Council - Tuesday 15 September 2026, 7:30pm - Wandsworth Council Webcasting

Council
Tuesday, 15th September 2026 at 7:30pm

Speaking:

Start of webcast

Share this agenda point

Select an agenda point

Scroll with video

Disclaimer: This transcript was automatically generated, so it may contain errors. Please view the webcast to confirm whether the content is accurate.

Please be seated.

Welcome, councillors, to this extraordinary meeting of the council. Apologies have been

received from councillors Richards -Jones, Hamilton, Pridham, Wiles and Fisher. Are there

Oh, sorry, I had you down. Sorry. Sorry councillor Fisher. You're here

Do we have any items which need to be approved for urgency reasons

As a reminder

Please could all speakers keep to time and wind up their speeches when the red light comes on

When the red light comes on you will have 30 seconds remaining to wind up

This is to allow as many councillors as possible to participate

Thank you.

Item 1, Announcements by the Mayor.

It is with sadness that I report the death of former Councillor Colin Dorr.

On behalf of the Council, I offer our condolences to his family and friends.

Councillor Dorr served as a Councillor for 16 years, between 1990 and 2006.

I invite members to join me in observing a short period of silence in his memory.

Thank you. I now invite members to pay tribute.

Councillor Acunola.

Thank you Madam Mayor. Hello councillors. It may seem quite strange for me to have

counted Councillor Doar as a friend but before

politics I was a member of the Rotary Club in Tooting. I was the

every evening, every Monday evening for about four years at the White Eagle Club.

Colin was always very curious about why I joined, but it's simply because I love to hear about the history of Tooting, the area, and between him and the other 12 members.

I really learned a lot about Tooting from the 1950s and onwards.

I recall one day he'd had some sort of illness.

So Roger, who was another member, and I dropped him off towards his house in Crystal Palace.

so I got a full history of the area, including a complaint about new council homes that were

being proposed outside of his home, which would ruin his view of London. And he loved

the view and he loved London. Colin was really very involved in the community. I would call

him politely feisty, very opinionated, but also very charming. He supported schools as

a governor, sent John's ambulance and sent Georgie's Hospital, to name a few. He even

supported my own charity one Christmas and helped me organise my street's very second

street party. It poured with rain, but we had a tent and a barbecue and sent John's

ambulances on hand just in case. And as always, unlike every event he ever attended, he was

suited with his signature hat. He understood that true service starts at home on the streets

of Tooting and Wandsworth, but can also be achieved by lifting others up and those people

that need it the most.

Colin saw the Rotary as a powerful movement,

a vehicle for positive local change

and international goodwill.

Along with the rest of the club, we

built schools, training centres, and our last project

was a well that we built to bring fresh water

into a village in Ghana.

We supported recovery efforts in Pakistan,

sponsored volunteers helping in the Rohingya crisis,

and paid for several children to go to school

across the African continent.

Our political views were clearly very different,

but our commitment to fellowship and charity were aligned.

After I became the president of the club,

he badgered me to get into politics relentlessly.

They could do with someone like you, she said.

And I remember when I told the club

I'd been selected for the grave new seat

and they all applauded.

Then Colin piped up, hang on, which party?

The right one, I hope.

Of course, I said, Labour. And they all laughed, most of them being paid up conservatives and

also strangely members of the co -op cooperative party. He said, I don't approve, but I wish

you the best. I'm sure you'll be good at it and maybe in time. Well, that time never came,

but you did get another, Kemi. I never did serve with him in the council, but I heard

brought his Rotary values to his tenure as Mayor, putting service above self and championing

volunteers and the work that our amazing VCS do. A great Rotarian. So rest in peace, Councillor

Doar. Thank you, Councillor. Councillor Covington,

thank you. Thank you Madam Mayor. I mean, Councillor

and it sums up a lot of values that Colin had.

But I want to sort of focus on Colin

that many of us remember.

There was something very old fashioned

and elegant about Colin.

He was always properly dressed.

He always had his trilby,

and very many times I've seen him doffish

hat off to people he recognised,

including when he was on a bike.

So he somehow managed to combine all of those things.

He used a propeller pencil,

propelling pencil and a fountain pen.

I mean, those are the kind of values with which he lived his life and he brought to

the council too.

So I think he would have been very surprised that we didn't rise to mark the moment silence.

I mean, that was the kind of person Colin would say that that was the thing that he

thought was really important.

It's important for him, but also it's important for us to remember that he was a part of a

continuum.

He grew up, he served in the National Service Royal Air Force.

He did all sorts of public service.

Almost all his life he was a public servant,

either in schools, in colleges, or in this council.

And to him, that was the way of putting back

into the community he had.

One of my real long memories of it was that,

I think it was the second month of him joining the council,

I noted that the tie he was wearing had a crest on it.

And I was looking at it, and he said,

oh, well, this is the Devonport High School for Boys tie.

That's where I went.

It just so happened that there was also

the school I went to for two terms.

But suddenly, a world of old boys opened up for me.

I mean, I had no reason to be a member of the old boys.

After two terms, it was a bit like a thing

that I was almost going into under false pretences.

But he was always keen that I went to one or two

of the dinners, met people, reminisced.

And nothing to reminisce, but he was hospitable

and he was keen to share that kind of fellowship

that he brought.

Colin left this council, moved to Beulah Hill

or Crystal Palace, often continued to come to events here

on his bike, went back on his bike,

and was extraordinarily fit for a very, very long time,

part of his life.

He did well for this borough,

and I hope we did well by him.

The likes of Colin are rarer still,

but I'm glad to have known him.

Thank you.

Unfortunately, on this occasion,

we are not joined for prayers by my chaplain,

Canon Martin Edwards, of the East Hill Roman Catholic Church

The Oratory of Saint Mary Magdalene,

as he is currently in Istgia off the coast of Southern Italy,

home of the ancient thermal waters and several Catholic pilgrimage sites.

But I would firstly like to take this early opportunity to welcome

Councillor Giorgiani to the Council following the recent by -election.

Councillor Giorgiani, we look forward to working with you

and I hope you enjoy your first Council meeting.

The Deputy Mayor and I have had several mayoral engagements since we were last all here together

in July. We have made visits and have spoken to sporting and educational establishments,

community groups and at business and charity events. The Deputy Mayor recently took part in

Roehampton's Got Talent, part of Roehampton Community Week, celebrating the fantastic

creativity and community spirit in that important part of our borough. She has also recently spoken

and other community events in both Battersea and Tooting.

I was particularly delighted to welcome Queen Camilla

to the borough earlier this month

for the presentation of the Queen Elizabeth II

Coronation Award to Christopher Wilden OBE

of the Royal Academy of Dance,

recognising his excellence, creativity,

and dedication within the arts.

Yesterday, I was delighted to attend

the 2026 Royal Academy graduation ceremony

at Cadogan Hall in Chelsea,

where more than 40 countries were represented.

Last week, I welcomed 25 Dutch council clerks

and officers from across the 12 provinces of the Netherlands

and several councils to the mayor's parlour.

They were very interested in how our systems differ,

but also on some of the similar challenges we face

in areas such as housing.

Other events that have stood out

include the Battersea Community Festival

in Shillington Park, where it was a pleasure to speak

and to join the air cadets in a parade,

one or two of whom I have known since their first day

at primary school and are now studying for their A levels.

It was also a pleasure to welcome the new vicar

of St. Margaret's in Putney, Reverend Susan Wright,

at the service for her collation and licencing.

And I was also with counsellors and council colleagues

at last week's Celebrasia event,

which is London's biggest celebration of the food, culture,

and creativity of the Southeast Asian community

held at Battersea Power Station.

Finally, this weekend, I was delighted to speak

at the Southfield Lawn Tennis Charity Day,

which allows disadvantaged local children

to take part in the sport.

I also attended a fundraiser in Tuting

for the victims of the recent floods in Nepal and Tibet.

In the next few weeks, I'll be inviting my charities

back to the town hall, where I hope we can have some dates

organised for our pre -Christmas fundraiser.

