Minutes:
Motion on behalf of the United Kingdom Independence Party Group
Over many months members have had concerns about the LIP funding and how it is our money being returned but with strings attached. TFL state 'We allocate money to the London boroughs to spend on projects that support the Mayor's Transport Strategy through a Local Implementation Plan" This money is raised through the GLA precept, only part of which do we see returned and only then to be spent on things that The London Mayor wants and not what is necessarily of any benefit to the people of Havering; rarely used cycle lanes being a case in point.
Most recently the unveiling of plans to build 30,000 homes in the borough over the next 10 years to meet the London Mayors housing target, coupled with the assault on our greenbelt to bury the dead from other London boroughs highlight just how little control we currently have to set our own destiny when it comes to planning.
This has been the case since the creation of the GLA in by the Greater London Authority Act 1999 which passed through Parliament, receiving the Royal Assent in October 1999.
From that day to this Havering has had increasingly less control over its planning decisions. Which with the ever increasing demand for housing largely fuelled by continued uncontrolled mass immigration this situation is not going to get better any time soon.
This council agrees that it would be better off renegotiating our current relationship with the GLA and rather than remain under the Mayors planning authority we should become a Unitary Authority so that we can bring back control of planning and create a local plan that better fits the needs of Havering residents.
Amendment by the Conservative Group
This Council notes that, although it has repeatedly argued for greater control over how LIP funding is spent in the Borough and is concerned about London-wide or other outside control over planning policies and decisions, an Act of Parliament would be needed for the Borough to cease to be a London Borough and to become a Unitary Authority and that this would still be unlikely to give the Council ultimate control over such matters. Planning procedure in particular is governed by statute and national and regional policies. Any planning decision is subject to appeal, and if a council departs from such policies the outcomes are taken out of its hands.
The Council notes further that, even if Parliament could be persuaded to pass such an Act, there would be considerable implications including the loss of London-wide Freedom Passes and other subsidised transport schemes for our residents, the apportionment and burden of future funding of liabilities such as GLA pensions, the future of local policing and fire services and involvement in their governance and the future of the local transport and highway infrastructure which are controlled by TFL and its governance.
The Council notes further that the Council has not unveiled plans to build 30,000 homes over the next ten years and that matters such as annual housing targets and the preservation of the Green Belt will be will be part of the draft Local Plan to be considered shortly by the Council after the extensive consultation and evidence gathering which has already taken place.
Amendment by the Independent Residents’ Group
Growing demands to leave an institution is also growing evidence of a need to reform an institution and this applies to the Greater London Authority (GLA), which is presided over by an EU inspired Elected Mayor. Havering sits between London and Essex and enjoys the costs and benefits of both, but the Mayor of London’s plans to make Havering part of a Greater London to meet ambitious housing targets has incited a renewed debate about the future governance of Havering within the GLA.
This “Essex NOT London” debate involves a wide range of issues beyond planning matters and the Council’s official position on whether to remain should be guided by popular support. For this reason Council calls on the Executive to seek a democratic reform of the GLA and consider holding a borough wide constitutional In or Out referendum on our future relationship with the GLA.
Following debate, the amendment by the Conservative Group was CARRIED by 29 votes to 10 (see division 4); the amendment by the Independent Residents’ Group was NOT CARRIED by 27 votes to 8 (see division 5) and the amendment by the Conservative Group was AGREED as the substantive motion, without division.