The Administration's Priorities For The Coming Four Year Period

As agreed by the Council in 2008, arising from a review of the operation of aspects of constitutional arrangements since 2006, the Leader of the Council will make a presentation on the Administration’s priorities for the coming four year period.

This presentation will open the debate on the direction of the Council to 2014 and will draw on the Liberal Democrat Local Election Manifesto.

Leader of the Opposition, Cllr Howard Jones responded:

Madam Mayor

This evening’s debate gives us an opportunity to reflect on the things that make the Borough such a pleasing place to live.

But it also affords us the platform to assess where the Council is and where it should be heading: an opportunity to hold the Administration to account, and properly scrutinise whether or not their manifesto pledges and promises have been acted upon.

In the circumstances of the late Motion put before this Council by the Leader of the Council only just over 24hours ago we now have been asked to review where we might be going over the next four years and adopt the Lib Dem Manifesto

Let me first of all say something in introduction.

A week or so ago I met with the leader of the Council and asked for a discussion about politics in the Borough – not just because of the Conservative Liberal Democrat Coalition in power in Whitehall but also because not only does the National Government face a crisis of debt and lack of funding but so does this Council.

I felt - and my colleagues agreed - that for too long politics in this Council had become polarised – there was an interesting Us and Them phenomenon about nearly all issues that were raised. I felt that this situation if allowed to carry on would do no good for the people of Kingston in the present financial climate and that we on the Conservative side should offer a less combative style of opposition – that we would look for compromise and agreement rather than stark opposition. In return we would seek early consultation on issues of note and importance and would play our part in the development of policies and work for the common good.

It seemed that this approach was accepted by the Leader and I was hoping that we would continue a dialogue. In the event it also seemed that this evening’s debate would be an opportunity to perhaps seal the new relationship.

I thought doubtless the Leader would expound on the successes of his Administration over the past years and then go on to explain the main planks of his Administration’s goals for the next four years. Originally the debate was headed: and I quote

“The Leader of the Council will make a presentation of the Administration’s priorities for the next four years.”

Little did I expect that we would be introduced to the Liberal Democrat Manifesto from the last election as the working document from which we are to understand where this Administration is going over the next four years and which we as a Council are asked to sign up to and vote for.

Well in spite of our discussions Leader – the Conservatives will not be signing up to the Liberal Democrat manifesto which not only talks about ten firm commitments (and there are many of those that we agree with and are promises that we also made to the people of Kingston) but there is also a long misplaced diatribe about Conservatives on this council – it misrepresents policy positions that we have put forward – misinterprets history – and is a political document drawn up for fighting an election. It seems to me not to be a Council Policy document.

A lot has gone on since the election and this manifesto is history – out of date – by passed by events. It is not a policy document we would have expected to be prepared by a new administration facing the financial crisis that we all know about. We have been accused in the past of laziness in preparation of Motions – this motion I am afraid reeks of laziness in preparation. We expected and the residents deserved a clear vision of the future – where the One Council project will provide the platform for us to survive the financial perils that we face, where a programme to make the most of our assets would engage us, where we would look to the future with anticipation.

Unfortunately this document does not give much insight into the One Council Project and where the Administration sees that heading. We thoroughly support much of the One Council process and much of the philosophy behind it. But we look for strong financial management within the project – stronger financial disciplines - stronger political leadership and a more aggressive approach to goal setting, time lines and delivery.

Local Authorities play a critical part in the day-to-day lives of their residents. We play a huge role in the provision of services. We ensure we have school places for our children, we make sure the streets are clean, and that businesses can be accommodated and flourish. It is our responsibility to maintain, and improve, the quality of life of everybody in the Borough, which is perhaps why our residents tolerate paying the highest council tax in London!

Regardless of what happened at the ballot box in May, when we put forward a policy programme which we believe contained measures that would be truly beneficial to our residents, businesses, partners and service providers, and for which we would hope the Administration would be able to put aside partisan objections and consider implementing - you see we still believe that Kingston is worth fighting for.

Let’s talk about the Council’s tenants. They pay their rents, only for the Council to receive a red flag for housing in the CAA and fail to meet the Decent Home Standard.