And now for the formal business of the meeting.

On Item 2, are there any members who have any declarations of

disclosable pecuniary interests, other registrable interests or any non -registrable interests

relevant to any matters to be considered at the meeting?

Councillor Cooper?

I thought we had agreed a form of words that would be generally just referred to, but I

am the London Assembly Member for Merton and Wandsworth, so anything relating to the Greater

London Authority and this is just for transparency purposes and there's no pecuniary interest

but just for the records. Thank you, they'll be in the minutes. Thank

you. On item three, members please raise your hand to indicate if you have a petition to

hand in. Once I have called your name, please announce the subject of the petition and who

you are presenting it on behalf of. Please then come forward and hand your petition to

Mrs. Ritchie, are there any petitions?

Councillor White.

Petition from Katie Taylor, not the Katie Taylor,

but another Katie Taylor, who's raised a petition

with 38 of top end of Coteford Road for traffic calming.

Thank you, please bring your petition.

Any other petitions? Okay, thank you.

Item four is questions to the leader of the council.

Before I call the first question, I will explain the new procedure.

The overall period for questions to the leader is 20 minutes.

The first question is allocated to the leader of the opposition.

The leader will answer each question.

The leader of the opposition may ask up to three supplementary questions following the

answer to the first question.

Each other counsellor whose question has been selected may ask one supplementary question.

Supplementary questions must take no longer than 30 seconds.

I ask members to keep strictly to that limit so that as many published questions as possible

can be reached.

If the questioner is absent, the question is withdrawn.

Request for supplementary questions must alternate between administration and other councillors.

Members must rise if they can or otherwise raise their hand to indicate they wish to

ask a supplementary question. When the 20 -minute period has elapsed, any questions not received

will receive a written reply in accordance with the standing orders.

First question on council tax from the Leader of the Opposition, Councillor Hogg.

Question one to the leader.

Can I thank Councillor Hogg for his question.

This administration inherited a financial position of real severity.

The biggest government funding cuts, the largest projected overspend,

and the largest forecasted budget gap Wandsworth has ever faced.

Let us be clear, residents are now paying the choices for decisions made before we took office.

The government sadly has stripped funding

from local councils and the previous administration

left behind an unsustainable financial position.

As you will hear later this evening from Councillor Graham,

we are taking steps to correct this.

I'm not pretending they won't be painful, they will.

Thank you, Councillor van Hoek.

Supplementary question and obviously keen to welcome

and Councillor Moritz to his new role

as leader of the council.

I thank him for his answer.

That does sound concerning.

It has been reported in the Times and elsewhere

that the administration is considering doubling council tax.

That would be stunning and outrageous

and completely unnecessary.

Why on earth does he think such an unprecedented move

would be required, and does he agree

it would obviously require a manifesto pledge

or a public referendum?

Thank you.

Ahas he's well aware, it's not my opinion about whether we would need a public referendum.

It's a decision taken by his Labour government to remove the cap.

And that doesn't just apply to this borough, it applies to many other boroughs, Labour and Conservative, accordingly.

The reason why we can pretend that there are other possibilities, there are in essence only three real choices.

we eat reserves to an unsustainable degree,

we put up council tax,

or we slash services beyond the point, I think,

where anyone thinks that's acceptable in this room.

Let's just turn to the point about reserves.

Lots is made of the fact that we have

a considerable amount of reserves.

The level of reserves has decreased.

We are now under 100 million.

In this financial year, 26, 27,

the government is going to take away 19 million.

Next year in the financial year 27 -28, it's going to take away 48 million.

And the year after in 28 -29, it's going to take away 84 million.

That is more than we currently have in reserves without actually -

Can you wind up, Councillor Moritz?

We go bust.

Second supplementary to the leader.

Thank you, Councillor.

I mean, obviously, a major increase in council tax

will be incredibly painful for local people.

It will be unfair, unnecessary, and we will oppose it,

and labour will reverse it as soon as we can.

This is a cruel and selfish and very political decision,

and you are seeking to blame everyone but yourselves,

and you have been fundamentally dishonest.

Every fact and figure you've used in your argument

was available to you last year.

It was available to you before you wrote your manifesto

and before you knocked on people's doors in the election.

Can you ask the question, please, Councillor Hogg?

Does the leader accept it's absolutely appalling

for his party to conceal its intention

to increase council tax, and will he now listen

to local people and reverse the decision

if that's what they ask him to do?

What's wholly unfair is what's been done to us by this Labour government. The people of

Wandsworth pay into the ex -Jekylland. No one for a second is saying that we shouldn't help

the rest of the country, but we pay in each year over £5 billion. In return, we get 4p

for every one pound. The national average for a local authority or public body is 12p.

We're getting a third of what everybody else is. We are effectively being robbed by this government.

Councillor Hogg, your third supplementary.

Third supplementary. I mean, this is quite a theoretical discussion because we haven't

seen any papers. We're unaware of what the proposals are. Note, Madam Mayor,

The questions are very late today,

but I wonder if the leader can clear something up.

He's been a Councillor for only four months

and obviously served earlier on Wandsworth Council.

And residents have raised with me

the circumstances of his departure,

reported at the time to be over financial impropriety.

Can the leader please set out for residents

the reasons for him leasing the Council

and put on the record if these have been resolved

in a satisfactory way?

Instead of concentrating on me, Councillor Hawke should concentrate on his own behaviour

and the financial mess he left. At the end of the day, the people of Temsfield made a

judgement about my character and stuff when they re -elected me and I personally find Councillor

Hawke super pleasant to deal with, but I think he's rather missing the point. What people

want to know is what decisions are we going to make tonight and what are we

going to do about council tax and no amount of personal stuff is going to

come in the way of the fact he left an incredible mess and we're cleaning it up

question two to the leader

thank you councillor Hampton reserves as I've already touched on exists to

protect residents from shocks, and support planned investments,

and help us to manage risk, something which in her day job

no doubt she deals with all the time.

They are, in effect, a rainy day fund.

They should be used, well, rather they

shouldn't be used to paper up over day -to -day spending.

Even under a Labour administration,

like we've got nationally, taking away our cash,

It can't be raining every day

Thank you captain supplementary madam

Has the leader

Discussed with officers what they believe would be prudent for us to maintain as reserves

Yes, and I think it's fair to say that sadly reserves are not going to be at the level we'd like and that's a direct consequence

of what we're going to do.

I think in the documentation that Councillor Graham

sets out later, we have a prudent approach.

It is going to be super difficult to deliver,

but one that is absolutely necessary

if we're to protect residents

from the financial mess that we've inherited.

Question 3 to the Leader. Sorry, can it be read out please, since the rules have changed

since July? Quite the question.

As new Councillor, I'm finding the restructuring of formal processes a barrier and an unwelcome

distraction with the leader agree the format for questions is confusing and

poorly implemented I have some sympathy for you for your point it's it's fair to

say and I don't think it's just on your side that people are struggling to get

to grips with this new system but these new standing orders were developed

through engagement on a cross -party basis.

Clearly, the administration has no majority

on general purposes for it to travel forward.

It inevitably has to pass that.

I would say that officers have issued some clear guidance,

but I definitely hear the point you're making.

I hear the point that some of the colleagues

from my own side have made, and we'll try and review that

and keep it under review as is constantly.

As I understand it, we do have some changes

to standing orders that are coming up and it gives us an opportunity to look at things

again.

supplementary.

Can the leader comment on how the system allows for new members to and back bench members

to get a fair chance asking questions?

Sorry.

Yes, Councillor Cook has the first supplementary.

So when I first heard the way questions were to be selected, it did put me in mind of Hogwarts

sorting hat. I must say though, on a serious note, I think you're leaving your group and

potentially the council wide open to ridicule. Fortunately for you, I'm not a clown, so I

don't intend to do that. But what I would ask is, is it now time to pause and come up

with something that's workable.

Councilman Morat.

