7.1 REGENERATION OF THE ELEPHANT & CASTLE (see page 69 of the main agenda)
The clerk advised that if Amendment A was carried, the change to paragraph 3 of the motion set out in Amendment B would fall. This was because paragraph 3 was deleted by Amendment A. The remainder of Amendment B could be debated and voted upon.
Councillor Chris Page, seconded by Councillor Peter John, moved the motion.
Councillor Ian Wingfield, seconded by Councillor Kirsty McNeill, moved Amendment A.
Following debate (Councillors Richard Thomas, James Gurling, Nick Stanton, Paul Bates, Kim Humphreys, Jenny Jones, David Noakes, Dora Dixon-Fyle, Peter John, Martin Seaton, Tim McNally, Toby Eckersley and Alison McGovern), Councillor Chris Page exercised his right of reply.
Councillor Richard Thomas made a point of personal explanation. Thereafter Amendment A was put to the vote and declared to be lost.
Councillor Nick Stanton, seconded by Councillor Paul Noblet, moved Amendment B.
Following debate (Councillors John Friary, Peter John, Kim Humphreys, Gordon Nardell, James Gurling and Linda Manchester), the Mayor announced that the guillotine had fallen and the bell was rung.
Under council assembly procedure rule 1.10(6) Councillor Paul Bates, seconded by Councillor Chris Page, moved that the gullotine rule be suspended for a period of 30 minutes. The procedural motion was put to the vote and declared to be lost.
Amendment B, was put to the vote and declared to be carried.
The substantive motion was put to the vote and declared to be carried.
In accordance with council assembly procedure rule 1.13 (5) the following members requested that their vote against the substantive motion be recorded in the minutes: Councillors Paul Bates, Fiona Colley, Mark Glover, Mary Foulkes, John Friary, Dora Dixon-Fyle, Aubyn Graham, Peter John, Barrie Hargrove, Susan Elan Jones, Lorraine Lauder, Evrim Laws, Richard Livingstone, Alison McGovern, Kirsty McNeill, Abdul Mohamed, Gordon Nardell, Ola Oyewunmi, Chris Page, Andrew Pakes, Sandra Rhule, Martin Seaton, Tayo Situ, Robert Smeath, Althea Smith, Dominic Thorncroft, Veronica Ward and Ian Wingfield.
RESOLVED:
1. That council assembly notes that residents in Southwark have waited too long for the regeneration of the Elephant & Castle which extends beyond the ‘footprint’ of the Heygate Estate and shopping centre, and which was first promised by the Labour administration in the late 1990s.
2. That council assembly notes that the current recession has had a major impact on private sector led developments but supports the continued efforts of the executive and chief officers to secure the best possible deal for local residents.
3. That council assembly further notes that the executive and council officers are bound by EU procurement rules which do not allow the council to vary significantly from the original ‘best and final offer’ accepted in July 2007, and that achieving the best value for money for Southwark’s taxpayers should be paramount.
4. That council assembly believes that the regeneration of the Elephant & Castle has to put the needs of residents first, and ensure local residents who want to can move back to the area.
5. That council assembly calls on the executive to ensure that any development includes a high proportion of affordable homes and does not sacrifice the needs of residents simply because of the current property market. Council assembly agrees with the vision for the area which will provide more high quality homes, including socially rented affordable home to replace existing units on the Heygate Estate, new public squares and open spaces, and new retail units, especially for small independent traders.
6. That council assembly regrets that the recent government announcements on social housing could well result in the loss of funding for bringing existing homes in Southwark up to the ‘decent’ standard’ and will do little to reduce the massive number of Southwark residents on the housing waiting list.
7. That council assembly notes that some developments, including at Steedman Street and Wansey Street, have already been completed and have provided both new private and affordable units.
8. That council assembly recognises the successful completion of St Mary’s Churchyard, the securing of money to improve the southern roundabout, the progress being made at Strata Tower which will provide 90 shared-equity units, and the advanced negotiations with the Homes and Communities Agency to help kick start developments at the Oakmayne Plaza and London Park Hotel sites which will provide a new home for the Southwark Playhouse and new units for small independent traders.
9. That council assembly further notes the successful negotiations with the Homes and Communities Agency which have led to an increase of 200 social rented homes above the levels granted at the six Elephant and Castle housing sites.
