My colleague Cllr Chris Maines is collecting examples so he can put together the full picture.  If you’re a parent who is dissatisfied with your offer from the Council, please do drop Chris a line at cllr_chris.maines {at} lewisham.gov(.)uk – do copy me in, too.

Councillors from all parties joined behind Sven’s motion calling on the Mayor to ensure that all elderly residents are aware of their entitlements, and to publicise the scheme further.  Most older residents receive these entitlements automatically, but there are a minority of people who are entitled to the payment but won’t receive it unless they apply.

Sven said, “Far too many older people die of hypothermia when they can’t afford to turn the heating up, because they either don’t know about the benefit available, or else don’t claim it. We’ve had two cold winters in a row, and this shouldn’t be something they need to worry about.”

For reference, you can find out if you’re entitled to a Winter Fuel Payment, and apply if you need to, here.

There’s also the Cold Weather Payment, which is triggered if the temperature falls below zero for seven consecutive days.  We’ve already had one such period in Lee Green this year. Info on that payment, and a postcode search facility, here.

The one thing I’d emphasise is that these are entitlements - people who have contributed to society for so long shouldn’t be ashamed to accept or apply for what they’re entitled to.

If people give up their time to troop down to the Polling Station and vote, then the least they can expect is that their vote will be counted quickly and accurately. With a tight result expected nationally (and here in Lewisham), then it’s only right that votes are counted as soon as possible so we know the result.  Of course, I come from the home of speedy vote counting!

So I was pleased that on Thursday night the Council’s Elections Committee, which I chair, agreed to keep Lewisham’s general election count on election night, with a result expected early on Friday 7th May.  Counts for the Mayor of Lewisham and our 54 local councillors will take place later on Friday May 7th.

So good news, and I’m sure that – for Pete at least – it’ll be alright on the night!

If anyone knows a better-gritted stretch of pavement in Lewisham, I’d be surprised!

Residents who live in the affected areas will have received an application form for permits a couple of months ago – if you haven’t filled in and returned your permit application, you need to do so now.  If you need another copy of the booklet and form, please call Eva Ashley at the Council on 8314 2080.

Residents will be aware that these zones were consulted on over a year ago.  I was told back in June that they would begin operation by the end of September.  Quite why it’s taken so long is anyone’s guess.  I asked the Deputy Mayor (who is responsible for CPZs) a formal question on this at the last Council meeting and was told then that she couldn’t provide me with a date for the start of operation.  When I asked her why there’d been such a delay she suggested that bad weather might have been responsible (I know we didn’t have the best August, but surely it wasn’t that bad?!?) She promised to get back to me with an explanation, but a fortnight on, and I’m still waiting.

Anyway, 18th January it is.

I promised to raise this at Council and did so last Wednesday.   My question, and the Deputy Mayor’s disappointing response is below:

LONDON BOROUGH OF LEWISHAM

COUNCIL MEETING

25 NOVEMBER 2009

Question by Councillor Robson of the Deputy Mayor

Question

A recent decision made by planning officers to agree a ‘detail’ of a planning permission without further consulting residents has caused some controversy in Lee Green Ward. Having asked officers for a copy of the procedure followed in this case, I was surprised to be told that there is no written procedure for officers to follow in deciding whether such details conform to the original permission. Can Members be assured that a written policy is put in place to ensure that residents can understand the processes followed in such cases?

Reply

The question is referring to what is known as “Approval of Details” applications. These are submitted by applicants in order to discharge their obligations by way of conditions imposed on planning permissions. Such requirements normally arise in instances where fuller illustrative details or technical specifications are needed. In granting the original planning permission the principle of the development has already been confirmed, but the submission and approval of appropriate details serves to ensure that the development will be implemented to a satisfactory standard.

It is not normal practice amongst local planning authorities to notify or consult third parties on Approval of Detail applications for the simple reason that the formal consultation exercise will already have been undertaken for the original application. Indeed, Lewisham Council’s Statement of Community Involvement makes no reference to such applications.

