Greenwich Council

Agenda, decisions and minutes

Venue: Council Chamber - Town Hall, Wellington Street, Woolwich SE18 6PW. View directions

Contact: Daniel Wilkinson  Email: daniel.wilkinson@royalgreenwich.gov.uk or tel: 020 8921 5102

Note: The deadline for public questions is 12 noon on Wednesday, 6 December 2017 

Webcast: View the webcast

Items
No. Item

1.

Apologies for absence

Additional documents:

Minutes:

Apologies for absence were received from Councillors Tonia Ashikodi, Don Austen, Barbara Barwick, Spencer Drury, Bill Freeman, Ambreen Hisbani, John Hills, Rajinder James, Paul Morrissey, Maureen O’Mara, Gary Parker, David Stanley, Ray Walker and Miranda Williams.

 

Apologies for arriving late were received from Councillor Aidan Smith.

 

Apologies for leaving early were given by Councillor Mark James.

2.

Minutes

To agree the Minutes of the Council Meeting held on 18 October 2017.

 

No motion or discussion may take place upon the Minutes except as to their accuracy, and any question on this point will be determined by a majority of the Members of the body attending who were present when the matter in question was decided.  Once confirmed, with or without amendment, the person presiding will sign the Minutes.

Additional documents:

Minutes:

That the minutes of the Council Meeting held on 18 October 2017 be agreed and signed as a true and accurate record.

3.

Mayor's Announcements

Additional documents:

Minutes:

The Mayor announced that the Mayor’s Carol Concert was being held in the Town Hall on Friday 15 December. It was a concert in aid of charity with proceeds going to The Woolwich Garrison Church Trust and Wide Horizons, The Adventure Learning Charity.

 

The Leader of the Council informed the Mayor and Council, that babies had been born to Councillors Miranda Williams, and to Sizwe and Rajinder James. On behalf of Council the Leader gave best wishes to the parents.

4.

Declarations of Interest pdf icon PDF 39 KB

Members to declare any personal and financial interests in items on the agenda.  Attention is drawn to the Council’s Constitution; the Council’s Code of Conduct and associated advice.

Additional documents:

Minutes:

Resolved –

 

1.    That the list of Councillors’ memberships as Council appointed representatives on outside bodies, joint committees and school governing bodies is noted.

 

2.    That the follow declarations of interest be noted:

 

·        Councillor Mark James declared a Personal and Financial interest in agenda item 16, because he was an employee of Transport for London.

5.

Notice of Members wishing to exceed the 5 minute rule

Additional documents:

Minutes:

The Council noted that there had been no requests to exceed the five minute rule.

6.

Petitions

Presentation to the Council of petitions for consideration.

Additional documents:

Minutes:

The following petitions were presented at the meeting:

 

Subject and Number of Signatures

Presenting Councillor

Lead Department

We would like residents parking only on the residential side of Anchor and Hope Lane and a mix of free and pay and display parking on the industrial side because of increased commuters, Charlton football fans, new retail outlets and a development proposing 900 new residential homes.

17 signatures

Councillor

John Fahy

Directorate of Regeneration, Enterprise and Skills

 

We would like to have trees planted on Bellot Street.

64 signatures

Councillor

Stephen Brain

Directorate of Regeneration, Enterprise and Skills

 

Reject the Meyer Homes planning application which includes a 27 storey tower in front of Tesco.

1407+ signatures

Councillor

David Gardner

Directorate of Regeneration, Enterprise and Skills

 

We, the undersigned residents of Masons Hill SE18 are concerned at the volume of non-resident parking in the WA Controlled Parking Zone bays in our road which makes it very difficult for householders who have paid for arming rights on their street. We call upon the Royal Borough of Greenwich to (a) ensure more rigourous and regular enforcement (b) to removed the one-hour free parking exemption and (c) to consider extending the hours of restrictions into the evening.

7 signatures

Councillor

David Gardner

Directorate of Regeneration, Enterprise and Skills

 

7.

Public Deputations on matters not otherwise on the agenda

Additional documents:

Minutes:

The Mayor agreed to receive a deputation from the ‘Speak Out Woolwich’ group. He advised the speakers that in making their comments they should not refer to specific planning applications, as they were dealt with according to the procedure for planning applications rather than by Council, nor to the petition which had been submitted, and which would be responded to in accordance with the Council procedures.