I didn't elaborate further earlier

because I'm like you restricted to 60 seconds,

so I believe.

We have to amend some standing orders

because of changes the national government

is making in respect of delegated authority

for planning matters.

So there will be an opportunity.

We will keep this under review.

I think it's somewhat unfair, three questions in,

to decide whether the system is working or not.

And that's something that in consultation

with your leader, Councillor Hogg and Councillor Grimston,

we will sit down and have a discussion

about what we think is the best way forward.

Thank you, Councillor Davis, your supplementary.

Thank you.

Could the leader comment on how this system

allows for backbench members such as myself to get a fair shot at asking a question.

Yes, and I thank Councillor C Davis for her question.

The old system, let's face it, was not perfect. It definitely had its idiosyncrasies.

And one of those was that everything was actually controlled through the party whips.

And under the new system that's been put forward,

whether one likes the ballot or shuffle,

whatever we're going to describe it as,

there is a genuine opportunity for all members

to come top and ask their first question.

And I think in many respects that's to be welcomed

because it does diminish the power of the whips.

And then the second point,

which is super good in this system

and even were the balance to be altered,

it's something we would want to retain,

which is the power of written questions,

which we never had before and is a significant improvement

and means that people are not waiting

from full council to full council.

Thank you.

Before I call the next question,

I understand that it is Councillor Barron's birthday today.

It is also Councillor Apsa's birthday.

So I am sure members will join me

in wishing them both a very happy birthday.

Fourth question on Barrow Investment. Councillor Barron.

Thank you very much Madam Mayor. Will the leader update us on how Wandsworth is working

to attract investment and create jobs for local residents?

Can I thank Councillor Barron and join with you Madam Mayor in wishing him many happy

returns. The Council I think is committed to creating

the conditions for investment that

enables growth in our borough.

And above all, I think that it involves,

because let's face it, the market out there is very tough.

Particularly when it comes to things like house building,

I think even the mayor of London has

recognised that in the way that he's tried to change and reduce

affordability.

And one reason why he's reduced those thresholds

is in recognition of how difficult it is.

I think that requires us to have a mature and engaging approach

with developers and that's exactly what we'll be pursuing through our

development forums.

Supplementary Councillor Barron.

I'd like to thank the leader for his work on the developer forums and please can I ask the

updates on how developers responded to this engagement.

Can I thank Councillor Barron. I find developers are not always looking for a

yes they're just actually looking for a straight answer and even when the answer

is know that we don't think that is deliverable.

They appreciate the engagement.

As a property developer, you do not want to sink

sometimes tens or hundreds of thousands of pounds

into a scheme only to be told no,

or led to believe it's possible to take it forward

when that was never actually deliverable.

Therefore, I'm finding, and myself and Councillor Corner

have already engaged in several roundtables with developers,

and that it's not just private sector developers,

that is housing associations and many others.

We are finding that engagement is good.

And quite frankly, they find it refreshing

to have someone who's prepared to meet with them.

Thank you, Councillor Moritz.

Councillor Acunaga's supplementary.

Second supplementary to the leader.

You've spoken a lot about development in your response

to the question about attracting investment and creating

jobs for local residents.

But as we know, Wandsworth is primarily

a borough of small medium enterprises.

We have the most amazing work match programme

that also operates within the borough.

Can you elaborate on how you plan on creating jobs

in areas other than development?

Sure, I think one of the main things I've been doing,

and this will be reflected in our position going forward,

is trying to convince the government

to stop its war on small businesses,

red tape, extra taxes, things like national insurance contributions have

been absolutely appalling not just for small businesses but for small charities

the voluntary sector, hospices, you name it they're getting clapboard just as we

are as a council by this Labour government.

Question five. Yeah question five on selective licencing, Councillor Dickerton.

Yeah can I get an update on whether selective licencing to protect private

Renters is still being rolled out to ones of town Balham and the other listed awards later this year has been planned by us

Can I thank cancer dictum for his question the simple answer is no that won't be rolled out they're going to be paused

I think it's important we look and see

Where the previous licencing scene got to and whether it's actually genuinely meeting the tests that the scheme was set out to do

You can take the position, and I'm sure it's his,

that there's no ward you wouldn't licence.

I don't think that's the approach that we will take.

I genuinely want to see.

I think there is a genuine point that some in the PRS

in particular do need extra protections,

but I'm not convinced that a further rollout

of that scheme is the best way to take that forward.

Yeah, so in the written question, you talk about the fact

that it works and is useful and will be used

in the places that it is rolled out.

One of those places is Northcote,

but like I said, it's not rolled out

in places like Wands of Town, Ballon.

That means single people, couples, and families

don't get the same protections

as those where it is and has been rolled out.

And where, in the written answer,

you say it's working well and gives you

the resources you need to make enforcement.

So can you explain to the residents

who were waiting for selective licencing,

were looking forward to selective licencing,

why they won't be covered compared to someone

who might live literally on the opposite side of the road.

I agree with him.

It's relatively iniquitous in that some people

have got it and others don't.

But by the same token, had he wanted everywhere

to be covered when he was in charge,

he could have brought in the scheme borough -wide.

Supplementary, Councillor Islet.

This is Councillor Moritz.

I just want to understand,

is selective licencing really working well elsewhere?

And I'm worried about wards like mine own,

Ballum, for example, places where rents were already high,

the impacts that it might have,

and I just want to put that to him.

I think the picture is mixed.

It's not that it doesn't offer any protections,

and I think it would be remiss of us to suggest

it doesn't offer any protections,

but you rightly highlight what is my concern,

which is in a age when rents are increasing,

and we are facing a lot of people who are squeezed,

ultimately this extra burden just ends up being passed on to the renter.

And it's a question of whether we get that balance right,

as well as whether the scheme is actually working.

That is at the forefront of my mind in the pause.

Supplementary Councillor Rigby.

Thank you.

Could you provide evidence of what links you've got to show

that it does increase rents?

It's certainly not what we've not found any evidence to that and certainly people in Balham really wanted it to come in

It just took

I'm happy to go and look at the others and to a sentence and that's why I said it needs to be reviewed

But it just stands to reason

That the landlord is not going to eat that and is going to pass on costs

it's

Inevitably, costs are passed on in the same way

that a increase in mortgage costs is passed on.

And however it is done, I think it is not in the real world

to suggest that landlords just eat that.

They don't.

And the fullness of time, whether it's immediate or not,

ultimately, it's the tenant that bears the extra cost.

I did say I would be happy to provide it outside this chamber.

Sixth question on adult social care finance. Councillor, Mrs Graham, thank you.

Thank you, Madam Chair. The question is, given the continuing financial pressure with adult

social care, what are the practical steps to be taken

to bring expenditure back down into line

with the agreed budget while protecting residents

with eligible care needs?

Thank you.

Can I thank Councillor Graham for this question?

It is not going to be easy.

I think we all know, and it's a significant slice

of this council's budget, that adult social care services are

experiencing significant financial pressure.

That's not just the case here.

That's the case in authorities up and down the country,

quite frankly.

Through the Adult Social Care and Public Health

Transformation Programme, the council

is focusing on prevention and early intervention

to improve outcomes and financial sustainability.

This includes promoting independence

through timely reviews of care and support arrangements,

ensuring support remains proportionate to address need,

securing appropriate NHS and client contributions,

and strengthening commissioning,

expanding technology -enabled care,

and community support to develop local alternatives

to higher -cost provision.

Thank you, Councillor Moritz.

The time for questions to the leader has now finished.

Item 5 is the Statement on Housing

by the Leader of the Council

in accordance with Standing Order 38.

Before we begin, I will briefly explain the procedure.

The leader will make the statement and there is no time limit.

The leader of the opposition may respond for the same length of time followed by a right of reply of up to five minutes.

Questions and answers should each be brief and should not exceed one minute.

Each council may ask one question only.

I will alternate between the administration and other councillors and indicate when I am taking the final question.

Once the final question has been answered,

a procedural motion may be moved, if appropriate,

to commend the statement to the Council.

