Use the below search options at the bottom of the page to find information regarding recent decisions that have been taken by the council’s decision making bodies and individual decision makers.
Alternatively you can visit the officer decisions page for information on officer delegated decisions that have been taken by council officers.
From March 2025 the council will be working with ICS colleagues to introduce digitally-enabled health and care services across Greenwich. This decision relates to the contract award to the supplier who will provide technology, data and services to support this new service
Decision Maker: Director of Health and Adult Services
Decision published: 07/02/2025
Effective from: 14/02/2025
Decision:
1. Approved the award of contract to Alcove Limited (company number 09076735) from the ESPO Framework for the supply and support of technology and data services as part of the new Assistive Technology-Enabled Care (ATEC) service.
2. Noted that the Council had completed a mini competition via the ESPO framework (under Lot 2 – Technology Enabled Care Services) and previously published a decision (made on 21/10/24) to award a contract to Alcove, which was not implemented for the reasons set out in this report and was withdrawn.
3. Noted that the total cost will be up to £17m (plus VAT) for a 5 + 2 + 2 + 1 year contract term from February 2025. Funding sources are agreed as a combination of Better Care Fund (BCF - Royal Borough of Greenwich and Integrated Care Board allocations), Section 106 contributions, Disabled Facilities Grant (DFG) in the first 2 years of the contract. Further financial planning and agreements will continue to ensure beyond the first 2 years of the contract, sources of funding from health and social care (care and support budgets), Integrated Care Board Funds, DFG as well as continued contributions from BCF from the ICB and RBG.
Wards affected: All;
Lead officer: Kit Collingwood
To agree the Co-operative Commission report and recommendations.
Decision Maker: Cabinet
Made at meeting: 05/02/2025 - Cabinet
Decision published: 05/02/2025
Effective from: 12/02/2025
Decision:
Agreed the ‘Together for Greenwich: Co-operation for the future’ Commission report and its recommendations, included in Appendix 1 of the report.
Agreed the use of £1.0m one-off funding of Carbon Offset Section 106 for eligible expenditure from the ‘Together for Greenwich: Co-operation for the Future’ Commission. This includes the launch of a Community Energy Fund (CEF) to enable communities within the borough to apply for funding to support and/or deliver community energy projects that deliver carbon reductions.
Wards affected: All;
Lead officer: Madeleine Burch
Approval to Proceed to Tender
Decision Maker: Director of Place and Growth
Decision published: 03/02/2025
Effective from: 08/02/2025
Decision:
1. Agreed, in accordance with CSO 16 to officers procuring and setting up a Contractors’ Framework (Vetted Supplier Shortlist) for use by officers in procuring small construction contracts for the Authority. This Framework will be for contracts of below £2m in size and the total estimated value of the Framework Agreement is £100m over a period of 4 years.
2. Noted that setting up a Contractors’ Framework is simply an expedited route to market in accordance with the Public Contracts Regulations 2015. It does not require a financial commitment, either now or in the future, from the Royal Borough of Greenwich.
3. Noted that the Framework will be available for use across the Council, by all directorates that may benefit.
Wards affected: All;
Lead officer: Kevin Orford
Contract Award
Decision Maker: Director of Housing and Safer Communities
Decision published: 03/02/2025
Effective from: 08/02/2025
Decision:
1. Agreed to the award of a contract to the following suppliers, who have been evaluated as the top 3 scoring suppliers in a tender for the provision of Additional Voids Works to properties, in accordance with Contract Standing Order 28.3:
· Max Building Services Ltd (Company Registration No 06403002)
· ATPB Ltd (Company Registration No 09615960)
· Purdy Contracts Ltd (Company Registration No 01830283)
2. Noted the overall value of the award for all three providers is £2.4m, for a two-year contract duration from the date this report is signed off until to 1 January 2027.