 

Council was addressed by Kate Heath and Dorota Paluch. They explained they had formed their group because they were angry about planning decisions for the area. They highlighted the problem was lack of social housing in developments, which did not the provisions required in the Council’s Core Strategy. They commented that people could not afford social housing. They recognised the pressure the Council was under but called on the Council to reject applications that did not meet the requirements of the Core Strategy.  

 

Councillor Danny Thorpe, Cabinet Member for Regeneration and Sustainability, stated that all Councillors shared their frustrations and concerns. He commented that the single biggest cause of homelessness in London was the ending of a private sector tenancy. He said the housing market was broken; and the Council had made the case that they need the tools to deliver and build the homes people need. With regard to the concerns expressed he explained that the Council had introduced stakeholder forums so that residents, groups from across the borough, community societies and developers could all discuss matters. The Royal Borough of Greenwich legally had to comply with viability statements, but Greenwich was one of first councils in the country to make them public.  He noted that there were now 170,000 less council homes since the Conservative Party took office. He highlighted that last year of homes built across the country 84% were by private developers, 14% by housing associations and 1% by local councils. He explained that he had written to the Secretary of State requesting the powers they needed as the Council did not have them. Greenwich was at the top of the Housing Revenue Cap; in the Budget the Government offered to make deals on the matter and Greenwich would pursue that. Greenwich was 1 of only 5 London Boroughs to have delivered over 35% affordable housing across London. In the past three years Greenwich had delivered 1800 new genuinely affordable homes, which was the second highest in London; in contrast neighbouring Bexley was the lowest with less than 100. It was recognised that Woolwich was under pressure from developers who could see an opportunity. But the authority had worked tirelessly with those developments which had come forward to secure the affordable housing they needed, for example, on the Ogilby site 35% of the homes were at social rents, on the Albion pub/Woolwich Church Street site 37 1/2 % were, and at 16 Sandpit Place, a scheme they were delivering with Meridian Housing which was the Council's own company, 100% would be at social rent. He confirmed that it  ...  view the full minutes text for item 7.

8.

Public Questions pdf icon PDF 72 KB

Up to half an hour will be allowed for questions by Members of the Public.

 

Questions will be taken in the order notices are received by the Chief Executive.  Each question to have no more than one part.  No member of the public shall ask more than 2 questions at a meeting.

Additional documents:

Minutes:

The Mayor stated that Council had received 11 written questions by members of the public.  The questions and replies, together with the supplementary submissions made during the meeting are attached as Appendix A to the minutes.

 

9.

Questions from Members pdf icon PDF 71 KB

a.      To receive written responses to questions submitted by Members in line with procedure Rule A1.38.

b.      Up to 10 minutes will be allowed for Members questions.

 

Additional documents:

Minutes:

The Mayor stated that 15 written questions had been received from Members of the Council.  The questions and replies, together with the supplementary submissions made during the meeting are attached as Appendix B to the minutes.

 

Under procedures for oral questions, the Mayor invited questions to Members of the Cabinet for response.

 

Councillor Matt Hartley asked the Leader of the Council whether she had raised with the Mayor of London the matter of the Mayor of London’s cuts to the taxi card scheme, as several other Labour council leaders had spoken out publicly against these cuts. The Leader of the Council agreed to look into the matter.  The Leader commented the Mayor of London had to deal with £120 million worth of cuts from central Government, and stressed that those cuts could not be blamed on the Mayor of London. The Leader noted the Mayor of London received no money from vehicle excise duty to repair the roads, and that Greenwich Council had had to finance a scheme to repair the roads in the Borough. The Leader invited Councillor Hartley to write to the Mayor of London.

 

Councillor Mark Elliott asked the Cabinet Member for Regeneration and Sustainability whether there was enough time for a thorough consideration of what was on offer with the Greenwich Neighbourhood Growth Fund and the consultation process as it seemed to have been shoehorned into a narrow window of time. The Cabinet Member for Regeneration and Sustainability replied that the Greenwich Neighbourhood Growth Fund was the neighbourhood element of the Community Infrastructure Levy. They had been talking to residents about their priorities and systems they would like to see at Better Together meetings, they had worked hard to make sure they had a process that involved residents in that decision through a formal vote on applications that were received. The Cabinet Member for Regeneration and Sustainability was confident that they were going to handle all applications that came in and work with residents to get the best decisions for them.