It does not require a seconder

and is put directly to the vote without debate.

I now invite the leader of the Council

to make the statement on housing.

Thank you, Madam Mayor, just give me a second.

I gather these are the sort of thing

we're supposed to use for statements.

And I'm all out of shoeboxes or whatever else it is

that Kenneth DeGruyen has got by the side of him.

Madam Mayor, Councillors, I want to speak about

one of the most important

and long -term responsibilities we have,

and that's making sure that our residents

have a safe, quality home, not just today,

but for decades to come.

I know the party opposite wants to debate housing policy.

It's something which they care deeply about,

and that, I think, is very much to their credit.

My statement in the context of an extraordinary council,

which will inevitably focus on finance,

is a genuine attempt to foster that debate.

There will be enough news elsewhere on the agenda

when Councillor Graham gets to his feet,

but I'm not going to be pulling policy rabbits

out of the hat, and I regret that I couldn't,

owing to Standing Order 38,

facilitate the Leave the Oppositions request

that in terms of enabling the shadow cabinet member

to respond.

If I may just add a personal reflection,

I spent a huge chunk of my professional career outside this council working for a large ha to provide decent

affordable homes my parents

First home was bought under the Thatcher RTB revolution

It provided my parents and their two small boys me and my brother with a springboard to a better life

And if I was leader the one job I would love to do

is to be cabinet member for housing,

but don't worry, Matt,

I'm not proposing a job swap anytime soon.

Across our borough, there are states

from the Doddington to the Dover house

that have served generations of families well.

They're part of Wandsworth's history,

and they're woven into the fabric of people's lives.

But many of these homes were built in a different era

to different standards with different expectations

about energy efficiency, accessibility,

fire safety, family life, and how to deal with crime and ASB,

and the quality of the public realm.

Our borough has an ageing retained housing stock

that's finding it increasingly difficult

to meet today's standards.

Those standards have rightly risen

since the Grenfell tragedy,

and we simply cannot say we are meeting them all.

If we were, we would not have a C3 rating.

I want to apologise to every tenant and leaseholder for the level of service they've received

over the last few years.

It's less than they had a right to respect, and it won't be fixed overnight, but fix it

we will.

And the ambition of this administration is to deliver a C1 rating.

That's not simply a technical regulatory matter.

It's about confidence that homes are safe,

that they're well maintained and properly managed,

that tenants and leaseholders rightly expect accurate records,

timely inspections, effective repairs and a housing service

that puts them first.

The regulators' findings show that improvements are required

to meet those expectations,

and that's the work that is now ongoing.

It's important for me to recognise

that the council has accepted the findings

and has begun a programme of improvement.

And I pay tribute to the work of staff and members

from all sides who contributed to that.

Wandsworth's housing improvement and transformation plan,

supported by a new oversight board and independent reviews,

is intended to strengthen compliance,

improve resident engagement,

and deliver better accountability

across the housing service.

However, plans alone are not enough. We all know that.

Residents will rightly judge success by results.

They all want to see safer homes, faster action on outstanding issues,

greater transparency and a clear path towards a higher regulatory grading.

The challenge facing Wandsworth is not simply to move from a C3 to a better rating,

but to rebuild trust with tenants and to demonstrate that lessons have been learned.

Key to that is the delivery of what we will do

to reestablish the ED for housing.

Housing should have its own voice around the top table.

It's no slight on the current team.

I know officers are giving them all,

and I thank them for it.

But establishing a housing ED was a manifesto commitment,

and we aim to deliver on that.

The formal recruitment process will commence

following the joint staffing committee

later on Thursday this week.

My message to housing colleagues

and others in the chamber tonight is simple.

I want this administration to get out there

and find the very best,

a high calibre, experienced housing professional

who can work with counsellors of all stripes,

fellow officers, tenants and leaseholders,

to make housing deliver for our communities.

But I also need to set out clearly

that we do face trade -offs.

We face some difficult choices.

We all know that more homes of all types and tenures,

homes for sale, homes for rent,

and yes, more council homes are required.

We have greenlit over 279 homes since May.

That will deliver new homes in Nine Elms,

Roehampton, and West Hill.

I'm sure the opposition would rightly tell me

that they started many of those, and I acknowledge that.

That's always the case, and frankly,

We need a more mature level of debate both in this chamber and outside it if one looks through example at the

502 homes built under the previous administration

Well, the Conservatives gave the go -ahead for a hundred and eighty eight of those

Yes, we have cancelled some projects since coming to office in the Fitzhugh for example 42 units over a major gas pipeline

Which was undeliverable I could go on but I went we've rehearsed the argument

about the Ashburton and others long enough.

But existing tenants and lease holders

and those that we have counselled

were getting disruption in the bill, but not much else.

Removing those sites bring together the total number

that is not now going ahead to 253.

I am not proposing that this administration will walk away

from the delivery of new build commissioned and paid for

by Wandsworth Council.

Nor will any administration of which I lead blindly chase housing numbers merely for the

sake of it.

That doesn't mean scrapping regeneration, quite the opposite.

Regeneration where it makes sense, creates better homes and neighbourhoods for the long

term, and some of that will go ahead.

It should also mean better land use and thus in the long term a higher level of new council

homes.

They will all, not all however, be for social rent.

We aren't walking away from social rent altogether

because I recognise that the grant regime

doesn't allow for that.

But people aspire to more than to simply rent

and where we can, we as an administration

ought to facilitate that.

I've yet to meet resident, even the most ideological

for a resident who aspires to rent rather than own.

None of this means imposing change.

It means having an honest conversation with residents

about what good housing should look like in the future.

That's warmer homes, lower bills, safer buildings,

better open spaces, more accessible homes,

and places where families can put down roots.

I'd characterised, and I'm sure some members opposite will think this is unfair, but that

the last four years primarily focused about new build over existing stock.

The aim ought not to be to just maintain what we've inherited, but to build the modern sustainable

council housing, one's its needs for the next generation.

That's why I'm keen to start a meaningful discussion, working across the chamber wherever

we can about how we create more homes and better homes for local people.

Recognising the trade -off between the two, the HRA, isn't infinite. We can only leverage

ones and in a choice between new build and existing stock, my preference will unashamedly

be that we focus on existing stock. And to do much of this, we need delivery partners.

My message to them is a simple one.

Wandsworth is open for business and open to growth.

I want a constructive relationship with developers, investors and regeneration partners

who share our ambition to deliver high quality homes, jobs and infrastructure for local people.

This administration is unapologetically pro -growth and pro -delivery

and we want to see the right developments come forward in the right places

supported by strong design, good infrastructure,

and community benefits.

We're committed to creating the conditions for investment

and providing clarity about our priorities.

You can't do that if you aren't prepared to sit down

and talk with people.

Our new developer forums, as I said to Councillor Barron,

are designed to do just that

with the first taking place next month.

Look, I cannot pretend there are not challenges.

There are many in this area

with items like temporary accommodation.

A detailed strategy has been prepared on that

and it will come forward in the coming months

in the normal way and I'm sure we will debate that

in this chamber and elsewhere quite vigorously.

But let me just draw to a close with a positive,

which I think is much needed

against a gloomy development picture.

I've tried to refrain from the debate

on the London Plan and other topics,

not least because I wanted to keep things

to what we here in Wandsworth can control.

And the positive I would end on is that

in state inspections have already returned

under this administration.

We've already done one in Wandsworth town

and we're now rolling out a schedule of visits.

The purpose of those visits is for counsellors of all parties

and officers to inspect the estates and share perspectives

and actions about how they can improve lives for residents.

Tonight we aren't going to solve the housing crisis, we all know that, but it is the start

of a debate I think we need to have about what good looks like, about what the trade -offs

may be, and ultimately about how we can afford it.

There will be much that we can agree on and much that we cannot.

That's healthy and I for one welcome it.

Thank you very much.

Thank you, since you're working now. Thank you, Councillor Moritz. I now invite the

leader of the opposition to respond. You have 11 minutes and 16 seconds.

