Home > Agenda item

Agenda item

Matter for Consideration by Council

Following the receipt of a requisition signed by Members of the Council, Madame Mayor has agreed that an Extraordinary Meeting of the Council should be held.

 

The requisition states:

 

"This Council has no confidence in Councillor Tony Newman and Councillor Simon Hall and calls for their immediate resignation."

Minutes:

Madam Mayor informed Council that a requisition signed by five Members of Council had been received and that she had agreed that an Extraordinary Meeting of the Council could be held.

 

Madam Mayor read the requisition:

 

“This Council has no confidence in Councillor Tony Newman and Councillor Simon Hall and calls for their immediate resignation.”

 

Madam Mayor invited Councillor Perry to propose the motion.

 

Councillor Perry explained that there was no confidence in the Leader and Councillor Hall. They had brought Croydon to the brink of bankruptcy and needed to be removed before they did more damage. It was described how they had sought to deflect and blame others. In fact, the Administration’s own motion doing exactly that had been withdrawn at the last minute from the agenda for the meeting. The Leader and Councillor Hall had doubled Council debt which stood at £1.5bn and had increased by £15K for every hour they had been in charge. Their only solution to this situation was to borrow even more money.

 

It was highlighted that all Councils had faced the same pressures and impact from Covid, but that it was Croydon that had been found wanting and residents would be paying for years to come. Councillor Perry questioned why so much borrowing had happened, describing how this had been used for a spending spree to buy failing assets rather putting money into the Council’s reserves that might have allowed the storm of Covid to be weathered.

 

Money had been loaned to Brick By Brick which was described as a loss making company that had failed to deliver social housing and was not making interest payments to the Council. Whilst Brick By Brick had claimed to have made a profit no accounts had been published allowing this to be verified.  Brick By Brick was being funded by the Council to build on the borough’s valuable green spaces which were being sold for a little as £1. Intensification was reducing space in Croydon and making it a developers’ paradise. This was at a time when green spaces were needed for health and wellbeing. This was in addition to the impact of the reduction of green spaces on the environment at a time when the Leader had made a commitment to the climate change agenda.

 

Croydon was described as being in decline and being brought down by the Leader and Councillor Hall. Fly-tipping had increased, recycling rates had stalled, streets were dirty with ingrained mess and businesses, at a time of extra challenge, were facing having to encourage shopping in decay. The Labour Administration had seen the loss of inward investment and business rate revenues. It would be very different if the opportunities had not been squandered. Councillor Perry stated that the Leader and Councillor Hall needed to be removed from office as they could not be trusted to deliver. Their mismanagement could not be tolerated any longer. Councillor Perry stated that Croydon deserved better and called for support from across the parties for the motion.

 

Councillor Hale seconded the motion and reserved the right to speak.

 

Councillor Fitzpatrick rejected Councillor Perry’s misrepresentations. Many years ago Croydon had been banded with other outer London boroughs leading to a legacy of underfunding with subsequent Administrations labouring under this disadvantage. As a result Croydon had been asking for fair funding and for realistic funding for UASC. Under the Conservative Administration of Councillor Fisher a campaign had been launched for a fair funding deal for the borough. This had been stating the truth about Croydon’s difficult financial circumstances. Then the crash had happened, leading to austerity with local government having borne the brunt of Government cuts. Austerity had been piled on top of the inadequate funding base. Economic and demographic factors had added further pressures as populations had been priced out of central London adding to demand in Croydon. Councillor Fitzpatrick noted that the sensible investments made by the Administration had not been opposed by the Conservative Group when they had been proposed. The Government had said that local government would not be out of pocket because of Covid, but this promise had not been kept. Councillor Fitzpatrick argued that the Leader and Councillor Hall had acted in good faith in difficult circumstances. The motion was the politics of the new leadership of the Opposition. Councillor Fitzpatrick rejected the motion.

 

Councillor Flemming described how the Council was experiencing unprecedented times. Those who had suffered or who had been lost because of Covid were held in thoughts and prayers. At a time when the Council was facing a possible second wave of Covid it was essential to pass the Renewal Plan and budget amendment with the funding reduction meaning that new ways of delivering services had to be found. It was noted that the requests to Government for fair funding had not been met, but that despite this great things had been delivered including the partnership with the South Bank University. The Legacy Youth Zone was celebrating its first birthday and had been shown to generate £5 of impact for every £1 of investment. When the budget had been set in March 2020, it had not been possible to foresee the impact Covid would have on the Council’s finances. It was noted that there had been cross-party agreement of the budget when it was passed in March 2020. Councillor Flemming described how she had come into public service to support the vulnerable. The delivery of priority services was therefore key. The call was made to put residents first and deliver at pace and with precision.