3. Noted that this procurement was undertaken under CSO 15 via the Council’s Approved List.
4. Noted a business case has been produced for this procurement in compliance with CSO 8.1.
Wards affected: All;
Lead officer: Donald Harding
Decision Maker: Council
Made at meeting: 29/01/2025 - Council
Decision published: 30/01/2025
Effective from: 29/01/2025
Decision:
Item deferred
Decision Maker: Council
Made at meeting: 29/01/2025 - Council
Decision published: 30/01/2025
Effective from: 29/01/2025
Decision:
Background:This year, we have passed the seventh anniversary of the fire in Grenfell Tower, which burned for more than 60 hours taking 72 lives. The Grenfell fire exposed a crisis of fire safety in high-rise building across our country, with a considerable number of buildings in the Royal Borough of Greenwich being found to have various levels of breaches of building regulations and the use of dangerous materials.
We believe that it is imperative that the developers and owners of all buildings over 18m in need of fire remediation work must be able to proceed with the removal of unsafe material as quickly as possible, and leaseholders should be protected from the costs of this work being passed on through fees and charges.
However, the response to this crisis from the previous Government was woefully slow, piecemeal, and created competing and contradictory safety standards for remediation work that has left residents burdened with high insurance premiums and mortgage difficulties.
Motion: This Council notes with deep concern the following:
1. Disparity in safety ratings between developers and insurers
Flammable material on homes poses a risk and while we cannot eliminate all fire risks, it is about managing them. The disparity arises from insurance companies and developers having varying priorities and perspectives.
In the wake of the Grenfell fire, insurance companies have added the heightened risk of whole block fires in many over 18m buildings. In many cases the risk is too high for single insurers are not able to cover on its own. So, leaseholders have left unable to get cover or brokers have turned to sourcing cover from multiple firms. The latter meaning thatseveral insurers are involved in covering one building, creating a ‘layered’ effect and driving up the cost.
Developers often rely on building regulations and standards that they meet during construction, which may vary depending on the specific interpretation of safety requirements. These ratings can sometimes be less stringent than the criteria used by insurers, who often apply more rigorous standards based on their risk models and the potential liability they face in the event of a claim.
· Developers are focused on the present safety and adherence to construction standards, while insurers look at potential risks and historical data to predict future incidents.
· Developers aim to ensure the building is safe from the start, adhering to codes and best practices. Insurers, however, evaluate the likelihood of future incidents and how well risks are managed.
· Developer ratings are often based on current and immediate safety measures, whereas insurer ratings consider long-term risks and past performance.
· Insurers are focused on the EWS1 certification process, which is a set way for a building owner to confirm for insurers that an external wall system on residential buildings has been assessed for safety by a suitable expert, in line with government guidance. It is however not a legal requirement to remediate to A1 standard with requirements for fire safety being B1, and this disparity creates confusion and frustration for leaseholders and unfairly increases premiums.
· There is a risk from flammable materials and the B1 rating have not given certainty to all stakeholders i.e. residents of Royal Artillery Quays and Insurance providers.
These differences in standards creates a gap between what developers consider "safe" and what insurers deem "insurable," resulting in challenges for leaseholders in securing affordable coverage. Although this mitigates the risk for individual insurers, they also escalate overall insurance costs for leaseholders, further exacerbating the financial strain on residents.
Council Calls upon the Government to:
1. Act upon the findings of the Grenfell Inquiry.
2. Bring forward a review how to better protect leaseholders from costs and take steps to accelerate the pace of fire remediation across the country. It is imperative that this review considers the findings from fires in Barking and Dagenham and determine what is acceptable on buildings, with a view of ruling out flammable materials. It must provide clarity for residents on if an A1 rating is necessary to ensure the highest standards of safety.
3. The Government should back a risk-pooling reinsurance scheme to help ensure quicker and more substantial reductions in the costs paid by leaseholders.
Decision Maker: Council
Made at meeting: 29/01/2025 - Council
Decision published: 30/01/2025
Effective from: 29/01/2025
Decision:
Item deferred
Decision Maker: Council
Made at meeting: 29/01/2025 - Council
Decision published: 30/01/2025
Effective from: 29/01/2025
Decision:
Noted the decisions taken under urgency procedures at Section 4 of the report.