Thank you, Madam Mayor. I can't see you anymore.

And your sticker is wonky apparently. I welcome the leader's statement, Madam Mayor, and his

genuine commitment to better housing in Wandsworth and really do welcome this as the start of

a new debate and as he says there are no endpoints on this,

there are only trade -offs and we look forward

to that discussion because we agree

that only the highest standards will do

for our leaseholders and tenants.

That culture change is crucial and that we must stand up

for our renters also because a good home

is the foundation of a fulfilled life.

We also agree that our regenerations

will transform life chances and that those council homes

at Bassey Power Station will help make that neighbourhood

a true part of our community.

I was grateful to Councillor Corner,

who took me on a walkabout

of the Winstanley Estate Project recently,

and to the leader for discussions in this area as well,

which we look forward to continuing.

He clearly has a deep expertise,

but also a care in the housing area.

There remain, however, differences of tactics

and of principle, and I'll set out Labour's record

on where we disagree with the Conservative vision.

And first, it is worth saying that we do seek consensus.

Some of these projects do take decades.

They span multiple administrations.

I think probably in year 15 of the Winstanley project,

I remember Councillor Govindia bringing the ward councillors

in early on that project.

That was appreciated and it's borne fruit.

And these obviously continue over,

span different administrations.

And as you note, investors also want certainty.

and Wandsworth politics has long been radical,

radical from the left and the right

and nowhere more in housing.

A century ago, Labour built the first council homes

built by directly employed Labour from the council.

Then 50 years later, the Conservatives

outsourced those services and sold off

half of our affordable homes to their tenants

and obviously as Councillor Morritt has described,

many people benefited, but I'm afraid

those homes were not replaced.

And the area has changed beyond recognition

and housing policy has probably had

as much to do with that as any other factor.

You know, homes which used to be occupied

by several families, one on each floor,

you don't know what you're gonna get

when you're canvassing, but they became one house again,

but are now split up and you'll have young renters

on each floor of it.

And even now, Battersea has not recovered.

With all its new building to the population level

that it had 100 years ago.

And that coal -fired power station

is now a very desirable place, a sought -after place,

for people to go and live.

And worth admitting that both labour and conservative

politicians over that period became too close to property

developers and their lobbyists.

And many of our neighbourhoods still

bear the scars of poor housing policy decisions.

And we can do better this time.

We agree on pro -growth.

We agree on delivery with community benefits,

and that is achieved by sitting down and talking to people.

The lessons we learned is whether you're public

or private developers, you can't just go into a neighbourhood

and say this building's going here.

You have to sit down and explain what it's gonna achieve

for them all the way around.

Four years ago, the people of this borough elected

a labour council to make genuinely affordable homes

for local people our priority, and we inherited

a waiting list already in the thousands,

thousands of children in temporary accommodation and a thousand homes

programme that would have put fewer than half those homes at council rent. Thanks

to Councillor de Kedem's leadership we flipped that programme so public land would

deliver council homes for local people and it's been incredible to meet the

families who've moved into those homes and it's transformed their lives because

you get to see what a secure warm home to call your own does for your sense of

We redesigned the Alton regeneration, made it a renewal plan so regeneration means more affordable homes not fewer but crucially, a full place plan with transport green spaces employment and community facilities at its heart, and it received a resounding

yes in Britain's biggest ever estate regeneration ballot.

Councillor De Kedem launched landlord licencing and then extending it.

I do think stopping now is a mistake, but clearly that's a discussion we're going to continue.

We lengthened interest -free repayments for leaseholders from 10 months to 4 years,

but completely accept there's more we need to do for our leaseholders,

many of whom really are caught in a cost -of -living crisis.

And yes, when the regulator found serious failings in the service,

that tenants actually live with day by day, we did not deny it.

We've initiated the housing improvement plan that now has cross -party support.

So that's our record.

Public land used for public good, support for renters, help for leaseholders,

no special favours for property developers,

and always willing to stand up for local people against powerful interests.

As always, it's unfinished.

There were challenges.

We faced extraordinary inflation following the invasion of Ukraine,

lack of skills post -Brexit, the end of low interest rates,

and now regular couples simply can't afford the mortgage

to buy those flats that are being built along the riverside.

And that takes us to the last four months.

So the Conservative administration

has cancelled five housing schemes,

and that means hundreds of planned council homes

on Ashburton, the Lennox, Fitzhugh,

Tynum Close, and Lavender Hill.

And that means hundreds of families waiting longer,

some were dreadful overcrowding.

We all know parents sleeping in the front room,

teenagers sharing rooms with nowhere to study

for their GCSEs.

And we're saying all of those homes were taken

out of the programme outside, the usual committee cycle.

Even on our most controversial schemes,

we went through round after round of consultation.

Residents were heard, often at length,

sometimes at the cost of delay.

So where is the democratic say now?

and we do want actually written statements

to be provided to this chamber,

but also written explanations of when decisions happen,

because you can have three or four housing

or transport cabinet members talking to officers

across a six month period,

so we need to be clear where the decisions are made.

I know Councillor Apps was disappointed

when letters went out cancelling a scheme in her ward,

and she'd previously been told by the deputy leader

that these statements aren't making decisions,

that decisions will properly come through the system,

they'll be scrutinised,

that they'll happen in the normal way.

On maintenance, we welcome that there's now

cross -party support for the housing improvement plan

that we initiated after the regulator's judgement,

and that plan is how we get regraded up.

Let's follow it, let's not water it down,

but even when we get a new grading, let's go beyond that,

keep that culture change going.

It's not what we would have done,

but we won't stand in the way of a new director of housing.

As you notice, it was in your manifesto.

It's the direction that you wanna go in,

and I know we can make that work.

I just note that the reason we went

for resident services before was because we felt

that would accelerate the culture change,

that housing shouldn't be seen to be off to one side.

It should have exactly the same brilliant customer service

and commitment to excellence and continual improvement

that the rest of the council has.

He raises the issue of new versus existing,

and I just say we don't really accept the false binary

between maintenance and new build.

We must do both.

The worst cases of mould, damp and disrepair in this borough

are often in those overcrowded tenants' homes,

and they're stuck in a transfer queue that barely moves.

I visited 16 -year -old Shanice,

who had a PIV ventilation added to their bedroom

to try and deal with the mould,

but they're sharing that room with two younger siblings.

We need the wider solution.

Six people in a two bedroom flat.

You can't repair your way out of a missing bedroom.

And you can't treat overcrowding as a decorating problem.

We need more homes and we need better homes.

And then as I say, there are private renters,

more than a third of people in the borough,

many people here.

And as I say, I think that the leader has some way

to go to prove that he's truly on their side.

The Renters' Rights Act, the biggest change to renters' rights in decades, came into force in May.

We haven't heard a huge amount from the administration on that.

You know, I spoke to Tom on the doorstep.

He told me his rent had gone up again this year by 14 percent, his salary only by 4 percent.

You know, will he be able to contact a council tribunal team who will be with him?

You know, we plan to set that up to help people get those claims in.

Visible support for tenants using the new rights act.

On temporary accommodation, I'd be grateful if he could be precise.

It was the Labour Council's policy not to place families outside London without their consent.

If that policy has changed, he should say so.

It's a great concern for local families.

But we do agree that the temporary accommodation system is broken,

that far too much money is paid to private landlords, sometimes for unsuitable homes.

We still have a housing crisis in Wandsworth and this council should have the ambition

and the self -confidence to make the difference and that nowhere is that more vital than in

Rough Sleeping. Hopefully he's seen the initiatives not just in the Mayor of London but now from

the Prime Minister. I hope we can all agree that we need to end this scourge of people

living and too often dying on the streets. I'd encourage all councillors to visit our

fantastic homeless hub on Lavender Hill,

where people who have been sleeping rough

are welcomed with wraparound services,

with compassion, and with a warm cup of tea.

How's it going, Madam Mayor?

All right, I'll do it.