 

Councillor Mehboob Khan asked the Leader of the Council whether she agreed that the current Government was the most anti-London government in a generation, a Government which had cut £1 billion from the Metropolitan Police budget, £600 million from the TfL revenue budget, a Government whose budget did not allow Crossrail 2 to progress to public consultation, a Government which has prohibited London government from applying for money from the Air Quality national fund and did the Leader agree that only a Labour Government working with a Labour Mayor would improve the quality of life for Londoners. The Leader of the Council, and all Labour members, indicated that they agreed.

 

Councillor Charlie Davis asked the Cabinet Member for Regeneration and Sustainability why CiL money from the Eltham Baths project was used in Cutty Sark Gardens. The Cabinet Member for Regeneration and Sustainability said it was easy to look at the published spreadsheet and say money had been taken from here and used over there, but  ...  view the full minutes text for item 9.

10.

Matters for early debate

Up to 3 items of business may be prioritised for consideration under this section.  Each political party may select an item of business, from the list of items on the agenda, for early debate. 

Additional documents:

Minutes:

The Mayor noted that no requests for matters to be taken early had been received.

 

11.

Annual Audit Letter pdf icon PDF 59 KB

Additional documents:

Decision:

Noted the 2016/17 Annual Audit Letter

Minutes:

The Mayor advised Council that the Annual Audit Letter had been considered by the Audit and Risk Management Panel on 29 November 2017 and that no comments had been made for the Council’s consideration.  The Mayor invited Paul Dossett, from the External Auditor, to address the Council.

 

Paul Dossett, the Engagement Lead from Grant Thornton, summarised their report. He highlighted that they had given the Council an unqualified opinion on its financial statements and that they were satisfied with the value for money arrangements. He informed the Council that there had been an objection from a local elector relating to PFI contracts as part of a national campaign, which was expected to be resolved early in the New Year. He advised the Council that statutory deadlines had been brought forward and that the Council will be required to produce draft statements by 31 May, and secure an audit opinion by 31 July 2018.

 

Councillor Matt Hartley queried the selection of projects considered by the External Auditor, when the Eltham Centre had had significant financial overspend and there were other big projects underway, and he asked whether one of the large projects could be considered by the Auditor next time.

 

Paul Dossett, the Engagement Lead from Grant Thornton, explained that they considered the projects in totality. He noted that the Council was going through a significant period of regeneration. All major projects had challenges and risks. They would continue to look at those projects and the Council's arrangements in respect of those projects and would talk that through with the Audit and Risk Management Panel.  The External Auditor’s role was to consider what arrangements the Council put in place to get value for money and not to necessarily assess the outcome of projects.

 

Councillor Mehboob Khan, speaking as a Member of the  Audit and Risk Management Panel, commented that the project management of large regeneration schemes had been discussed at the Audit and Risk Management Panel. The Panel had welcomed the Auditor's report as it gave a clean bill of health for 2015/16 in the management of these projects. The Panel had asked that the Auditor look at these large projects. The Panel had been given good assurance that the Council's arrangements for the delivery of these projects in 2015/16 were sound, robust and effective.  He said Panel Members would want the executive to ensure that the excellent management of these projects continue because at a time of reducing revenue base for the Council those projects from the Council's capital fund were going to be the ones that deliver the improvements to quality of life to residents, and to make sure they were both timely and do deliver the outcomes that were in the scoping of these projects.

 

The Leader of the Council noted that it had been another positive year for the Council. She drew Council’s attention to the Auditor's findings stated in section 3.3. of the report. She called on the Leader of the Opposition to join her in  ...  view the full minutes text for item 11.

12.

Treasury Management Mid-Year Report 2017/18 pdf icon PDF 99 KB

Additional documents:

Decision:

Agreed the Treasury Management Mid-Year Report for 2017/18.

 

Noted the impact of the implementation of the Markets in Financial

Instrument Directive 2014/65 (“MiFID II”) and in particular the classification of the authority from 3rd January 2018.

Minutes:

The Mayor advised Council that the Treasury Management Mid-Year report has also been considered by the Audit and Risk Management Panel on 29 November and by Cabinet on 6 December and that neither body had any comments for consideration by Council.

 

The Leader of the Council advised Council of the content of the report.

 

Resolved –

 

1.       That the Treasury Management Mid-Year Report for 2017/18 be agreed.

 

2.       That the impact of the implementation of the Markets in Financial

Instrument Directive 2014/65 (“MiFID II”) and in particular the classification of the authority from 3rd January 2018be noted.

