Agenda item

Questions

Minutes:

Climate Action Strategy

Shravan Joshi asked a question of the Chair of the Policy and Resources Committee seeking an update on the implementation of the Climate Action Strategy.

 

Responding, the Chair agreed that the Climate Action Strategy represented a significant great achievement and advised that the actions within that strategy were now being implemented at pace. She explained that detailed project plans for each action area, converting the targets and metrics described in the strategy into annual targets for achievement between 2021 and 2027, were now being developed, together with a new performance management system to facilitate this process. It would be vital for the strategy to become embedded in the day-to-day activity of every department and associated actions and targets were also being integrated into 2021-22 business planning process and relevant Chief Officers’ performance objectives.

 

The Chair also outlined the various capital bids associated with the Strategy already approved by the Resource Allocation Sub Committee, together with a further  £200,000 approved from the Policy Contingency Fund to support critical enabling actions in the 2020/21 financial year to accelerate the programme. She noted that dedicated officer governance had been developed to support the four delivery areas related to building interventions, as well as wider measures associated with committee reporting and decision-making.

 

Finally, the Chair touched on the significant engagement activity initiated across all audiences ahead of a re-launch planned for the Spring, including with bodies such as the London Assembly, City Property Association, the Annual City Residents’ Meeting, Livery Companies, and the UK’s Net Zero Business Champion Andrew Griffiths.

 

In response to a supplementary question from Shravan Joshi concerning emissions from the Barbican Estate, the Chair advised that officers were working to identify the exact site level interventions at the Barbican and other buildings, both operational and investment. This included the treatment of lighting, heating, electrical systems and building fabric, whilst the use of building monitoring systems across the estates would be expanded to better understand usage and opportunities to use solar will be reviewed. The Climate Action Team were already engaging with residents and were planning proportionate engagement with other audiences. Other measures were also being considered and further information would be presented to Members as plans progressed.

 

COVID recovery and support for City businesses

Alexander Barr asked a question of the Chair of the Policy and Resources Committee regarding the recovery from COVID and support for SMEs and businesses in the City.

 

The Chair, responding, observed that the new national lockdown would make trading exceptionally difficult – if not impossible – for many businesses. She therefore welcomed the additional support outlined by the Chancellor of the Exchequer recently, including one-off top-up grants to closed businesses and a further £594 million being made available for Local Authorities and the Devolved Administrations to support other businesses not eligible for these grants but which might be affected by the restrictions. Further information on when and how the new funding would be allocated was awaited but, when received, the City Corporation would be contacting eligible businesses accordingly.

 

Nevertheless, it was undoubtedly true that some businesses in the City would continue to struggle despite this announcement and the City Corporation would continue to press the Government for further support and seek to treat our own tenants considerately.

 

In the meantime, the Chair urged all Londoners to comply with the new rules and welcomed the vaccine rollout well under way, stressing that it was essential to bring COVID-19 under control so that London and the rest of the country could return to a semblance of normality as soon as possible. The City was also hoping for clarity on when office workers could return to COVID-secure workplaces as soon as possible.

 

In reply to a supplementary question from Alexander Barr concerning adjustments to the Local Plan and various related strategies necessitated by the pandemic, the Chair observed that the relevance and resilience of the new Local Plan had benefitted from the fresh thinking recently undertaken as part of the City Corporation’s London Recharged Report, which had been prepared during the pandemic and was informed by interviews with many senior figures to gauge their latest views on the short term and long-term implications of the pandemic for London. The close alignment between the new Local Plan and the recommendations in the London Recharged Report provided some reassurance that the Plan was sufficiently flexible to remain relevant and, indeed, the version approved by the Court earlier in the meeting had included several changes to reflect key aspects of the London Recharged Report, such as the increased importance of providing buildings and spaces which encourage collaboration and creativity. 

 

COVID-related road safety measures

Deputy James Thomson asked a question of the Chair of the Planning and Transportation Committee in relation to COVID-related road safety measures.

 

The Chair, replying, advised that the Planning & Transportation Committee had agreed at its 5 January 2021 meeting to retain the temporary traffic management measures currently deployed on City streets in response to Covid-19. This would ensure the safety of residents, workers and visitors while social distancing requirements remained in place, whilst also encouraging people to walk and cycle, including as an alternative to using public transport, as the gradual return to the workplace continued.

 

The Chair outlined the gradual replacement temporary materials such as barriers and cones with more robust but still temporary plastic wands and bolt down kerbs, which would require less maintenance and provide greater clarity to all street users.

Throughout the project, feedback from street users had been sought and, where appropriate and possible, on-street changes made in response. Examples of such feedback-based improvements included on Chancery Lane, Threadneedle Street and Lothbury.

 

As the timing and extent of a meaningful return to the workplace remained unclear, the Chair advised that the need for these interventions would be reviewed again in the Spring but that amendments at particular locations would continue to be made in the interim where necessary and appropriate. However, he stressed the importance of avoiding a car-led recovery, noting that this would lead to increased congestion, road danger and air pollution.