Everyone agrees that investment is urgently required in our social housing. But I also believe that after two botched stock transfers so far, the Administration should look again at this option and consider a further, tenant-led transfer, involving and engaging with the Resident’s Associations at every possible opportunity.

Only by a tenant led stock transfer do we believe that this crisis can be solved. We advocate strongly the Residents Associations are given increasing responsibility over the management of the housing stock and the negotiations with both their members and prospective Housing Associations

They say that they can deliver with our help and we say give them the chance. This would be an inexpensive way of achieving something hundreds of thousands of pounds in Consultants fees have failed to achieve in the past.

Our schools are facing the biggest challenges for decades. Kingston’s schools have long been the envy of most other Local Authorities, a statement backed up by the fact so many parents from outside the Borough aspire to send their children to them.

It’s a great shame, in my opinion, that schools in Kingston are no longer uniquely for Kingston children – but we don’t have much control over that.

This Administration has so far not handled either Primary and Secondary education issues with dexterity some have said they have handled it disastrously. When my colleague Cllr Doe brought to the Executive’s attention, the need for additional school places, he was labelled a scaremonger, and the Conservative Group was told that there was ‘no sustainable demand for additional places based on pupil number projections’.

This has resulted in some of our children being taught in portakabins! This disgraceful situation has been exacerbated by the Administration’s arrogant refusal to accept the evidence produced by my colleague that we were not providing enough places for both Primary and Secondary School children.

There has been much vociferous criticism of the Administration’s handling of the consultation on primary school places. All this serves to do is simply erode the good reputation of the Borough’s education services. Central government cuts in education spending will have to be resolved.

We will work with the Administration to ensure the new school in North Kingston is built; investment is still needed in our primary schools and we will use all our influence to ensure that funding is forthcoming. We should be in no doubt that in this issue and many others we are now “All in this together.”

Policing is an area of policy that invites some comment. We are still strongly in favour of zero tolerance policing and alcohol free zones. Whilst Kingston’s retail sector and the bar culture bring in much needed revenue, it also raises questions about the level of visible policing in the Borough. We support, and commend, the Coalition Government’s proposal for elected individuals, answerable to the residents via the ballot box, to be in overall charge of local policing matters.

Libraries and care homes have long been a Conservative priority – these are provisions which many residents value enormously or simply could not live without. The Administration saw the response when Hobkirk House was so unceremoniously closed. They should heed that warning and do all they can to ensure these vital services are protected.

The financial pressure is mounting.The desire to find savings may well force us to debate furiously key services. We believe that our all our Libraries can remain open and for longer hours not less. But to achieve this we need to bring every possible service we can on to the same sites. Co location of Council services is the way ahead in the future. This will need some investment but we are satisfied that we can reduce costs, release assets and realise asset value and in some cases increase services for less.

We will fight any closure where it is not clear that the closure is part of a master plan that will retain services but reduce costs. We know it’s possible and we will work with you if you invite us.

It is true we favour looking at building a new Newent House that benefits from improvements like those built into Amy Woodgate House. We have no plans for the closure of Newent House as alleged by the Leader in the run up to the election but we would prefer a modern provision. We would like for example to consider building a new home next to the new Surbiton Polyclinic and create what Age Concern calls a “Campus for older residents”.

The provision of social space and care for our older residents is a perfect example of how we have failed to make the most of the opportunities presented to us in the past. We believe that through the clustering of services lounges for older residents to meet and visit can be created and our existing care homes can be re-provided to meet the future needs of care and by working closely with our non-for-profit and third sector partners all this can be achieved without costing us anything,

The Rose Theatre has long been a contentious and controversial issue for this Council, and, despite come constantly harping about our opposition I want to make it clear once again that our objections revolve purely around council tax payers funding. The way taxpayer’s money has been thrown at the project (after being told none would be used) not only to get it open, but to keep it open.

But make no mistake – we wish the Rose well, and want it to be a success - not just so it can begin to make repayments to the Council – not even to help shift Kingston’s night time economy away from one obsessed with alcohol consumption, but because we welcome the prospect of a cultural element to the town centre’s life.