13.

Motion - "London Declaration on sugar reduction and healthier food" pdf icon PDF 50 KB

Additional documents:

Decision:

Resolved –

 

The Council notes the adverse health impacts arising from obesity and poor diet in the Borough. The Royal Borough of Greenwich supports initiatives to address this issue and, accordingly, agrees to adopt a declaration on sugar reduction and healthier food, as follows:

 

Area

Pledge

Tackle advertising and sponsorship

         To audit current corporate partnerships or sponsorships within Greenwich in particular looking at those which are associated or promote foods and drinks which are high in fat, salt and sugar, and undermine breastfeeding

         To develop coherent policy on future marketing/ advertising that welcomes opportunities for investment, whilst avoiding those that promote foods and drinks which are high in fat, salt and sugar and undermine breastfeeding

Improve the food controlled or influenced by the council and support the public and voluntary sectors to improve their food offer:

         To continue steps to further deliver healthier catering within Council buildings

         To roll out Good Food in Greenwich (GFIG) catering guidelines across the Council and apply to the RBG hospitality menu

Reduce prominence of sugary drinks and actively promote free drinking water

         To remove sugary drinks from Woolwich Centre café

         Introduction of Sugar Smart Greenwich and promotion of sugar levy on soft drinks

Support businesses and organisations to improve their food offer

 

         To engage and support more businesses across the borough to adopt the Breastfeeding Friendly Greenwich scheme

         To engage more businesses with the Healthier Catering Commitment

         To work with market stall holders supporting them to  accept Healthy Start food vouchers

         To work with sport and leisure providers and other partners to improve their vending offer reducing the amount of food and drink high in sugar, fat and salt

Public events:

 

         To expand GFIG catering guidelines to cover public events

         Ensure that all events licensed by the Royal Borough of Greenwich are Breastfeeding Friendly Greenwich approved

Raise public awareness:

 

         To actively promote the following websites with residents and partners: Breastfeeding Greenwich website, Livewell Greenwich website and Good Food in Greenwich

         To continue with community cookery clubs promoting healthy eating, cookery and budgetary skills

         Good Food in Greenwich to host two large public events per year promoting Good Food in the Borough

 

 

Minutes:

The Mayor noted that Councillor Denise Scott-McDonald also wanted her name to be recorded formally as supporting the motion.

 

Councillor David Gardner moved the motion. He explained that the Declaration had been produced by an organisation called Sustain, and was being considered by other London Boroughs. He detailed the reason for the motion. He advised Council on the progress Greenwich had already made on the matter of healthy eating, but brought to Members' attention that 43% of Year 6 pupils were overweight or obese which was the fourth highest rate in London. He highlighted the initiatives given in the Declaration and said it would keep Greenwich in a leading position to tackle the demographic time bomb of obesity. 

 

The motion was seconded by Councillor Clare Morris, who spoke in support of the motion. She highlighted that they must prioritise breastfeeding to give babies the best start in life, but advised Council that UK breastfeeding rates were low compared to the rest of the developed world. She explained the health benefits of breastfeeding, for both mother and child. She detailed the barriers encountered by mothers who wished to breastfeed. She said they were proud of their children centres on the matter, and that they had received the Unicef baby friendly award, but they needed to change the culture of workplaces, public transport, restaurants and entertainment businesses to make sure that breastfeeding mothers felt welcomed and valued.

 

Councillor Matt Hartley stated the support of the Conservative Members for the motion.

 

In closing the debate Councillor David Gardner said it was regretful that the Government had passed on the recommendations from Public Health England in taking on advertising and marketing. While Greenwich would do what they could he said that they needed national action on daytime advertising on unhealthy drinks and food.