Decision Maker: Council
Made at meeting: 29/01/2025 - Council
Decision published: 30/01/2025
Effective from: 29/01/2025
Decision:
That Councillor Sandra Bauer has been appointed by the Leader of the Council to become the Cabinet Member for Equality, Culture & Communities be noted.
Decision Maker: Council
Made at meeting: 29/01/2025 - Council
Decision published: 29/01/2025
Effective from: 29/01/2025
Decision:
That proposals in the report relate to the Local Council Tax Support (LCTS) scheme for working age claimants and that pensioner households claiming LCTS are unaffected and continue to be able to receive up to 100% support, subject to eligibility, be noted.
That in setting the budget for 2024/25, savings amounting to approximately 10% of the councils overall net budget were agreed and that within this sum was £1.1m relating to potential changes to LCTS, subject to consultation and agreement, effective from 2025/26 onwards, be noted.
Noted that:
Øthe direct cost of support to pensioner and working age households is £26.2m of foregone council tax to the council and GLA, of which £13.3m is working age support attributable to the council
Øaround half of London’s councils have recently consulted on changes to their working age schemes, also to take effect from 2025/26
Agreed that, following many years of structural under funding and in order for the scheme for working age claimants to remain affordable, the maximum level of support for working age claimants of LCTS changes from 100% to 80%, so that all households make a minimum contribution of 20% towards the total council tax bill (before support)
Agreed to increase the earnings taper for working age residents from 15% to 25%.
Agreed to increase the non-dependant deduction charge from £5 to £10 per week
Agreed to also remove the exemption for non-dependants who are in receipt of passported benefits and / or not in work.
Agreed to abolish the second adult rebate for working age claimants
Agreed to allow the use of DWP notifications of a claim for Universal Credit as a claim for Local Council Tax Support.
Delegated to the Cabinet member for Inclusive Economy, Business, Skills and Greenwich Supports to agree details of the Hardship Fund and its implementation.
To secure the future use of the properties as accommodation for people with learning disabilities
Decision Maker: Cabinet
Made at meeting: 29/01/2025 - Cabinet
Decision published: 29/01/2025
Effective from: 05/02/2025
Decision:
Approved the freehold acquisition of five NHS-owned properties listed below that host care and support services for people with learning disabilities, on the terms set out in exempt Appendix C.
· 1 Samuel Close London SE18 5LR
· 2 Samuel Close London SE18 5LR
· 3 Samuel Close London SE18 5LR
· 1A Erindale Terrace, London SE18 2QQ
· Arnold House, 154 Shooter Hill Road, London SE3 8RP
Delegated to the Director of Place and Growth the process for acquiring the properties.
Delegated to the Director of Health and Adult Services the process for procuring and appointing a service provider and the terms of that contract upon completion of the acquisition, to ensure stability for residents.
Noted that Health and Adult Services intend to explore opportunities in the future to deregister one or more of these properties, should this option be appropriate.
Agreed to treat the information contained in the Exempt Appendices A – H to this report as exempt information in accordance with the provisions of paragraph 3 of Schedule 12A to the Local Government Act 1972 (as amended) (information relating to the financial or business affairs of any particular person, including the authority holding that information). To agree that this exempt information contained in the Exempt Appendices A-H shall not be released to the press or public.
Wards affected: Various;
Lead officer: Elizabeth Saunders
To recommend to Council changes to the Local Council Tax Support scheme for working age households from 2025/26.
Decision Maker: Cabinet
Made at meeting: 29/01/2025 - Cabinet
Decision published: 29/01/2025
Effective from: 29/01/2025
Decision:
Recommended Council to –
note that proposals in this report relate to the Local Council Tax Support (LCTS) scheme for working age claimants and that pensioner households claiming LCTS are unaffected and continue to be able to receive up to 100% support, subject to eligibility
note that in setting the budget for 2024/25, savings amounting to approximately 10% of the councils overall net budget were agreed and that within this sum was £1.1m relating to potential changes to LCTS, subject to consultation and agreement, effective from 2025/26 onwards
note that:
· the direct cost of support to pensioner and working age households is £26.2m of foregone council tax to the council and GLA, of which £13.3m is working age support attributable to the council
· around half of London’s councils have recently consulted on changes to their working age schemes, also to take effect from 2025/26
agree that, following many years of structural under funding and in order for the scheme for working age claimants to remain affordable, the maximum level of support for working age claimants of LCTS changes from 100% to 80%, so that all households make a minimum contribution of 20% towards the total council tax bill (before support)
agree to increase the earnings taper for working age residents from 15% to 25%.
