Excerpt of Tower Hamlets Council meeting held on 20 November 2024 (AI Generated Summary).
The Mayor began his report by addressing the Government’s Best Value Inspection Report, which had been published the previous week. He told the meeting that he had met with the Minister for Local Government and that the meeting had been ‘a very positive start in our journey with the government as a partnership of equals.’
The Mayor welcomed the findings of the report, which he said identified ‘several positives in the way this council is run and performing’, and he also welcomed ‘the Minister’s decision to not send in commissioners, not to remove any powers from this council.’
This, he argued, demonstrated that ‘the government and the Minister’ had confidence that the Council was committed to working in partnership with them to deliver on its improvement commitments.
The Mayor acknowledged that ‘there are room for improvements’, but said that he was ‘particularly pleased’ by the report’s recognition that ‘our financial position is strong, sustainable and robust.’ He also welcomed the report’s recognition of ‘our staff’s passion and commitment to deliver for our residents.’
The Mayor said that he was ‘personally committed to ensuring that our council has the highest standards in public life and to change in the nature of the political discourse’, which the inspectors had referred to as ‘toxic’.
He committed to working with the Group Leaders and the Local Government Association to address this issue.
The Mayor also announced the following:
A new Winter Fuel Payment scheme for pensioners, which he said would provide a payment of £175 to those residents who did not qualify for the government’s Winter Fuel Payment.
A proposal to ‘model the financial and logistical cost of reintroducing the Meals on Wheels scheme’, which was launched in 1994 and cut in 2020.
A proposal to ‘model the financial and logistical cost of reintroducing elderly luncheon clubs’.
The Mayor concluded his report by saying that he was ‘confident that we will be able to find the resources to provide these services to our elderly and ensure that they receive support with healthy eating.’
Opposition response: Councillor Shirajul Islam, Leader of the Labour Group, responded to the Mayor’s report.
He began by saying that it was ‘regrettable’ that the government had published its Best Value Inspection report and response. He noted that the government’s letter to the Chief Executive had ‘confirmed that this council failed its best value duty’, and that as a result the government had issued ‘a statutory improvement plan and two government envoys in the council for two years’.
Councillor Islam recalled that he had been a Councillor in 2015 when the Council had been placed into special measures. He said that it ‘saddens’ him that the Council was being put back into special measures ‘just because’.
He then turned his attention to Labour’s proposed urgent motion relating to the Best Value Inspection Report, which had been rejected by the Monitoring Officer.
Councillor Islam explained that the Labour Group had ‘felt it was appropriate’ to propose an urgent motion because they felt that ‘our residents need to know what is in that inspection’, but said that they respected the Monitoring Officer’s decision.
The Councillor said that the Best Value Inspection Report ‘doesn’t pull any punches’, and noted that it described ‘toxic culture’ at the Council, and that trust between Councillors, officers and partners had ‘broken down’.
Councillor Islam went on to say that the Report states that ‘Decisions aren’t made, services don’t get delivered’, and argued that it is ‘not us the politicians’ who pay the price for these failures, ‘it’s the people of this borough, the residents of this borough’.
Councillor Islam said that the Report found that the Council had a ‘friend and family culture’ when it came to jobs and power, and that these things were ‘doled out like party favours’, not based on merit.
‘That’s no democracy’, he argued, ‘ladies and gentlemen, that’s not governance. That is wrong.’
He argued that the Council’s toxic culture had led to ‘millions blown on consultants in a single year’, and that ‘key services like housing and waste management are failing, falling apart’ because of it.
He then quoted from the Report, saying that the Inspectors ‘are sceptical on the council’s capability to self-improve’, and that this was why external oversight was necessary, ‘not because we want to, but because the people of Tower Hamlets deserve better. Our residents deserve this council, they can trust, the council that delivers, the council puts them first.’
Councillor Islam concluded his response by saying ‘That’s what the Labour group is fighting for. We will work tirelessly to bring transparency, accountability and decency back to this council. This borough is full of potential, of talent, of resilience. We will not let this administration squander it any longer. We will not stop until the council has what it deserves.’
He added that he was privileged to have been elected, and said that the Labour Group’s role was to hold the Mayor and his administration to account, and ‘work constructively with the administration’, adding that they ‘look forward to playing our part in the improvement that the government has set.’
The Mayor responded to Councillor Islam’s statement. He said that Labour had been in power for seven years and that during that time they had ‘cut services to its core’, outsourcing youth services to the bare minimum.
The Mayor then contrasted this with what his administration had done since it had been elected: ’45 million pound additional investment in public services’, bringing youth services back in-house, providing a youth club in every ward, and investing ’13 million pounds per year additional money’ in youth services.