Cool, so I'll just conclude by saying

the regulator was right to mark down the service

that we inherited and transformed too slowly,

but we're clear on our vision.

But more council homes, renters rights, an end to rough sleeping and an improvement plan written with tenants in the room.

The Conservative vision is, I don't think they'll argue, narrower. They have cut council homes.

They are just more keen to leave renters to the mercy of the market. And I need to be reassured that they don't want to push lower income families out of London.

We will support every home that gets built, we'll support every repair that's done properly,

and we'll support the improvement plan that we helped to right, but we won't support a housing policy that cuts council homes,

ignores renters, and then wonders why the housing crisis does not improve. Thank you.

Thank you, Councillor Hogg. I now invite the leader of the council to exercise the right of reply. You have up to five minutes. Thank you, Councillor Morritt.

Thank you madam mayor hopefully I'll try and be brief briefer than

Five minutes. Let me try and take these in

Some kind of order in which he raised them. I do accept what councillor hog says

the failure to build

sufficient

homes over decades and it's not just a conservative failure, but a

National failure that applied to the Blair government for example

has generated significant long -term problems

that everyone is dealing with and facing

in the form of higher rents.

I think if you constrain supply,

it's inevitable you're going to face some of that.

So I think that'd be much between us,

which we agree on on all sides.

I would draw a distinction, however, with him

without wishing to rehearse it.

He says that residents were heard

that's not my experience of how people on the Lennox or the Fitzhugh or the

Ashburton

Felt they might have been heard the sure as hell weren't listened to

And that's why we made a and it shouldn't come as a surprise to anyone that we got rid of those schemes with a clear

manifesto commitment to do so and

and cabinet made that decision.

And as he knows, we under the new system

facilitated him coming and making representations

so that there was genuine debate

rather than just a straight up and down vote.

I do agree with him very, very much

about the point about culture.

I do think it is a challenge for all of us,

and I'm sure we all recognise this in our inboxes,

that we see our tenants and leaseholders treated in a better,

and I'm going to choose my words carefully here,

sometimes less dismissive manner.

That's not how I think I would wish to be spoken to.

It's not how I think people in this room

would wish to be spoken to at times,

and that is something that must carry across to all of us.

And I know that's something that both senior officers

and Councillor Corner recognises,

and that's going to be a journey rather than an event.

But we're determined to push forward with that,

and the new ED is a big part of that.

I would say that Councillor Hogg looks through

somewhat rose -tinted spectacles,

and I'm sure I'm the same in reverse about some things.

But when he talks about overcrowding and everything else,

One would assume that of that 502 units that they built,

that there were a giant number of family homes that

would actually do something to alleviate that overcrowding.

I just look at the 111 units, and I

don't have the figures for the whole 502,

but I regret now not asking.

I do, however, know the numbers for the Ashburton incredibly

well.

And I think I'm right in saying that 86 % of those units

were one and two beds.

I have great sympathy for the anecdotal storeys

that he told, but frankly, one and two beds

are not going to remove that problem of overcrowding.

I would just end on the point,

because he asked a direct question

about temporary accommodation.

The strategy hasn't been written yet.

We have got some very good new joiners joining the team

who are real specialists in this area.

I think that's great because we all know

that the temporary accommodation bill this council faces

is totally unsustainable and therefore

we need a new strategy given it's not written.

I can't make any promises.

But what I can promise is we'll come back here

and we will debate it at the appropriate way

and it will go through the appropriate channels

of precision scrutiny at the OSC and cabinet

and full council accordingly as it is needed.

And I very much hope we'll be able to do that at PACE

and before Christmas so that we can have the type of debate

he was saying and I welcome the manner in which he responded

because I do think there is a lot of difference between us

but there is also in things like culture

a huge amount of commonality.

Thank you, Councillor Moritz.

I now invite members to ask questions.

Please indicate that you wish to speak by standing

or if you are unable, by raising your hand

and I will call you.

Councillor Dickard.

Thank you and I hope you allow me to say

that there was actually a lot in there that I agree with,

which I think is important to say.

If I outline your position, can I just briefly,

because I think it's worth doing,

is that there might be some expansion of regen in,

because there wasn't a lot of detail,

but we can talk about it later at housing committees.

But your position was to continue

with the housing improvement plan,

but slightly leaning towards a stronger capital programme

on major works and repairs.

And I look forward to the detail on that.

Because we haven't had any detail,

the last housing committee was in January,

it's really difficult to get into the nitty gritty,

and I think the nitty gritty is important.

Can I just get clarification

that the new homes coming forward on Platt, Auburn Square and Tolland, because I saw a

video come out about it, we learn things through video now, that they're going to remain 100 %

council housing as was previously planned. And that will happen with the existing schemes

in the pipeline. And can I also just get a commitment that we're going to stick to the

local lettings plan, because that local lettings plan was really important.

Can you wind up, Councillor Dickard? It was really important for trust and for

making sure those who overcrowded existing tenants got the move and there was fairness

in the system

Thank You cancer ticket him council March

Thank you. I'm slightly worried if we agree too much. I'm sure you would be too

Those two things and Tolan Square and the plot are

complicated not least because of the position and the plot of the

contractor

And I'm happy to update you outside this chamber

About that we'll keep them under review were we to change them as you know, we'd have to bring it back in the normal

way to do so and

Very happy to have a broader conversation and potentially come and talk to

You and colleagues at the housing OSD about some of that detail as well

Thank You cancer marriage cancer parent

I'd like to thank the Leader and the Leader of the Opposition for the tone of this statement.

It's good to see the agreement in the room and constructive issues raised.

Could the Leader outline what the Council is doing to ensure leaseholders have a strong

and effective voice on issues relating to their homes?

Thank you, Councillor Barron.

Councillor Moritz?

Thank you, Councillor Barron.

I personally believe and the papers that come forward to the housing our CN else that will reflect this that we need a

Lease hold a forum. I do think that we cannot simply assume that these holders and tenants

Have the same interests they do share many

co -joined interests about grounds maintenance or other stuff

But given the nature and age of our stock leaseholders in particular face increasingly large

Bills that are going to be difficult to repair

and pay

And therefore it makes sense to look at them slightly differently. I I do hope more broadly on this area. We can forge a

Better consensus about what works in terms of our housing oversight. I

housing area panel that sometimes they are not always the most effective use of either

member or officer time. And that's something that we'll try and have, I hope, a genuine

cross -party conversation about.

Can you wind up, Councillor Moritz?

And see what we can do on that front.

Thank you, Councillor Moritz. Councillor S Davis.

Hello, thank you. Councillor Moritz, I'd like to know if you know about the level of upset

and anxiety that's being caused by the letter that was sent out to those currently living

in temporary accommodation about what to expect and just mentioning the private rented sector.

You know, there's no indication about when, why, how, you know, and you said that this

strategy isn't developed yet, but it does look like it's started to be implemented and

obviously that's a little bit concerning with the lack of, you know, as we heard, you know,

there's been no housing OSC since January.

We did get an email about it, but no briefing.

And I've got a lot of people in my ward,

and my colleagues do as well,

who are very, very upset and zeros.

Thank you.

Thank you, and I'm really sorry to hear that

if they are upset and concerned.

Councillor Coyle and I can arrange

that you have the appropriate briefing.

The changes that have been communicated

are, I believe, and I've not seen the letter,

but I will cheque it tomorrow when I'm in the office,

reflect the changes that came to cabinet

at the end of July.

So those are the changes that we have brought to cabinet

in the normal manner, and there was an opportunity

for discussion, and in fairness,

Councillor Hawke made many of the points

that I'm sure that you would do in respect of that.

But in that sense, that is what I hope has been communicated,

and I don't believe we've gone further.

I would be surprised if we have done so.

Sorry, Councillor Grinsden, I have to have a question

from the administration.

And if there isn't, then that's it.

I'd be very grateful if Councillor Grimston was allowed a question.

That is my question.

There we are. We'll just do it. Thank you.

I must say I hadn't realised that was one of the consequences of the changes.