Which leads us onto the cultural quarter, a proposal we have made which would allow the Council to co-locate a number of cultural and night-time activities in the area between the High Street – the Guildhall – the market place and the church which in turn would enable the theatre to grow commercially stronger and more viable/less dependent on financial assistance from residents and stand artistically and commercially independent in a new and vibrant heart which would develop into the heart of all cultural activities throughout the year.

I hope that the University will continue to build on its present commitment to the Rose Theatre and over time become the leading partner in the project

New Malden is probably still a sore subject for the Administration. It has overseen disastrous attempts at improvement which have proved to be anything but. None of this means there is good reason to ignore the blatant and dire need to redevelop much of the area around Blagdon Road and Cocks Crescent and the Causeway.

Back in April, we commissioned a New Malden-based firm of architects to look at the opportunities, investigate the potential and produce a range of suggestions for residents to consider intended primarily to instigate a thorough debate on the issue and the area’s future. This area could be developed into a new and vibrant heart for the local community – without relocating any of the services and amenities currently provided on the site.

We have offered the work we have done already to the administration for consideration and look forward to progress

We also need to raise and maintain awareness of environmental issues, which are so often the first things to be sidelined in an economic turndown. We have a high quality of life in the Borough, with the River Thames, Richmond Park, and the many green spaces we posses being the main reasons for people wanting to move here.

An Environment Centre would enable both residents and service providers to think beyond recycling, to forms of transport, the design of homes, and the technology we use to help us at work or entertain us at home.

Kingston is home to some of the most innovate people in London. Through use of new technologies and services we want to create jobs in the Environmental sector that will strengthen the quality of local employment in Kingston and thus reduce the need for travel for those it employs.

The work of The Save the World Club, Kingston Friends of the Earth, The Community Furniture Project and the recently launched Transition Town Kingston all reflect our Borough’s growing awareness of the environment.

The Environment is not just about greenhouse gases and landfill. It is about changing the way we live and finding new ways to do things that cause less harm in the future.

We also proposed to introduce a Green Budget that would be presented with the same formality and debate as the Revenue, Housing and Capital Budgets agreed each march. This will give an open and transparent way to measure our efforts to respond to the growing concerns on Climate Change, and the Budget can be set annually at Budget Council and enable residents to see what measures the Council is taking to respond to the threat of climate change.

We would also see the returns on the investments in both financial and environmental termson a year by year basis.

Our final proposal was to work with local business and community organisations to create an Olympic Festival in the heart of our borough. The 2010 London Olympics will be a once in a life time opportunity for our residents and for the borough to enjoy such an experience.

We have worked on two proposals. The first proposal is to make sure that every school child gets to visit either the Olympics or the Paralympics once and the second proposal is to stage “A Kingston Olympic Festival” - in one of our local parks fitted out with huge main screen television of the main Olympic events.

Our Vision would be to have worked with the Kingston Youth Council and other community organisations with residents – sponsored by local businesses – we are prepared and willing to hand over the work already completed on the screen provision and sponsors to the administration should they want us to do that..

We believe that these Olympics and our arrangements will give Kingstonians the feel good factor.

24% of residents think they get value for money from this Council. We need to improve that figure in spite of the dire economic circumstances. We need to review our contractors and the quality and value for money they are providing. Does the commissioning we hear so much about in the One Council programme work?

Are we getting value for money from Quadron who look after our wayside verges and our parks? Are we getting value for money from Veolia? Are we getting value for money from the Smith and Byford and from Mears and from RJ Dance? Are we getting value for money from our SLT – are they paid too much – if so what can we do about it? Are we getting value for money from our IT suppliers who charge us £900 for £300 computers?

Should we not urgently put all the Council expenditures over £500 on the web – to ensure transparency - should we not instigate a star chamber of senior Councillors and officers to oversee all spending above £500 to make sure it is really necessary and should we not require a senior officer sign off to authorise any such payments.

We really care about the Borough. We are really keen to see that we survive with all our services intact when this recession is over. Where we can we will work with the Administration over the next four years – the residents who voted for us expect us to maintain our Conservative principles and to maintain proper opposition which requires us to be critical where necessary and provide proper Scrutiny but this does not mean that we should not work together and as I said at the start of this speech in a more positive way.

Nevertheless also for the reasons stated before I will be abstaining in the vote on this Motion which supports the Liberal Democrat Manifesto.