 

Councillor Redfern described the dire financial situation and that the Leader and Councillor Hall had shown no contrition and offered no apology; they were taking no responsibility when it was no one else’s fault but theirs. It was therefore questioned if there was confidence in them to get the Council out of its predicament. It was noted that borrowing had increased by £15k for every hour of the Leader and Councillor Hall’s tenure. The purchase of the Croydon Park Hotel was questioned when it was always known this had financial difficulties. Equally, the Colonnades shopping mall had been purchased at a time when the retail sector was already in difficulty.  Members of Council were reminded of the £42m overspend incurred during the refurbishment of Fairfield Hall. This had happened because the work had been given to Brick by Brick which had no relevant experience. The result was a venue that did not have the physical access to allow bigger and higher earning productions to be staged. The Administration was known only to look at the best case scenario when undertaking its due diligence and financial modelling. With General Reserves only equating to 10 days of expenditure the question was where would cuts fall? It was already being reported that Children’s Services would be subject to cuts valued at over £1m including a review of the safeguarding function.  Adult Social Care was scheduled to receive £500K of cuts. Additionally, libraries would not be opening and environmental services were being lost. In summary, key services were being lost to clear-up the mess caused by the Leader and Councillor Hall.

 

Councillor Clark noted that Croydon’s residents had the chance to elect the Conservative Group in 2014, 2018 and at by-elections since, but that this did not happen. The Opposition had also supported the budget in March 2020.  This had been set with the aim of increasing reserves but this had been derailed by Covid. Whilst the Government had promised to fund local government to do whatever it took to fund the Covid response, this had not happened. The resulting budget gap should not be used for political gain. Members of Council needed to come together to do all that was possible to protect the most vulnerable. This was the priority for the weeks and months ahead and therefore Councillor Clark opposed the motion.

 

Councillor Hale stressed that residents should be able to trust the decisions made by the Leader and Councillor Hall. However, this trust had been shattered by their appalling decisions that had brought Croydon to its knees. It was described how the Council now faced the humiliation of asking the Government for a bailout. Debt of £1.5bn meant borrowing had increased by £15K for every hour the Leader and Councillor Hall had been in control. This level of borrowing was the highest of any London borough with MHCLG having described Croydon as having the worst run finances of all local authorities, putting jobs and services at risks. However, despite this becoming apparent, funding for Brick By Brick continued with it concreting over greenspaces. The sum paid to the previous Chief Executive was noted along with the unwillingness to answer the Opposition’s questions on financial matters at Cabinet meetings. The petition signed by 17,000 residents calling for a referendum on a directly elected Mayor, demonstrated the lack of trust in the Council’s leaders. It was the duty of all Councillors to do best for the residents of Croydon – they were their servants and stewards of the Council’s resources.  Councillor Hale acknowledged that she could not accept the leadership of those who refused to accept their responsibility or apologise. The Leader and Councillor Hall were called on to step down.

 

Before proceeding to the vote on the motion, Madam Mayor noted that she had received a request from 11 Members of Council that a poll vote be taken on these recommendations. Councillors Perry, Jason Cummings, Hale, Creatura, Streeter, Redfern, Gatland, Stranack, Hoar, Ward and Roche. Madam Mayor confirmed their request.

 

A poll vote was conducted by the Head of Democratic Services & Scrutiny with 28 Members voting for and 40 against.

 

Members voting in favour of the motion were: Councillors Bains, Bennett, Bird, Brew, Buttinger, Chatterjee, Clancy, Creatura, Jason Cummings, Gatland, Hale, Hoar, Hollands, Hopley, Millson, Mohan, Neal, O’Connell, Oviri, Parker, Perry, Helen Pollard, Tim Pollard, Redfern, Roche, Stranack, Streeter and Ward.

 

Member voting against the motion were: Councillors Ali, Muhammad Ali, Audsley, Avis, Ben-Hassel, Butler, Campbell, Chowdhury, Clark, Clouder, Collins, Croos, Patsy Cummings, Degrads, Fitzpatrick, Fitzsimons, Flemming, Flynn, Fraser, Hall, Hay-Justice, Henson, Jewitt, Kabir, Bernadette Khan, Shafi Khan, King, Letts, Lewis, Mann, Newman, Pelling, Prince, Ryan, Scott, Shahul-Hameed, Skipper, Wood, Woodley and Young.

 

There were no abstentions. Madam Mayor noted that the motion had fallen