The decision to impose particular conditions on a planning permission may sometimes be as a consequence of the stated concerns of local occupiers, and it is also important that these applications – which amount to approximately 12% of the yearly total – are dealt with as expeditiously as possible, so as not to hinder or delay developments of acceptable form. Accordingly, officers, who enjoy delegated authority by way of the Council’s Scheme of Delegation, are entrusted to use discretionary judgement to this end. There have been occasions when the committee determining the application may consider that the details of a particular issue are of such significance that they need to be referred back to them for decision. If the committee do not take this approach it is normal practice for officers to discharge the conditions under their delegated powers.

In the interests of consistency the original case officer will invariably deal with the process of discharging the terms and conditions of a planning permission. The formal approval process also requires the agreement and signature of a senior officer. With such safeguards in place I do not believe that producing a policy or guidance note as to how such submissions should be best dealt with would serve any useful purpose.

 In my supplementary question, I pressed the Deputy Mayor further, pointing out that residents have a right to understand what’s going on, and that the council also owes it to planning officers to have a policy in place that they can refer to rather than leaving them defending decisions without the benefit of a written policy to guide them.  The Deputy Mayor reiterated her belief that producing a policy or guidance note isn’t a good use of officer time. 

My own view, for what it’s worth, is that officer time spent serving residents is time well spent, and the Northbrook case shows that residents aren’t being best served by the current lack of policy.

Lewisham have gone for all three approaches – with different solutions in different areas.  I’ve been supportive of the Leybridge Court transfer, so I don’t at all come at this from a ‘let’s oppose everything the Council does’ angle.

However, the ALMO route has been fraught with difficulty.  The Council were late setting up Lewisham Homes, and it had an appalling start with a dreadful Audit Commission report on the set-up it inherited from the Council (something the Cabinet Member responsible has told me she’ll never forgive me for demanding a copy of!).  The Government won’t give Lewisham a penny for decent homes until they’re confident the organisation is in a fit state to spend it, and they define that standard as a ‘2 star’ award from the Audit Commission.

So far, that critical inspection has been delayed and delayed again, and far from all homes meeting the standard (as the Mayor promised tenants back in 2006), seven out of ten Lewisham Homes won’t meet the standard by 2010.  In fact, the number of non-decent council homes has increased since 2006 as kitchens and bathrooms have become life-expired.

The latest piece of bad news comes from Government.  Having got sick of waiting for Lewisham to get their act together, the Government has decided to spend the money allocated for our decent homes on something else.  So there’s now no money in the kitty to deliver decent homes, even if Lewisham did pull a rabbit out of the hat and get two stars.   The housing minister has said that money might be found in the next round of government spending – due in 2011 – but as we all know, there’ll be a general election by then, and he’s not in a position to promise that.

The Lib Dem group are really worried by this state of affairs, particularly as the Council has been very slow off the mark in waking up to this and doing something about it.  Their initial reaction was to deny there was a problem and say the money had been ‘delayed’ by six months.  Other Councils affected have launched a judicial  review, but Lewisham’s chosen not to take part in that.  So we tabled a motion for the last council  meeting on 24th September - noting our concerns and asking the Chair of Council to write to the Minister concerned, and for the Mayor to apologise to tenants through Lewisham Homes’ ‘Home’ magazine for their tenants.

Now, Council meetings in Lewisham begin at 7.30pm and end at 10pm, unless Council decides to continue.  As you can see from the agenda, the motion was the last item on the agenda of the September meeting.   So, when 10pm came round, we asked for the Council meeting to be extended so we could ensure we covered all the business.  Predictably, Labour councillors voted against, rather than have the motion discussed (I should add that they filibustered throughout the meeting to ensure that time ran out – one councillor listing the platforms at London Bridge station ‘Platform 1, platform 2, etc…)

So, we ensured our motion was the first one to be debated at last night’s council meeting.  What could go wrong?  Well, the Chair of the Labour Group decided to ask for the order of business to be changed, so that once again, our motion was last.  As a couple of opposition councillors weren’t present, the Labour group got their way, and the motion was once again relegated to the end of the agenda, and once again, they voted to close the meeting at 10pm.  That’s democracy, Lewisham Council style.

This is a really important issue that affects thousands of tenants across the borough. It needs to be discussed by their representatives, and not ignored because it’s politcally embarassing for the ruling clique.  Fortunately, there are now enough opposition councillors that we can call an emergency council meeting – so that’s exactly what we’ve done.