 

The motion was put to the vote and it was unanimously

 

Resolved –

 

The Council notes the adverse health impacts arising from obesity and poor diet in the Borough. The Royal Borough of Greenwich supports initiatives to address this issue and, accordingly, agrees to adopt a declaration on sugar reduction and healthier food, as follows:

 

Area

Pledge

Tackle advertising and sponsorship

         To audit current corporate partnerships or sponsorships within Greenwich in particular looking at those which are associated or promote foods and drinks which are high in fat, salt and sugar, and undermine breastfeeding

         To develop coherent policy on future marketing/ advertising that welcomes opportunities for investment, whilst avoiding those that promote foods and drinks which are high in fat, salt and sugar and undermine breastfeeding

Improve the food controlled or influenced by the council and support the public and voluntary sectors to improve their food offer:

         To continue steps to further deliver healthier catering within Council buildings

         To roll out Good Food in Greenwich (GFIG) catering guidelines across the Council and apply to the RBG hospitality menu

Reduce prominence of sugary drinks and actively promote free drinking water

         To remove sugary drinks from Woolwich Centre  ...  view the full minutes text for item 13.

14.

Motion - "Council calls upon the Government to abandon plans to invite Donald Trump on a State visit to the UK" pdf icon PDF 43 KB

Additional documents:

Decision:

Resolved –

 

This Council notes with alarm the decision by Donald Trump, President of the United States to 'retweet' Islamophobic propaganda from the Britain First Twitter account.

 

Council further notes with sadness the President’s bigoted attitude towards women and ethnic minorities which has resulted in examples of division and hatred within the USA.

 

As such, Council calls upon the Government to abandon plans to invite Donald Trump on a State visit to the UK.

 

Council further calls upon the government to use funding that would have been spent on Security for such a state visit to fund charities such as the Jo Cox Foundation that promote peace and understanding.

 

Council notes the positive impact of the work it has undertaken with The Greenwich Inclusion Project; Greenwich Action for Voluntary Services; faith groups and community groups throughout the Royal Borough. As such, Council reiterates its commitment to working with residents to strengthen community relations.

 

Council notes with regret that this Borough’s commitment to maintaining a strong and vibrant community is incompatible with the ideology and policies espoused by President Trump.

 

As such, should the Government choose go ahead with State Visit, this Council makes clear that President Trump would not be welcome in the Borough.

 

Minutes:

The Mayor noted that Councillors Linda Bird, Bill Freeman, Denise Scott-McDonald and Aidan Smith also wanted their names to be recorded formally as supporting the motion.

 

Councillor Chris Kirby moved the motion.  He recollected the experience of racism in the area, including murders, and how people had marched against the BNP bookshop in Welling. He noted Greenwich had put initiatives in place to tackle hatred and division including the development of the award winning CARE Partnership. He noted there had been instances of hate crime around the country after the tragic murder of Lee Rigby. He said the Royal Borough of Greenwich was proud of its diversity. He drew Members’ attention to the work of the Greenwich Migrant Hub and of Greenwich being a place of refuge. Despite state visits being a national issue they had to take a stand on the matter. He described the activities of Donald Trump, which spread division and hatred, including attacking Sadiq Khan and publicising the far right extremist Britain First’s Islamophobic message. He emphasised that they should make their position clear, that there was no place for aggressive, bigoted, hateful rhetoric in the Royal Borough of Greenwich. A state visit by a president who would undermine our values had no place here.

 

The motion was seconded by Councillor Denise Hyland. She commented on the behaviour of Donald Trump, including insulting a variety of people. She noted how he retweeted Britain First and then rather that apologise he had attacked the British Prime Minister who had been critical of his actions.  She felt that the Prime Minister should withdraw her invitation for a state visit for the sake of peace and harmony in the world.

 

Councillor Matt Hartley proposed the amendment to the motion, as detailed in the published Tabled Items agenda. He made it clear that there was not a single fan of Donald Trump on the Conservative benches, and in his view Donald Trump was an appalling individual and deeply unfit for the office to which he was elected. They were in agreement with the first two paragraphs of the motion. He was grateful to Councillor Kirby for discussing the motion in advance, but there was a fundamental difference between Labour and Conservative Members on the purpose of Council motions. Conservative Members believed they should focus on local issues which were of direct relevance to the local residents who they represented. He said the contrast between this motion and the other motions on the agenda was instructive. Motions were an important part of local democracy, and should keep to local issues. He felt this motion undermined that in its focus on international politics. He added that Greenwich had rolled out the red carpet for Vladimir Putin without a motion condemning his views. He suggested that motions on international affairs were gesture politics, however well intentioned, and that was not what they were there for. So while they all agreed on how awful and dangerous Trump was, the amendment made clear that they  ...  view the full minutes text for item 14.

15.