10. That council assembly further notes and laments the failure of the former London Mayor, Ken Livingstone, to include improvements to the transportinfrastructure into Transport for London’s funding plans.
11. That council assembly looks forward to welcoming former US President Bill Clinton who plans to visit the Elephant and Castle to see the innovative work being undertaken to reduce carbon emissions by creating the Multi Utility Service Company (MUSCO).
12. That council assembly further notes that the previous Labour administration decided to demolish the Heygate in 1998 but then ten years later called for the council to stop the process of decanting tenants and leaseholders.
13. That it be noted that had councils like Southwark been allowed to invest in building new homes by the Labour government, then it would have been possible to have developed all the planned “early sites” at the Elephant and Castle by now.
14. That council assembly calls on the executive to move forward the regeneration vision for Elephant and Castle by using all the tools and options at its disposals.
Note: This motion will be referred as a recommendation to the executive for consideration.
7.2 PRIMARY SCHOOL PLACES IN DULWICH (see page 69 of the main agenda)
The guillotine having fallen, Councillors Toby Eckersley and James Barber, formally moved and seconded the motion.
Councillors Veronica Ward and Robert Smeath, formally moved and seconded Amendment C.
Amendment C was put to the vote and declared to be lost.
The substantive motion was put to the vote and declared to be carried.
RESOLVED:
1. That council assembly notes:
i) That Village Ward councillors had identified the need for increased primary school provision in North Dulwich, previously recognised in the corporate plan.
ii) The recent complaints amongst parents in Dulwich about the perceived lack of places available for children, and about how their cases were handled by education service.
2. That council assembly requests:
i) The executive to request a report from education officers which clarifies the number of children in Dulwich who have not received a primary school place offer within one mile of their residence, maps their location, and considers whether pressure on primary school places will increase in the Dulwich area over the next five years.
ii) To identify best practice in communication with parents and providing advice at what is a difficult time for many parents who do not receive an offer for which they have indicated a preference.
iii) If continued pressure on primary school places in the Dulwich area, or parts of it, is predicted, to present to the executive options that may be available to expand existing provision and costs associated with these options.
Note: This motion will be referred as a recommendation to the executive for consideration.
7.3 ONE HOUR BUS TICKET PROPOSAL (see page 70 of the main agenda)
The guillotine having fallen, Councillors Caroline Pidgeon and Paul Kyriacou, formally moved and seconded the motion.
Councillors Barrie Hargrove and Fiona Colley, formally moved and seconded Amendment D.
Amendment D was put to the vote and declared to be carried.
The substantive motion was put to the vote and declared to be carried.
RESOLVED:
1. That this council believes in affordable public transport and in the need to ensure that passengers who use “Pay As You Go” Oystercards have a fair deal.
2. That council notes that in other European capital cities bus passengers have the benefit of a time-limited bus ticket which enables them to use two or three buses within a set time without having to pay again.
3. That council notes that almost a million car journeys every day in London are less than one mile in length, and supports effective ways of encouraging modal shift to public transport.
4. That council views with concern at this time of economic recession that even short journeys in London may involve using two or three buses and can cost up to £3.00 if more than one bus is needed.
5. That council notes that the average bus journey length is 3.54 km (2.2 miles, 9 stops), and that Transport for London estimate that 16% of bus journeys on Oyster ‘Pay As You Go’ involve using a second bus within 60 minutes of the first.
6. That council commends the proposal for a One Hour Bus Ticket to be available on “Pay As You Go” Oystercard, enabling passengers to use more than one bus during a 60-minute period without paying more than £1.00.
7. That council calls on the leader of the council and the lead executive member for transport to write to the Mayor of London promoting the One Hour Bus Ticket proposal; and to ask the Mayor of London to request that Transport for London investigates the practicalities of implementing such a scheme.
8. That council assembly also notes the extremely low take-up of the income support and job seeker allowance half price fares scheme in Southwark. It notes that take-up for those on job seekers allowance is 3.14% in Southwark and for income support is 2.02%.
9. That council assembly calls on the executive to explore ways to promote this scheme more widely, for instance by including an article in Southwark Life, Southwark Housing News and other council publications and ensuring information is available in One Stop Shops, housing offices, libraries and leisure centres.
Note: This motion will be referred as a recommendation to the executive for consideration.
7.4 PRIMARY SCHOOL PROVISION IN DULWICH (see pages 70-71 of the main agenda)
Following the voting on Motion 2, Motion 4 fell.