Cassette's the leader.

There is lovely, over the last couple of days,

I've been talking to a lovely 86 -year -old man in my ward.

He's lived in his property for 47 years.

His wife passed away a couple of years ago

and is, in effect, made now as a shrine to her.

He received an extremely harshly worded letter last week

telling him that he would be evicted from this house

because he was overoccupying, which indeed he is.

Now, I talked to the department today,

and what came back was actually even more shocking

and I was saying, no, we don't intend to.

The victim we realise is in that situation.

There is a callousness sometimes about the communication

between the council and potentially vulnerable members

of our community here, which causes,

the level of distress caused by this elderly gentleman

was off the scale for something which was never gonna happen

in the first place.

So as part of any review of housing,

can we make sure that we look very, very carefully

and make sure that this sort of needless harm

that is being done to our residents is a thing of the past.

If Councillor Grimston would be so kind as to furnish me with the details,

I will personally write to that resident and apologise to them

because that is not the term we wish to set.

And it's something we will guard against going forward.

As I did say earlier, I do feel there is a cultural challenge

and rather sadly he's just found a perfect example of that.

Councillor Rigby.

Yeah, something else that I'd like you to look into please

is the way that when somebody is looking to

declare themselves homeless,

there seems to have been some changes to the website

where people have to go through lots of loops

and lots of asking of questions that then direct them to...

Sorry, you're shuffling plinths around.

What are you doing?

So yeah, there seems to have been some changes

to the website that make it sort of unnecessarily difficult

for somebody who's seeking help with a homeless situation.

So could you please take a look at that?

Yes, I'm very happy to.

If you want to drop me the exact URL, I'll look into it.

Councillor, Mrs Graham. Thank you.

Thank you, Madam Mayor. Antisocial behaviour is an absolute... it's dreadful in areas in

Wandsworth and on our housing estate we do have it in areas and also people who are living

on in the flats as well.

What will be our actions on this going forward

as regards to this ASB?

Thank you, Councillor Graham, for your question.

I do appreciate that there is a genuine problem with ASB.

We've all seen it when we've been out talking to residents,

canvassing, or whatnot.

I do think with the way that Councillor de la Sejour

is moving forward with policing and enforcement

and the idea of co -locating people together

when that finally happens later this autumn,

that will help on some of this.

It won't eradicate it, but it would be a better,

more efficient use of our existing resources,

and that is super important.

And I also think we have to hold the Met's feet

to the fire on this.

It is not, we have to recognise where the boundary lies.

It is not for the council, as paternalistic as we may wish

to be, to do everything.

We can't.

In some of these cases, I had a very awful case

on the plat recently where, frankly, the police

were not doing enough to protect other tenants.

And that is just as important.

It is not all for us.

Thank you, Councillor Moritz.

Councillor White, thank you.

Thank you, Lady Mayor. My question is around treating council tenants with respect, which

you referred to, because I know our manifesto promise of same -day sweep will be rolled out

at the end of the month, which is good news, but not on council estates. How will this

council ensure council estate tenants will not experience a two -tier, second -class cleaning

service?

Thank you, Councillor White -Clint Simmer. I don't understand, and this is definitely

true of my street. In some places, it doesn't need a blanket. We want to do it all universally.

The street cleaning at the end of there should be driven by the needs. In some cases, that

might mean that actually they need to be cleaned more than once a street, or more than once

week rather and ultimately what Councillor White will see coming forward

to OSCs and stuff this autumn. Let's face it too many of our streets including our

estates are dirty they're below the standard I think our residents have got

a right to respect the measures that Councillor Brooks are bringing forward

more broadly will help that and we will also try and take that where it's

appropriate to do so on the estates as well. Thank you, Councillor.

Councillor Humphries. Thank you, Madam Mayor. Would the leader

agree with me as a principle that this council should have absolutely no forms at all when

it comes to spending the housing resources, that we should prioritise our existing tenants

and leaseholders over new build, because those are the people that are paid into the borough

and lived and work in the borough,

and we have primary priorities to look after them first,

and I see absolutely no reason why that shouldn't be

something that's agreed by all of us.

Yes, I wholeheartedly agree.

These are the people, the HRA at the end of the day,

that money is built up on the back of what tenants

and leaseholders have chipped in year after year after year

and it's right that they are the focus

of much of our programme going forward.

Thank you.

Councillor Worrell, I think I'll take you

as the last question.

Thank you.

Thank you, Madam Mayor.

I just want to return to a statement

about people in temporary accommodation

and moving out of London.

People in TA are often vulnerable

and often suffer from comorbidities

and need their local support networks.

Will the leader commit to keeping people within London

rather than dispersing them around the country?

As I've already said, until we've written the strategy,

I can't commit to anything in this regard.

And between now and Christmas, we will bring

that strategy forward and it will answer his question.

That is not to say we are definitely going

to do what he is suggesting.

I think he makes some valid points.

But until the strategy is written, it would be rather foolish

of me to make commitments in any respect.

Thank you members. That concludes questioning on the statement.

Ah, Councillor Rigby. Yes, I'd like to commend this statement to

the Council, please. Yeah, Councillor Rigby, you're moving that

the statement be commended to the Council. This does not require a seconder on this,

but directly to the vote without debate. The motion is that the statement be commended

to the Council. Those in favour, please raise your hand.

It's unanimous. Thank you.

Item 6 is questions to the cabinet member. Cabinet members, sorry. I will briefly explain

the new procedure. The relevant cabinet member will answer each question and the Councillor

who submitted it may then ask one supplementary question. Supplementary questions must take

less than 30 seconds.

I ask members and cabinet members to be concise

so that the published questions can be reached.

First question on school uniform vouchers,

Councillor Gasser to Councillor George Correlli,

cabinet member for children, thank you.

Thank you very much, Madam Mayor.

I'd like to ask the cabinet member,

how many families were affected

by not receiving school uniform vouchers this year?

How many took part in the well -meaning

but inadequate alternative scheme and how many received nothing when the scheme ran out?

Can I thank Councillor Gasser for her question? I understand that the start of the academic year can be particularly challenging for

families, not just families who are on low incomes, but all families when it comes to buying new school uniforms.

It is a financial struggle. In Wandsworth,

want to ensure that support is given to the families in our borough who are most in need

of that assistance. Can I say that the question that you've asked appears to contain a misinterpretation

of the scheme because it's important to clarify that none of the uniforms that are being given

out are actually secondhand. They're not. Well send me an email on that because the

uniforms that were given out through the scheme are new uniforms and let me explain how that

works because donate to educate is source volumes of brand new,

unbranded school uniforms, including shirts,

polo shirts, trousers, skirts, pinafores, jumpers,

all the essential uniform items that are required.

And the essential retail value of those uniforms that is

supplied is around 150 ,000 pounds.

Can I just point out as well that the point that you've

said that the scheme has run out, it hasn't run out.

It's still actually ongoing as is.

Can you wind up now please, Councillor Crivelli?

Well, it's still ongoing.

Can I point out to you, seeing that families

are a disadvantage, they're not.

Because the new scheme, there hasn't been any change

to the eligibility criteria.

It's in our intention to target the free uniforms

at the same families that were eligible under the voucher

scheme.

The new scheme is a new scheme that's

been successful in supplying new uniforms to families in need.

Can you wind up please, Councillor Crivelli?

We're hopeful that a new Pan -London support programme for new uniforms will be developed

on a Pan -London basis next year and Wandsworth are going to give our support to developing

that scheme.

Thank you, Councillor Crivelli. It would be appreciated if members don't interrupt because

I had to give Councillor Crivelli some more time then. Thank you very much.

Supplementary Councillor Gasser, thank you.

Yes, thank you. I mean, you are misinformed because it did run out, that's absolutely

the truth, and some people did get uniforms with name labels in, somebody else's name

tag, so that's second hand. So have you got any idea how that makes some people feel?