agree to increase the non-dependant deduction charge from £5 to £10 per week
agree to also remove the exemption for non-dependants who are in receipt of passported benefits and / or not in work.
agree to abolish the second adult rebate for working age claimants
agree to allow the use of DWP notifications of a claim for Universal Credit as a claim for Local Council Tax Support.
delegate to the Cabinet member for Inclusive Economy, Business, Skills and Greenwich Supports to agree details of the Hardship Fund and its implementation.
Wards affected: All;
Lead officer: Corin Hammersley
To agree the terms of leases with private landlords for 10 years in length, on properties to be used for temporary accommodation.
Decision Maker: Cabinet
Made at meeting: 29/01/2025 - Cabinet
Decision published: 29/01/2025
Effective from: 05/02/2025
Decision:
Agreed the model Heads of Terms and business plan parameters, as set out in exempt Appendix One of this report, for a ten-year lease to be offered to residential landlords for the acquisition of accommodation to house homeless households requiring temporary accommodation.
Noted that the potential rent payable under each lease acquisition may generate an annual financial deficit, to be funded from the General Fund (GF). The proposal aims to deliver a GF cost reduction, reducing the current TA budget pressures.
Noted that some properties acquired on a ten-year lease may be located outside of the borough.
Noted the process mapping for the delivery of this initiative, as set out in Appendix Two of this report.
Delegated authority to the Director of Place and Growth to negotiate and agree the details of each lease agreement.
Agreed to treat the information contained in the Exempt Appendix One to this report as exempt information in accordance with the provisions of paragraph 3 of Schedule 12A to the Local Government Act 1972 (as amended) (information relating to the financial or business affairs of any particular person including the authority holding that information). To agree that this exempt information contained in the Exempt Appendix One shall not be released to the press or public.
Wards affected: All;
Lead officer: Duncan Broe
To agree the Council tax base
Decision Maker: Council
Made at meeting: 29/01/2025 - Council
Decision published: 29/01/2025
Effective from: 29/01/2025
Decision:
Agreed a council tax base for the whole authority area for 2025/26 of 91,088.88 in accordance with the Local Authorities (Calculation of Tax Base) (England) Regulations 2012.
Agreed an additional council tax base for the Gloucester Circus Garden Square area of the authority for 2025/26 of 100.16.
Agreed a continuance in 2025/26 of a council tax premium of 100% in respect of long-term empty dwellings for dwellings empty for between 1 and 5 years.
Agreed a continuance in 2025/26 of a council tax premium of 200% in respect of long-term empty dwellings, for dwellings empty between 5 and 10 years.
Agreed a continuance in 2025/26 of the council tax discount of 0% on Class C & D dwellings (empty homes).
Agreed a continuance in 2025/26 of a council tax discount of 100% in respect of Royal Borough of Greenwich foster carers & shared lives households in the borough.
Agreed the reduction in the time before charging a Council Tax Premium to long-term empty homes (dwellings which have been unoccupied and substantially unfurnished), from 2 years to 12 months.
Noted that the council tax base relevant to the Southern Region of the Environment Agency for flood defence levy apportionment purposes in 2025/26 is 9,218.50
Noted that the council tax base relevant to the Thames Region of the Environment Agency for flood defence levy apportionment purposes in 2025/26 is 81,870.38
Noted the agreement at Council on 31st January 2024 of a 100% council tax premium on Class A & Class B dwellings second homes in the borough, which will take effect from 1 April 2025.
Noted that proposed changes to the Local Council Tax Support Scheme, considered by Cabinet on 29 January 2025 for recommendation to Council, are included in the tax base calculations.
