), physical health (cycling, walking, indoor and outdoor sports facilities, healthy eating, alcohol) and personal safety. The councillors also encouraged people to write in with questions they might have, by the end of August. Councillor Noakes explained that the scrutiny sub-committee was going to look into how the introduction of personal budgets had gone. In response to a question about the funding for patient participation groups, Councillor Lury said she would get a full response from the cabinet member responsible, Councillor Barrie Hargrove, and would be bringing this to a future meeting. |
|
8.05pm |
Focus on older people
Blackfriars Settlement (Tina Johnston) Minutes: Tina Johnston, coordinator for older persons’ services, at Blackfriars Settlement informed the meeting of the activities taking place there: including alternating arts and craft sessions (Wednesdays 2pm-4pm), memory skills training (Tuesdays 2pm-4pm), yoga, singing clubs and Sunday lunch. On Thursdays (10am-4.30pm) and Fridays there were full-day clubs (Fridays for visually impaired older people). The organisation also ran a befriending service called “join hands”. In answer to questions from the floor, Tina explained that the Friday club was by referral only. On Thursdays only the lunch had to be paid for, and Sunday lunch was £5. Blackfriars settlement was located at 1 Rushworth Street, London SE1 ORB. |
|
8.15pm |
Theme: Public Health overview
Dr Ruth Wallis, Director of Public Health Minutes: Ruth Wallis, director of public health, introduced this item saying that since April 2013, public health had been the responsibility of local authorities. This included issues like infectious disease control and long-term conditions like HIV, pulmonary diseases, mental health issues and high-blood pressure. It also included ensuring high-quality outcomes, by working with the clinical commissioning groups. The aim was to make Southwark a place where residents live well, and to tackle health inequalities.
Rosie Dalton-Lucas, health improvement partnership manager, introduced “mind apples” designed for collating activities which people felt increased their well-being. She went on to read out some of the things people had put on their “mind apples” at the meeting: connecting with others, volunteering, eating well, relaxation, and walking.
She went on to explain that the Southwark website contained several wellness apps and quizzes around healthy weight, getting active, alcohol, a “happier you” and smoking. These were available at www.southwark.gov.uk\livingwell.
Jin Lim, assistant director / consultant in public health, informed the meeting about the NHS health checks. These were conducted by invitation about every five years for all residents aged 40-75 years. They were designed to check for risks of developing heart disease, stroke, type-2 diabetes and kidney disease. They were being provided by GPs, some pharmacists and pop-up providers. More information on this can be found at: www.southwark.gov.uk/healthcheck.
For general questions about public health, please email:phadmin@southwark.gov.uk or contact 020 7525 0280.
In answer to questions from the floor, Jin explained that Southwark council had committed itself to providing free leisure service access, which would be phased in. It was important to get people active, as 40% of residents did not do the recommended amount of daily exercise. He went on to explain that the council’s public health responsibilities covered the whole of the population. The meeting heard that restricting NHS treatment to EU citizens, as had been discussed in the media, would create an impact on local health services from those not or no longer covered, as there was no alternative system. People should be able to see their GP in a reasonable time, but doctors’ surgeries were under strain as they had been given a lot more responsibilities. In terms of the health checks aimed at 40-74 year olds, these were designed to pick up previously undetected conditions. Older residents would also be receiving check-ups from GPs, but by the time they reached the age of 75, all long-term conditions should have been picked up. There was a programme of shingles vaccinations for over-75s as they were at particular risk from this disease.
The chair thanked the public health team officers for attending.
At this point Councillor Vijay Luthra left the meeting.
|
|
8.25pm |
Theme: Update on King's College Hospital trust
Mike Marrinan, Medical Director, King’s College Hospital Trust
Minutes: Mike Marrinan, medical director, King’s College Hospital Trust, introduced the item by saying the community council area had three world-class hospitals in its vicinity: St Thomas’, Guy’s and King’s. While the care at King’s was high-quality, in the last 18 months referral and treatment times had worsened due to a large increase in attendance levels and admissions. A larger proportion of people were very ill and stayed in hospital for longer, which was something that could not be planned for and created capacity problems. There was a building programme at King’s including two new wards and a helipad. This would ensure that not only was the treatment very good, but also concluded in a timely fashion. The hospital trust had been thinking about which services could be moved off-site in order to create more room, as demand was steadily going up. It had been decided to move the following areas to the Princess Royal Hospital in Orpington: elective care, orthopaedic unity and elective gynaecological surgeries. Non-complex cataract surgery had been moved to a new unit in Sidcup.
Responding to questions from the councillors and from the floor, Mike said that there was a business and social case to be made for the provision of transport to the Orpington site for visiting family members. He explained that the trust was hiring new staff at present for the projected 220-230 new beds on the Denmark Hill site over the next three years. No staff would be forced to move to the new sites. Money was tight at present, and the trust had increased its productivity, but this could not be done indefinitely without more resources being made available. The trust held meetings that were open to the public, which residents may want to attend.