Motion - "ULEZ expansion to the South Circular" pdf icon PDF 47 KB

Additional documents:

Decision:

Resolved –

 

Council calls on the Mayor of London to expand on his Ultra Low Emission Zone (ULEZ) proposals to the limits of Greater London. This Council applauds Sadiq Khan’s drive to bring about a crucial reduction in harmful emissions but urges him to be even bolder by extending the ULEZ to cover the whole of London. This would benefit all Royal Borough of Greenwich residents through cleaner air and improved health. 

 

Council recognises the other important measures being taken by the Mayor, including:

 

·        Making sure the entire bus fleet meets Euro VI standards by Sept 2020, primarily through retrofitting catalytic reduction systems to more than 4500 buses but also through introducing Low Emission Bus Zones, through which the lowest polluting buses will travel – several of which will improve the situation in Royal Greenwich.

 

·        Meeting the demand for an 11% increase in public transport journeys by 2022/23 through the creation of additional capacity on the London Underground, buses, Rail and Crossrail, and by better balancing bus capacity to demand.

 

·        Creating an environment for many more cycling and walking trips.

 

·        From January 2018 all new taxis to be Zero Emission capable, supported by 300 rapid charging points by 2020.

 

·        By early 2020s TfL will have replaced DLR trains with higher capacity rolling stock.

 

Council further recognises the improvements outlined in the Mayor’s Transport Strategy, including:

 

·        Aims for all Private Hire Vehicles and Taxis to be zero emission capable by 2033.

 

·        All new Private Hire Vehicles to be zero emission capable by 2023, through licensing arrangements.

 

·        All buses to be zero-emission capable by 2037.

 

·        All new buses to be hybrid, electric or hydrogen by 2020, as contracts change.

 

·        Accelerating the transition from diesel to zero emission capable black taxis, with an objective of 9000 zero-emission capable taxis by 2020.

 

Council congratulates the Labour Mayor of London on his proposals.

 

 

 

 

 

Minutes:

Councillor Mark James having declared an interest left the meeting.

 

Councillor Matt Hartley moved the motion, which he detailed. He added that the proposal to expand the ULEZ in the proposed amendment to the motion had not been costed and ignored that the package proposed in the motion would deliver more significant air quality improvement than the ULEZ as it stood.

 

The motion was seconded by Councillor Matt Clare, who reserved his right to speak.

 

Councillor Aidan Smith spoke on the motion. He refuted claims made in the 'Clearing The Air' report and challenged its interpretation of the data.

 

Councillor Sizwe James proposed the amendment to the motion, as detailed in the published Tabled Items agenda. He welcomed the Mayor of London's focus on tackling air quality, and noted its relevance to the Borough and to London.  He explained why they thought there were significant advantages to expanding the ULEZ. He commented that the existing infrastructure was already in place with the LEZ and so no significant additional expenditure would be required. They had asked the Mayor of London to undertake a study into the benefits and costs of upgrading the LEZ to ULEZ standards with a view to putting them in place in 2020. He said the measures in the motion were too narrow and omitted ways to influence the wider commercial fleet, and failed to take responsibility for ensuring that everyone had an incentive to change behaviour and contribute to improved air quality.

 

The amendment was seconded by Councillor Aidan Smith.

 

Councillor Matt Hartley did not accept the amendment. He commented that they could not know whether there would be the same effect as with the congestion charge zone because there had not been a proper study on the local impact. He said they could not support the amendment because the proposals were not costed, but he was pleased that Councillor Sizwe James had asked the Mayor of London about costs.

 

Councillor Matt Clare said they were totally behind improving air quality. There would be some modal shift from the ULEZ, and while its expansion was a great idea it was uncosted and would be eye-wateringly expensive. He commented on the effect from the South Circular under an expanded ULEZ on air quality on Eltham, Shooters Hill and possibly Woolwich, Plumstead and Abbey Wood, and suggested it might be comparable to a dividing wall.

 

The amendment was put to the vote and with 27 votes in favour and 7 votes against it was not carried.

 

Councillor Sizwe James closed the debate, and stated that the health benefits to the Borough's residents, and Londoners as a whole, made the expansion of the ULEZ a necessity and it complimented the other initiatives of the Mayor of London.

 

The motion as amended was put to the vote and with 27 votes for and 7 abstentions it was

 

Resolved –

 

Council calls on the Mayor of London to expand on his Ultra Low Emission Zone (ULEZ) proposals to the limits of Greater  ...  view the full minutes text for item 15.