Decision Maker: Cabinet
Made at meeting: 29/01/2025 - Cabinet
Decision published: 29/01/2025
Effective from: 29/01/2025
Decision:
Agreed to reducing the time before charging a Council Tax Premium to long-term empty homes (dwellings which have been unoccupied and substantially unfurnished), from 2 years to 12 months.
Noted the agreement at Council on 31st January 2024 of a 100% council tax premium on Class A & Class B dwellings second homes in the borough, which will take effect from 1 April 2025.
Noted that proposed changes to the Local Council Tax Support Scheme, being considered by Cabinet on 29 January 2025 for recommendation to Council, are included in the tax base calculations.
Recommended Council to
Agree a council tax base for the whole authority area for 2025/26 of 91,088.88 in accordance with the Local Authorities (Calculation of Tax Base) (England) Regulations 2012.
Agree an additional council tax base for the Gloucester Circus Garden Square area of the authority for 2025/26 of 100.16.
Agree a continuance in 2025/26 of a council tax premium of 100% in respect of long-term empty dwellings for dwellings empty for between 1 and 5 years.
Agree a continuance in 2025/26 of a council tax premium of 200% in respect of long-term empty dwellings, for dwellings empty between 5 and 10 years.
Agree a continuance in 2025/26 of the council tax discount of 0% on Class C & D dwellings (empty homes).
Agree a continuance in 2025/26 of a council tax discount of 100% in respect of Royal Borough of Greenwich foster carers & shared lives households in the borough.
Note that the council tax base relevant to the Southern Region of the Environment Agency for flood defence levy apportionment purposes in 2025/26 is 9,218.50
Note that the council tax base relevant to the Thames Region of the Environment Agency for flood defence levy apportionment purposes in 2025/26 is 81,870.38
Wards affected: All;
Lead officer: Richard Pulfer
Decision Maker: Local Planning Committee
Made at meeting: 28/01/2025 - Local Planning Committee
Decision published: 29/01/2025
Effective from: 28/01/2025
Decision:
Resolved that a decision on the application be deferred in order to undertake a site visit to get a better understanding of the topography and possible impact on surrounding residents.
Wards affected: Mottingham, Coldharbour and New Eltham;
Fees and Charges 2025/26 – Inflation and Cost Recovery
Decision Maker: Director of Housing and Safer Communities
Decision published: 29/01/2025
Effective from: 05/02/2025
Decision:
1. Agreed the proposed fees and charges for the financial year 2025/26 as set out in Appendix 1 of this report, in accordance with the Leader’s Scheme of Delegation.
2. Noted that the charges will apply from 1st April 2025 to 31st March 2026, where possible.
Wards affected: All;
Lead officer: Michael Horbatchewskyj
Decision Maker: Cabinet
Made at meeting: 29/01/2025 - Cabinet
Decision published: 29/01/2025
Effective from: 11/02/2025
Decision:
Noted the Council’s revenue position as at the end of November 2024.
Wards affected: All;
Lead officer: Hitesh Jolapara
Decision Maker: General Purposes Committee
Made at meeting: 23/01/2025 - General Purposes Committee
Decision published: 23/01/2025
Effective from: 23/01/2025
Decision:
Agreed to the salary range of the following Chief Officer posts, in accordance with the Council’s Pay Policy Statement:
Noted that the Chief Executive has delegated authority to establish, in consultation with the Party Group Leaders, individual Appointment Panels for the appointment of Chief Officers based on the requirements of the post.
Decision Maker: General Purposes Committee
Made at meeting: 23/01/2025 - General Purposes Committee
Decision published: 23/01/2025
Effective from: 23/01/2025
Decision:
Agreed to the salary range of the following Chief Officer post, in accordance with the Council’s Pay Policy Statement:
· Director of Public Health (Directorate of Health & Adult Services), Chief Officer grade B (salary range £119,467 – £131,210)
Noted that the Chief Executive has delegated authority to establish, in consultation with the Party Group Leaders, individual Appointment Panels for the appointment of Chief Officers based on the requirements of the post.
