Minutes:
The Leader of the Council, Councillor Stephen Carr, attended the meeting to give an update on his work and answer questions. He began by emphasising the importance of work on the budgets for 2015/16 and the following years, and the new approach being taken with the public consultation meetings that involved new meetings with resident’s association representatives in an attempt to stimulate more detailed and focussed discussions. The message was blunt that although there had to be a safety net for the vulnerable, services needed to change and be provided in more creative ways. Senior members and officers were lobbying M.P.s whenever possible to secure a fairer distribution of government grant for Bromley. He hoped that the outsourcing of leisure provision to Mytime would lead to services becoming income-generating in future. The Council itself had to become more efficient, and he had asked the Chief Executive to remove another £2m from the budget through further efficiencies. In addition, the Council was considering moving away from the Civic Centre to more efficient property.
The third Invest Bromley event had just taken place and there had been an encouraging turn-out from local companies. There was good progress on a number of development issues mainly around town centres such as the Bromley North Village improvements, Site G, Site K, the old Town Hall, the opening of the new Penge Library, the cinema-led scheme in Orpington and the Beckenham High Street improvements, as well as potential investment in Crystal Palace Park (both the ZhongRong proposals and the £2m improvements mainly from GLA funding), the West Camp at Biggin Hill and at Lagoon Road in the Cray Valley.
On the integration of health and care services there were significant challenges but the involvement of Kings College was positive for the residents of Bromley. On public transport, the Leader had met with the Mayor’s transport advisor to outline the needs of residents in Bromley, and in particular the concerns about residents using the Hayes Line losing connectivity to Cannon Street and Charing Cross if the current Bakerloo Line proposals went ahead. There had been discussions about the possibility of opening a link from Bromley North to Lewisham (for the DLR) and central London.
The Leader was questioned by members of the Committee on a number of issues. On the negotiations with ZhongRong about Crystal Palace Park, he accepted that there had been difficulties, partly because of the different cultures and expectations, but ZhongRong was now re-engaged in the process and the exclusivity period did not expire until February. A Member sought clarification on the discussions around improving rail services from Bromley North. The Leader stated that he had made very clear that the Council was disappointed that the Mayor’s manifesto promise to pursue the DLR extension to Bromley North was not being maintained, and with the Bakerloo Line proposals under which many residents would lose their direct links to Cannon Street and Charing Cross. He had questioned the costs of the Bakerloo Line extension and pressed for consideration of options to improve connectivity between Bromley North and Lewisham. He hoped that more detailed information could be provided on this to Members.
The Chairman endorsed the Leader’s comments about needing more creative and imaginative solutions, and mentioned the replacement of the Chislehurst Road bridge at Petts Wood as an example where a contractor had devised a completely different methodology which was both cheaper and a year quicker to implement.
On Crystal Palace Park, a member asked about the consultation on the future of the National Sports Centre (NSC.) The Leader clarified that he had set up an Executive Project Board for the Park several years ago, which had strong working relationships with various stakeholder groups. He had been disappointed with the NSC proposals, which he felt should have been more imaginative and taken a more positive attitude to sports provision for local people. A local ward councillor responded that she agreed with Cllr Carr’s approach to the consultation and emphasised that a holistic approach was needed for the Park.
Responding to comments about the New Homes Bonus and the need to be more proactive about town centres, the Leader reported that, along with London Councils, he had forcefully protested about the top-slicing of the New Homes Bonus and was pleased that the money was now coming to the Council. He emphasised that good quality mixed use developments were needed to improve the viability of town centres.
A member commented that the needs of small businesses had to be considered, and in particular he mentioned the difficulties caused to local businesses by the poor broadband speeds experienced in some of the rural parts of the borough. The Leader agreed that both large and small businesses were needed to improve the local economy, and the Renewal and Recreation Portfolio Holder was very keen to encourage all businesses in the borough.
A member complained that there had been no budget consultation meetings in the north of the borough. The Leader responded that he was trying to create a more strategic focus and that residents and resident’s associations from the north of the borough were welcome to attend the meetings, but also that he would be willing to go to the north of the borough.