 

Following a supplementary question from Deputy James Thomson concerning the provision of feedback in relation to the measures, the Chair advised that the public, Members, and businesses could provide comments, including requests or suggestions for changes, via an online portal or by emailing the City Transportation team directly. Details were available on the City’s website and had been promoted through various City Corporation email lists. In relation to a specific query concerning the City of London Police, the Chair advised that they had been engaged throughout the process and were represented at the officer group overseeing the transport recovery programme. There had also been several meetings with representatives of the taxi trade and private hire operators, engagement with the freight industry and industry groups such as the Brewery Logistics Group, and ongoing collaboration with Transport for London.

 

Marianne Fredericks asked a supplementary question in which she expressed concern as to the suspension of some bus stops in order to accommodate these temporary measures, observing the detrimental impact on those with mobility issues. She also stressed the importance of communications post-pandemic in relation to road closures and through-routes so that road users were fully cognisant of arrangements and traffic could be minimised.

 

Responding, the Chair advised that he did not believe we the City Corporation had the power to suspend any bus stops so was not aware of any such action the Corporation might have taken. However, he undertook to raise the issue with TfL in the event they had taken such steps and reiterated his encouragement for Members to highlight any such issues to officers at any time so as to ensure improvements to any arrangements could be implemented swiftly. In relation to through-routes, the Chair reminded the Court that the Corporation’s policy was to not encourage these, as it was seeking to minimise the use of roads due to safety and air quality concerns.

 

Staff Pay Award and Union Engagement

Anne Fairweather asked a question of the Chair of the Establishment Committee concerning the staff pay award and the latest engagement with the Unions.

 

The Chair reminded Members of the outcomes of the Joint Consultative Committee meeting on 9 December 2020, as articulated in subsequent communications to the Court. At this meeting, the two recognised Trades’ Unions had been informed that, as a result of the economic effect on the City Corporation of the pandemic, coupled with the “pay pause” in public sector pay announced by the Government in its Spending Review published at the end of November, the pay increases arising for the second year of the three-year Pay Award agreed previously, which would have been effective from 1 July 2021, would need to be suspended. The agreement reached with the Unions for this three-year pay award had had a clause inserted which allowed either side to require review of its terms in the event of “extraordinary circumstances” arising: it was unquestionable that the pandemic and its effects constituted such circumstances. The City Corporation would, however, continue to implement an increase of 1.525% on base pay for all employees on the lower grades A-C and their associated “Plus” and “Residential” grades. This would maximise the number of employees covered and guarantee a minimum increase of £250 to all such full-time staff in those grades where full-time base pay was £24,000 a year or less.

 

The Unions had since written to the Chair and, whilst not disputing the review clause itself, expressed their preference would have been for this to be activated by negotiations, rather than presented as a decision already taken. The Chair expressed the view that the decision was an honest appraisal of what the City Corporation could reasonably afford in the present circumstances and a conscious decision had been taken not to waste the Unions’ time with inappropriate offers, simply to go through the motions of ‘negotiating’ a settlement.  As yet, the Chair was unaware of any proposals the Unions might make in the national local-government pay negotiations for 2021, nor what the Local Government Association’s response will be, though they felt it was unlikely to be generous. 

 

Responding to a supplementary question from Anne Fairweather concerning pay awards in recent years made by London Local Authorities, the Chair advised that increases across the most recent five-year period respectively were 11.71% at the City Corporation and 9.05% at the rest of the inner London Boroughs.

 

Meeting Scheduling

Karina Dostalova asked a question of the Chair of Policy and Resources Committee concerning the scheduling of meetings on Monday mornings.

 

The Chair expressed sympathy for the difficulties faced by Members juggling personal and professional commitments, as well as for the challenges in scheduling the significant number of meetings to accommodate Chairs’ diaries and avoid clashes. She suggested that this be fed into the governance review for consideration and, in the interim, suggested it might be beneficial to liaise with relevant Chairs if there were particular meetings scheduled for times that individuals consistently could not make.

 

Chairmanship of the Policy and Resources Committee

Greg Lawrence asked a question of the Chair of Policy and Resources Committee regarding her intentions in respect of the future chairmanship of that Committee.

 

The Chair, in reply, thanked the Member for taking an interest in her plans and assured him she intended to complete her term, subject to the continued support of Members in doing so.

 

Financial services passporting and equivalency arrangements

Deputy Philip Woodhouse asked a question of the Chair of Policy and Resources Committee in relation to passporting and equivalency arrangements for financial services.

 

Responding, the Chair noted that, whilst the City was pleased that there was now a Free Trade Agreement, there was currently very limited coverage of financial services therein. Passporting rights had been lost and only a small number of positive EU equivalence decisions had been made. The City was already urging both sides to continue to work on these other outstanding issues in the interests of households and businesses on both sides of the Channel, whilst also continuing to urge the EU to take further equivalence decisions.

 

The City would also continue to engage with all parts of Government as they discussed with the EU further aspects of the UK’s new relationship. This included the recently announced review of Financial and Professional Services (FPS) regulatory equivalence led by the Economic Secretary John Glen MP and senior Treasury official Katherine Braddick. The Chair was in regular dialogue with both and had just this week written to them on this issue.

 

In closing, the Chair added that through the recently released ‘London Recharged’ report the City had recognised that London needed to reinvent itself to maintain its world-leading position. That included everything – from office infrastructure to better collaboration with international partners. Regulation would be a key part of this and the London Recharged report highlighted important areas in this respect.