Decision Maker: Licensing Sub-Committee C
Made at meeting: 21/01/2025 - Licensing Sub-Committee C
Decision published: 22/01/2025
Effective from: 21/01/2025
Decision:
In reaching its decision, the Licensing Sub-Committee (“LSC”) considered the Council’s Statement of Licensing Policy, the Licensing Act 2003, the Regulations made thereunder, and the Guidance issued by the Secretary of State under S.182 of that Act. In discharging its functions, the LSC did so with a view to promoting the licensing objectives of the prevention of crime and disorder, public safety, the prevention of public nuisance, and the protection of children from harm.
Having considered all written representations, evidence, and oral submissions, the LSC resolved that the 2 applications be refused, and Counter Notices be issued.
Basis of Decision
The Premises License holder, Mr Bankole Jones, attended the hearing with the co-director of the business, Mrs Gloria Jones.
The License holder submitted that he had run the business from the premises for one year without complaint, and that all claims of breach and nuisance were allegations with no evidence being provided. The License holder stated that he had never received a complaint from any local residents regarding noise and had good relationships with them.
The License holder denied the noise nuisance and claimed the environmental health officers had never spoken to him about the issue prior to serving the Abatement Notice. The License holder alleged that the environmental health officers had repeatedly turned off the music in the venue during their visits. The License holder also emphasised that music was allowed until 11pm as per the license conditions. Additionally, the License holder claimed that the environmental
health officers were intimidating and caused nuisance to the businesses’ customers, and that he has closed the business as a result of the officers approach.
Mrs Gloria Jones submitted that correspondence from the environmental health officers stated that no music was being played when they visited the premises and explained that on other occasions when music was being played this was done so during the permitted hours in line with the license conditions. Mrs Gloria Jones claimed that the environmental health officers made herself and the License holder uncomfortable during their visits, and subsequently caused a loss to their business. Mrs Gloria Jones stated that the noise nuisance and breaches were allegations made by the environmental health officers, but there was no supporting evidence. Additionally, that herself and the License holder had been working with the community and the Licensing Authority to abide by the license conditions.
The LSC received submissions from environmental health officers explaining attempts to engage with the Licence holder regarding the noise and public nuisance caused and associated with the licenced premises, including advice offered as to how to mitigate the nuisances. Additionally, the environmental health officers noted that the Abatement Notice had been further been breached on 21st December 2024.
The LSC considered that the Licence holder maintained there were no breaches of the premises licence conditions or the noise abatement notice and was unable to acknowledge the public nuisance associated with the premises. The LSC heard evidence that environmental protection officers had written to the License holder numerous times regarding details of the nuisance, warnings, the Abatement notice, and detailed circumstances of the breaches. The License holder-maintained denial of all breaches of the license conditions and the Abatement Notice. Further, the License holder denies that the officers have witnessed any nuisance or breach at the premises. The LSC noted that the licence holder did not appear to understand the licensing objectives, and in particular the prevention of public nuisance.
The LSC gave significant weight to the written representations and oral evidence by environmental health officers. The LSC were further concerned at the ongoing extreme nature of the loud amplified music witnessed by officers from residential premises. The statutory nuisance had been witnessed by a number of officers and the evidence by Environmental Health was given full weight by the LSC.
The LSC were satisfied that, on the basis of the evidence before them, the conditions attached to the premises license as well as the abatement notice were being breached; namely significant noise and public nuisance caused from the premises and licensable activities taking place outside of permitted hours. The LSC noted that it would be detrimental to residents to allow the temporary events, given that the License holder is failing to comply with the current license conditions and Abatement Notice and causing significant noise and public nuisance.
In reaching its decision the LSC disregarded any commercial considerations relating to the viability of the restaurant and bar.
The LSC resolved that Counter Notices be served and the 2 TENs applications stand as refused.
Any party aggrieved by this decision may appeal to the magistrates’ court within 21 days.
But no appeal may be brought later than five working days before the first day on which the event period specified in the temporary event notice begins
Wards affected: Greenwich Creekside;