The Mayor went on to say that his administration was the only one in the country which provides free home care and free school meals in both primary and secondary schools and that it provided Education Maintenance Allowance to all children from low-income families, and a £500 university bursary to 800 children from low-income families. He added that his administration provided free swimming to young women aged 16 and older, and men aged 55 and older.
The Mayor concluded by saying that Labour ‘believe in cut. They were booted out in 2022. They will be booted out again in 2026 inshallah.’
He said that he ‘believe in constructive criticism’ and that he would ‘always put myself and this administration forward to external challenges. We are listening council. We will listen. We will improve. But believe me, our residents come first. And we will continue to serve the residents of this borough.’
Meals on Wheels
The meeting then moved on to the motions for debate.
The first motion, moved by Councillor Maium Talukdar and seconded by Councillor Kabir Ahmed, requested the Council to:
Instruct Officers to model the financial and logistical cost of reintroducing the Meals on Wheels scheme, to understand its resource viability and deliverability.
Continue to promote access to the council’s Winter Fuel Payment scheme in the meantime, to ensure that affected elderly residents have access to support with their heating.
Further to this, instruct officers to model the financial and logistical cost of reintroducing elderly luncheon clubs via quality-assured 3rd sector providers.
To have a report presented at the next Cabinet meeting outlining options should such schemes be feasible.
To launch a borough-wide campaign to promote healthy eating and social inclusion for pensioners and vulnerable residents in Tower Hamlets.
Councillor Talukdar began the debate by praising the Council’s ‘groundbreaking investment into our residents’, noting that as well as announcing the Winter Fuel Payment scheme, the Council was now proposing to bring back the Meals on Wheels scheme, which was cut by the previous administration.
He said that the Meals on Wheels scheme was ‘absolutely critical and crucial’, and reminded Members that ‘during COVID, I had the honour of volunteering on Dial-a-Dog. We’ve distributed over 65,000 meals on Dial-a-Dog. And we’ve seen and we’ve witnessed how vital this service is to the elderly residents, including many Councillors on this side, volunteered. They helped us.’
He suggested that the motion built on the ‘spirit’ of the Mayor’s Manifesto pledge to serve the community, and noted that the Administration had ‘restored free school meals for all primary schools. We have introduced free school meals for secondary pupils. We are brought in the Winter Fuel Payment. Now, let’s see if we can go a step further and introduce this Meals on Wheels company for our pensioners.’
He concluded by saying that this was ‘another critical investment for our elderly residents, who has done a lot for us and for this community’, and urged all Members to support the motion.
Councillor Marc Francis said that he was going to ‘read to you a couple of paragraphs from the recent report on this council’, and then quoted from the Best Value Inspection Report, which said:
‘We have observed the council exhibiting in our view and that of some partners, staff and managers a drive to go back to some arrangements from 2014. The current administration regularly criticises the previous administration, the services it provided and its financial management. Many of the current managers and staff worked in the borough during the previous administration, and staff have told us this adversarial and disrespectful rhetoric from politicians affects them negatively. To a degree, this political culture is also preventing Councillors from engaging productively across the chamber and the Council from moving on and engaging in a culture of genuine improvement.’
Councillor Francis said that this was ‘exactly this kind of motion, exactly the lead member’s presentation. We cannot even get through one full council meeting without the mayor, the mayor of Tower Hamlets that’s presenting about exactly what the best value inspections have criticised. They’ve called this a toxic council. Our residents are paying council tax towards this. It is shameful. The mayor should apologise.’
The Mayor responded to Councillor Francis’s statement, saying ‘they don’t like criticisms. I accept criticisms. I want to improve. I want to improve as individual and as a council. Six years these people failed to deliver accounts, annual accounts. If you did it, there will be criminal proceedings against you. Six years failed to deliver annual governance statements. I wonder our governance is poor in one or two areas. Six years failed to return VAT returns. If you fail to deliver your VAT returns, your VAT returns, you will be in prison. They don’t like criticisms. They don’t like us being told the truth. You talk about me, I have the right to respond. Councillor Francis, I have the right to respond, I have the right.’
Councillor Nathalie Bienfait said that she was ‘extremely pleased that the Administration is looking into reinstating the Meals on Wheel service’.