Why are Lewisham Labour so afraid of a debate?  I think their record on housing speaks for itself.

The report being considered tonight responded to our statement by making three recommendations to the Mayor:

• That all residents in Lee Green ward who aren’t covered by existing Controlled Parking Zones (CPZs) will be consulted on the potential introduction of parking restrictions (including the option for a two hour zone where appropriate).  This will happen by April 2010.
• That existing CPZs will be retained on their current hours, and that if funds are available in future, hours of operation can be reviewed.
• The Hither Green East CPZ which was brought in last year will be reviewed by the end of this year, and the extensions to that zone and the Old Road/Bankwell Road zone that are currently being installed will be reviewed after one year of operation.  The original Old Road/Bankwell Road zone will also be reviewed at this point.

All the reviews and consultations will include questions on:

• If you’re in a CPZ, do you wish to retain it?
• If you’re not, would you like one?
• If you’re not in a CPZ, and you don’t want one, would you like safety works like yellow lining on corners to be carried out?

I spoke at Mayor and Cabinet and made the following points:

• It’s good that the assembly’s views have been considered, and that money’s been found to ask the rest of the ward about parking all at once (so as to hopefully avoid the piecemeal solutions we’ve had in the past that have simply moved the problem around)
• However, the assembly didn’t call for more CPZs – we called for CPZs with different hours, and other solutions like homezones and car clubs, to be explored.  Crucially, the concept of car clubs needs to be explained by the Council – it’s no good just asking people if they want one – we need to explain the concept and benefits (the Sustainable Development Select Committee report does a good job at this!) and this is something I’ve already raised with the Deputy Mayor at a meeting of the Full Council.
• The key word in our original motion was parking solutions - not just restrictions, as the Mayor’s report seems to assume.  A small change, but an important change of emphasis. The last thing we want is the assembly’s work being used as a trojan horse to push through more 9am-7pm CPZs where they’re not wanted.

I said I hoped officers would take that on board and ensure the consultations and reviews are carried out in the spirit of the assembly’s statement.  In particular, that third question about safety works should also ask about other solutions like homezones and car clubs.

I also asked that officers to prepare an update for the Assembly on 19th Jan explaining the decision that’s been made and where they’re up to with each of the recommendations.

Finally, there was some amusement about the Mayor’s interview in the NewsShopper, where he admits to owning no less than three cars himself (not including the ones the Council gives him use of).  He assured us this doesn’t colour his judgement when it comes to parking..!   In the same spirit of openness, I guess I should declare that I share a Ford Fiesta with my partner, which we sometimes manage to park on our own street.

This year is the 70th anniversary of the start of World War II, but this year I’ve been particualrly struck by The Poppy Appeal’s focus on the Afghan generation of  the Armed Forces and their families.   They accept online donations here.

“During July this year a number of ponds and lakes in south east London, including the Tarn at Eltham, were affected by Avian Botulism, a bacteria that can kill wildfowl. Although the source of the outbreak was not Lewisham the lake at Manor House Gardens was affected. The disease can be spread by the wildfowl, often on their feet, into new ponds and lakes. Hot weather raises the water temperature which makes the silt temperature rise in turn giving the bacteria a better environment for it to multiply. This was compounded by the low water levels, due to lack of rain, and the unfortunate malfunction of the fountain which helps to aerate the lake. The lake is oxygenated by means of an aerator overnight and repairs were made to the pump to ensure the fountain was in working order.

I am aware that the outbreak caused great distress, not only for the wildfowl but for users of the gardens. The outbreak has raised the importance of checking the water quality on a regular basis, checking levels and reducing the amount of bread fed to the birds which exacerbates the problem. With this in mind we have focussed publicity on offering healthier options for the wildfowl such as grains, duck pellets and even defrosted frozen peas.

The outbreak has also raised the importance of good communications, both between Glendale’s site staff and management, Glendale and the Council and Glendale and the Park Users Group.

I am pleased to say that the lake has now recovered, and wildfowl have returned. The fountain is working and the aerator remains in operation overnight when the fountain is turned off for noise reasons. My officers will ensure that the condition of all ponds and lakes in our parks and open spaces are checked on a weekly basis during forthcoming summers, and daily during very warm conditions.”