The chair thanked Mike Marrinan for attending, and said that this would be a topic the community council would come back to. |
|
8.40pm |
Petitions and Deputations
The chair to advise on any deputations or petitions received. Minutes: There were none. |
|
8.45pm |
Public Question Time
This is an opportunity for public questions to be addressed to the chair.
Residents or persons working in the borough may ask questions on any matter in relation to which the council has powers or duties.
Responses may be supplied in writing following the meeting.
Supporting documents: Minutes: The following public questions were asked at the meeting:
1. Is the community council supportive of efforts to use the closed fire station as a educational/fire prevention project and to list it as a community asset?
The chair said he would be writing to the London Assembly Members who had campaigned on this matter, and invite them to a future meeting.
2. Why are some people on incapacity benefit asked to contribute to their council tax?
The meeting heard that an exception to this regulation was made by the government for older people only, and that the council had set up a hardship fund for disabled people. The council’s “Rightfully yours” team would be able to advise on benefits and related issues. They can be contacted on 020 7525 7434 or at rightfullyyours@southwark.gov.uk.
3. With much construction being done around the borough, the demand for car parking is increasing. New car parking should be put in place, and some of the double and single yellow lines changed.
4. Why does the community council not provide BSL-interpreters at meetings? Deaf residents should be invited.
5. Could pedestrian and some traffic lights be turned off during the late hours, so reducing pollution?
6. Is the clerk or any of the members aware of the answer to the question recorded in the penultimate paragraph of the minute of item 7, meeting of 2 April 2014?
The following questions were submitted in writing:
7. “The sign at the junction of Heygate / Walworth Road gives information that this is the end of 20mph. Not so. The one at the Elephant Bridge gives the info that Walworth Road is the end of the 20mph zone.”
8. “Regarding Southwark council’s support for patient participation in health services: a. What funding is given to Southwark Healthwatch? b. Does the council have oversight of funding given to GP patient participation groups? c. Would the council like to see the Healthwatch representative on CCG (Clinical Commissioning Group) elected by Southwark patients/citizens?”
9. “Is the council aware that incidences of mental ill health are increasing and therefore cuts to the third sector (charities) where loopholes, or falling though the gaps, is detrimental to Southwark and so investment should be made?”
10. “Why is it taking years to remove the ‘Whiskey Shop’ sign form the western entrance to Clink Street. It was supposed to be moved before the 2012 Olympics. Can the relevant officer take responsibility for dealing with it?”
11. “Money given by government for PPG (Patient Participation Groups). Southwark was given some of this money, what is happening to it and which GP surgeries has it gone to?”
12. “Rubbish bins on Walworth Road that are not serviced by the council. Always full and smelly can something be done about this?”
The chair said that responses to public questions, which had not been answered during the meeting, would be provided at a future meeting. |
|
9.05pm |
Community Council Question to Council Assembly
Each community council may submit one question to a council assembly meeting that has previously been considered and noted by the community council.
Any question to be submitted from a community council to council assembly should first be the subject of discussion at a community council meeting. The subject matter and question should be clearly noted in the community council’s minutes and thereafter the agreed question can be referred to the constitutional team.
The community council is invited to consider if it wishes to submit a question to the ordinary meeting of council assembly on Wednesday 22 October 2014. Minutes: Councillor Dan Garfield explained that the next meeting of council assembly would be the Leader’s question time, at which no formal questions would be taken.
Following a discussion, the community council considered whether to submit a question to the next possible council assembly meeting.
RESOLVED:
That the following question be submitted to the next possible council assembly meeting :
“Are the changes to local NHS services, increased waiting times and access to treatment impacting on the council services, and what is that impact?” |
|
9.10pm |
Local Parking Amendments
Note: This is an executive function.
Councillors to consider the information contained in the report.
Supporting documents: Minutes: Note: This is an executive function.
Councillors considered the information contained in the report.
RESOLVED:
That the following local traffic and parking amendments, detailed in the appendices to the report, be approved for implementation subject to the outcome of any necessary statutory procedures:
· Congreve Street – install double yellow lines to prevent obstructive parking adjacent to parking bays over night and at weekends along its entire length.
· Borough Road – extend existing bus stand to accommodate buses from route 136 outside Nos. 49 to 60.
|
|
|
Mint Street and Quilp Street Amendments to Parking Arrangements
Note: This is an executive function.
Supporting documents: Minutes: Note: This is an executive function.
Councillors considered the information contained in the report.
RESOLVED:
1. That the extension of double yellow lines from Mint Street Park to the junction of Caleb Street and the extension of the single yellow line along Southwark Bridge Road across the junction with Quilp Street be agreed.
2. That the community council notes the removal of one existing permit parking bay from Weller Street.
|