East London News A Force for the community…
The second petitioner is not present, so we move to the third petitioner.
Terry McGrenera is now presenting his petition, which is asking for a community hall to be included in the new development at Watts Grove. He is giving a clear explanation of why a community hall is needed. Unfortunately, this is such a common story: “consultation” is an exercise in members of the public being allowed to see the plans, to be informed what has been decided – not an exercise during which residents can put forward views to be taken into consideration.
Cllr Danny Hassell (Labour) is asking a question: he and his fellow ward councillor asked for a hall to be included (and more wheelchair accessible housing) to be built. He feels that the consultation was truncated so that the Council could be certain to get GLA money for the development. He says that the GLA money means that the homes must be let at higher rents, “affordable” ones rather than “POD” ones. However, without GLA money the homes could not have been built, presumably.
Terry points out that the Council’s brief, given to the architect, did not request a community hall to be included. He still feels that a community hall could be built on one of the designated garden areas, from where it could work in tandem with the intended children’s play areas.
Cllr Khan is now replying to the petition. She has met residents from the area. She believes there should be a community hall in this area. She is talking to officers to try to find how the Council can facilitate a community centre being made available to the new residents.
We are now on to questions from the public. Hurrah: 20 mins max…
First to ask a question is Ms Kathy McTasney, with a question about personalised disabled bays. The second is from Ms Ghulshana Begum, about BAME unemployment. Neither is present, so the questions fall.
The third question is asked by Ms Shuily Akhtar, who wants information about the Community Safety Walkabouts. This has caused Labour Cllr Shiria Khatun to have a bit of a laugh. Cllr Ohid Ahmed replies to the question. He has explained that the Community Safety Walkabouts are very effective. Ms Akhtar has asked a supplementary question: which councillors have attended. Cllr Ahmed has explained that some councillors have not come, but some have.
The fourth question is from Musthak Ahmed, who is asking for an update on the impact of the Tory Government’s cuts in Council funding and welfare benefits. He is not present.
We move on to a question from Mr Aulad Miah. He congratulated the Council for supporting the Holland estate residents. His question is to ask why the Labour Group wanted to cut funding to the Kobi Nazrul Centre.
Cllr Alibor Chowdhury is replying. He pointed out that the Labour Group has a record of trying to make petty cuts in funding, which he attributes to their desire to attack THF priorities. Cllr Chowdhury is praising the centre (interrupting himself to ask Labour Leader Cllr Saunders to stop heckling him) and explaining that funding the centre will be of benefit to all residents – but that is not Labour’s way (Labour Councillors are tutting rather).
Mr Miah has come back for a supplementary question. He points out that councillors have just criticised EEH for not listening to its residents, but today he found out that Labour also tried to cut the annual residents survey: he sees this as a double standard.
Cllr Chowdhury agreed with Mr Miah – and also pointed out that Cllr Saunders was on the EEH Board when it cut Estate Boards. He also referred to Labour trying to cut funding of support for people trying to stop smoking. He went to Overview & Scrutiny (where Labour ask the Cabinet questions about the budget) and felt it was like being waterboarded for not purpose.
The next question is from Jamir Chowdhury, who wants to know how the Mayor’s Administration is supporting elderly and isolated groups in the borough.
Cllr Abdul Asad is giving a list of projects which the Council supports. As he got to the point of saying that the Council supported a number of lunch clubs, Cllr Rachel Saunders gave a loud heckle about that being “out of your control now” – whatever that meant. Cllr Asad insists that the Administration will continue to do good work in this area.
Mr Chowdhury came back to ask whether the Administration’s work received cross-party support. Cllr Asad said that Mayor Rahman did a great deal to support the elderly and they would both like more cross-party support but did not receive much.
Labour Councillors are having a good chat amongst themselves while all this goes on. The Speaker has intervened, asking all councillors to be more quiet.
Cllr Shiria Khatun is now making a point of order: she is accusing THF councillors of speaking (to each other) in Bengali, but they are elected councillors, so… She did not get to conclude her point before the Speaker insisted on moving on.
The next question is from Shamim Miah, who wants to know why the Labour Group wanted to cut finance to smoking cessation support services.
Cllr Asad is replying that he cannot imagine what inspired Labour to do this.
Mr Miah has come back to express great concern: he is a recent quitter, and he sees many youth smoking now and wants them to be supported. He thinks this is a serious issue (it will save public money in the long term) and wonders if Labour just seized upon this cut to suggest as part of a battle with THF rather than thinking through the consequences of the service being removed.
Cllr Asad agrees with the questioner: these services should be a priority. He calls on the Labour Group to stop threatening the service.
The final question we have time for is from Aser El Saqqa, who is asking about the Rich Mix. [A Council officer has intervened to remind councillors not to discuss the current legal action against Rich Mix.] Mr El Saqqa is referring to a petition (signed, he says, by 10,000) asking the Council not to put the continued existence of the Rich Mix in danger. He says the Rich Mix plays an important role in the artistic and cultural life of the borough.
Cllr Shafiqul Haque is replying. He is pointing out that the Rich Mix cinema costs more than the private Genesis cinema down the road. He says it is mainly used by people who do not live in the borough (“Rubbish!” shouts Cllr Saunders). He says it is little more than a publicly subsidised cinema.
Mr Saqqa refers to 600 events in the Rich Mix each year which are not cinema events – they have a very diverse cultural background. He believes the Mayor should look for a balanced dialogue with Rich Mix with a view to agreeing how the Council can support the Rich Mix.
Cllr Haque points out that at a time of cuts, it is not possible to support every cultural cause. He has not specifically pointed out that the money the Council is trying to recover is money that was loaned to the Rich Mix.
On to another Part of this report.