She argued that an in-house service would be able to ensure that the food was’ culturally appropriate’, contrasting this with private sector providers, who she suggested did not provide adequate ranges of halal and kosher meals. She also noted that ‘having a box delivered to your door once a month by a delivery driver, you know, he’s very friendly, but it’s really not the same as having a daily visit from someone that you see regularly and who is a friendly face and someone that you can talk to.’ She explained that she had been helping a number of elderly people in her ward to get meals, and noted that they were ‘very isolated’, and that was one of the reasons they needed the meals.
Councillor Ahmodur Khan praised the motion, recalling a conversation he had with an elderly resident who had told him that he had previously relied on both a lunch club and the Council’s cafe at the Idea Store, both of which had been cut.
Councillor Khan argued that the motion was ‘about legacy’, and praised the Administration’s decision to introduce free school meals, the Winter Fuel Payment scheme and the proposals in the motion, arguing that ‘this is what we are here in politics to do and it’s about legacy and I say I congratulate the mayor, Lutfur Rahman, that you’ve managed, you had the audacity to think about it, to give our elders the dignity back who are living in an overcrowded home, who can’t go to Starbucks or who can’t go out and just spend some time because they can’t spend £5, £4 in a coffee shop and just have their time and have a mingle with their friends.’
Councillor Peter Golds said that he supported the motion, and argued that ‘there is a hidden issue within this motion, and that is the loneliness, the awful, awful loneliness of older people.’
He urged Members to think about ‘the importance here, and I think it should be almost in neon lights, the need for the luncheon clubs and getting people together because very often the only social contact many older people have is something like a luncheon club.’
He then gave an example of an elderly resident on the Isle of Dogs who he had met while delivering Christmas cards, who told him that the only time she heard from her son was on Christmas Day.
Councillor Golds said that he had imagined her son living ‘in Canada or Australia or somewhere’, but was shocked to learn that he lived in Basildon.
He argued ‘that that is what we’ve got to look at, and as I say, hidden within this motion is this awful, awful loneliness of older people. I do beg of everybody, it’s not just the meal, it’s not what they get, it’s actually human communication, speaking to somebody, going out and finding somebody.
‘So I turn back to this, the importance is resuming the luncheon club. For many of these people, I’m sure it’s not the desperation of the food, it’s actually going there and having a couple of hours with another, with a group of people they can relate to. So I would say to everybody to support the motion, but as we develop this make sure that we have luncheon clubs spread around. We’ve heard today that we’ve got youth centres in every ward. Well, let’s make sure we have good luncheon clubs within every ward in our estates for our older people.’
Councillor Marc Francis said that he was ‘really pleased to take part in this debate because it gives us an opportunity to put some things on record ourselves’.
He noted that ‘in terms of what we agree with’, he wanted to start by talking about the winter fuel allowance. He acknowledged that many Labour members were opposed to the government’s decision to cut the Winter Fuel Allowance, but argued that this decision ‘is made on the basis of this country not being able to pay its way to pay for key public services. That’s the reason why the Chancellor has made this decision.’
However, he went on to say that alongside the decision to cut the Winter Fuel Allowance, the Chancellor had also decided to provide an additional £3 million of funding to Tower Hamlets through the Household Support Fund, which Labour had proposed a motion about at the previous Council meeting, which was rejected by Aspire.
The Chancellor, he said, had also announced a further £1 billion for the Household Support Fund in October, ‘of which Tower Hamlets will probably get a further £6 million. So when the mayor introduces these items, these items are being introduced in the context of a Labour government that is beginning to turn the corner on austerity and beginning to invest again in public services, including in local government. £9 million they’re coming through in household support fund alone, let alone social care fund, let alone revenue support grant and all of the other money that’s come through already announced and is going to be coming through in the comprehensive spending review as well.’
Councillor Francis said that Labour ‘absolutely’ believed that the previous Administration’s decision to cut the Meals on Wheels service had been the wrong one and that Councillor James King had ‘led a scrutiny challenge session during the COVID pandemic, which concluded about the dangers of removing that service’.
However, he also acknowledged that ‘a service was costing £500,000 to £600,000 a year to deliver a meals service was not a cost-effective service and there were alternative ways perhaps of doing that.’
Finally, Councillor Francis said that the issue of luncheon clubs was raised repeatedly in Price Waterhouse Cooper’s Best Value Inspection report in 2014. ‘The mayor knows all about this’, he said, ‘he knows all about the 954 fund. Lots of Councillors who were opposite us know about this as well. Lots of members of senior officers of this Council know all about the 954 fund as well. And when this is introduced, if this policy is introduced, we will be making sure that decisions are made appropriately about who gets that money and where that money goes to in Tower Hamlets.’
This summary is provided by Open Council, which uses AI-generated summaries to ensure that journalism fulfils its role in informing the public of the activities of government.