I mean, I'm really glad that a lot of parents were happy, but there were a lot that weren't

as well. First, someone was ruined by food vouchers being counselled at very short notice

with nothing else put in place. Then, uniforms of vouchers were counselled with nothing else

put in place, which meant some parents had already scraped together the money to buy

uniform and then you announced this scheme and it was a lovely idea. And I thank the

officers that made it happen.

I thank all the volunteers and charities that made it happen.

But it didn't work in the implementation.

It ran out early.

People got a second hand.

Kathy Gassy, you have more than 30 seconds.

Can you ask the question, please?

Very humiliating and undignified.

And that's the last thing we want for parents.

So my question is, what are you going

to do to ensure that all families that

need help with uniformed costs receive

that help in a dignified way?

Can I say to you, as I said at the outset, the whole purpose behind the scheme is to

help those who are most in need. The examples that you've given about people getting secondhand

stuff, please email me about that because I want to look into it. That shouldn't be

happening. That's the statement of fact. The whole purpose is that it's new uniforms. They're

supposed to be brand new as well, for that matter. The whole way that the system works

is the eligible families were contacted

and invited to request uniform support.

Families provided sizing information

through the request process.

The requests are checked against eligibility data.

The scrubbery, the charity,

then prepares the individual uniform packs.

The uniform stock is distributed to the family hubs,

and then the family hub contact

the families to arrange collection.

So I think that for a new scheme,

certainly the way that it's worked is

we've managed to target support of the families who need it most, but if there are hiccups

or there are issues with it, please do let me know that because I want to make sure that

we iron out any problems with it to make sure that the families who are most in need are

supported through this programme.

Second supplementary.

Thank you, Councillor Crivelli. If members can keep it to questions rather than speeches,

thank you, Councillor Gusset, you've got the second supplementary.

Under the previous scheme, eligible parents received a voucher. They took this to the

and they received cash.

Can the cabinet members say if there was an assurance

that all of the money allocated through vouchers

was spent on uniforms?

Can I say that I'm not in a position to do that

because obviously what you do is you give the voucher

and we're operating on the basis of trust.

I would very much hope that no parents abused the system.

I would very much hope that parents realised the support that we were giving

and I know that probably the vast majority,

99 .9 % appearance in Wandsworth would have used that voucher because that's the whole

purpose behind the support. But the fact is the way that the new scheme works is give

your sizing details, eligibility criteria checked, and then you actually get the uniform.

So the situation is that the whole purpose behind the scheme is that if you need the

uniform you'll get it. It actually in effect corrects that flaw that you're talking about.

Thank you, Councillor Prevely. The second question on high e -bikes from Councillor

Mrs Hampton to Councillor Nicholas Austin, the cabinet member for Transport. Thank you,

Councillor Mrs Hampton. Dumping of e -bikes on our streets is something

that a lot of residents have come to me about and are very concerned about. Can I ask the

member if he could update us on what action is being taken. I thank Councillor

Hampton for her question. The council and e -bike operators all have a duty of care

to make sure that our highways are clear for both foot and road passengers

passenger traffic. That's why later next week at the EOC we will be bringing a

paper and e -bike chartered for discussion and for debate which will put in a new robust set of rules

for e -bike operators to operate under in the borough. We're also going to roll out more

parking bays in town centres in order to relieve the congestion and free -for -all parking

and we're also looking to bring in the finding service and removal service as well on top of that.

supplementary madam. Can I ask you exactly what sanctions we can all levy against linebikes?

There are two separate sanctions in place. One is under the memorandum of understanding

which will come in the paper and the second is under the Highways Act which is a dangerously

obstructing bike.

We're going to introduce the powers to remove those

within two hours, robustly and quickly.

I met with the bike operators last week

in order to put these proposals to them

and they are hopefully under understanding

that this is going to be a swift and robust process

if they do not follow it.

Oh, supplementary Councillor Rigby.

Yeah.

So, the bays are really good. And so the question is, and I hope we can work on this together,

there are barriers to putting the bays in, in that if residents on a street say, we don't

want a bay, then they don't get a bay. And it meant that sometimes where the bays are

really inconvenient, like four streets away from the station. So, would you consider sort

of reviewing the rules on how we actually put bays on because they are the answer to

this. Thank you.

I thank Councillor Ruby for her supplementary. We have currently taken a hybrid approach

to this along with conversations with Councillor Hedges as well, especially with regard to

women's safety, the safety of everybody. And we're taking a hybrid approach. So the bays

will be concentrated around busy town centre areas and stations and hotspot

areas. We'll be still still having a more free -flowing way of parking bikes in

residential areas not only to protect what they what Councillor Rigby is

saying but also to protect safety of the riders especially going home late at

night who may have to park a great distance from their residential address

and walk the rest of the way. We will constantly review it and in areas where

there may be more hot spots, but it's something I welcome across the chamber discussion about.

Thank you.

Councillor Givindji, Government Chief.

Thank you very much.

Will the cabinet member engage with TfL for TfL to free up its road space, particularly

near stations where these bays are probably more necessary and more useful and would alleviate

the problems on some neighbouring residential streets?

I thank Councillor Liguivindia for his question there. We currently have over 200 bays that

are in existence and we're planning another 200 bays currently. There are 20 to 30 bays

which we are waiting for permission from TfL on Red Routes. The offices are continuing

to press TfL for that approval so that we can move ahead with them on places like the

ward and in your ward. We do need that approval but we are doing everything we can to get

it as quickly as possible. Next question. The third question is on policing

from Councillor Henderson to Councillor Caroline de la Seugeot, the cabinet member for enforcement.

Councillor Henderson. Thank you, Madam Mayor. Could the cabinet

and please provide an update,

asked how many police officers have been recruited

since the announcement of the last council meeting

and where they have been deployed.

Thank you for your question.

We have entered into a positive discussion

as MOPAC and the Met Police.

I'm actually meeting the Met Police again tomorrow

about this.

There will be a full report coming to the OSCE

in the fifth of October,

where further details will be shared on our plans.

We are working with the Met Police to ensure that officers are recruited

and deployed as soon as practicable

and in accordance with both governance and contractual processes.

Supplementary Councillor Henderson.

Thank you Madam Mayor.

In order to end the Cabinet Member's response,

she must have some idea as to how much this is going to cost the Council,

also how it is going to be funded, and can she give cast iron guarantee that none of those officers will be

abstracted as contained in the Tory pledges? Thank you.

As noted in my initial comment, the full details will come to the OSC on the 1st of October.

You are a member of the OSC, so you will get a full report on that.

In terms of the abstractions question,

that would be in line with regular police standards

from that perspective,

but that is indeed being discussed with him.

Council Craig, Secretary.

Thank you, Madam Mayor.

Can the cabinet member give us an update

on the previous administration's manifesto commitments

to put more law enforcement officers on the street

and perhaps share with us

whether that pledge would be met by Labour

when she entered office earlier this year?

Thanks for that question.

I think on page 21 of the 2022 manifesto,

Labour promised, or quoted, said,

we will put more law enforcement officers on the streets.

I think that the main announcement Labour made

was that they hired three new community safety officers.

I think we all agree they did a great job,

but they're not enforcement officers.

In our 2026 manifesto, we made a very clear commitment

to recruit more police officers,

and within less than two months of being elected,

we've published plans to hire an additional 25

police officers for Wandsworth.

Discussions are underway, as I said in my original response,

and those officers will be deployed as soon as possible.

But I think more broadly, this administration

has demonstrated from day one

that community safety is a priority for us.

We have created a dedicated cabinet portfolio

for enforcement that is supported

by a new director of public protection

to drive this agenda forward.

And these changes reflect a determination

to put community safety at the heart of the council's work

and to ensure residents are more visible

and proactive response to crime and antisocial behaviour.

Thank you, Councillor de la Chéon.

Fourth question's on the closure of Albert Bridge.

Councillor C Davis to Councillor Nicholas Austin,

the cabinet member for transport.

The closure of Albert Bridge by Kensington and Chelsea

for safety reasons, has exasperated traffic

in my and other wards.

Can the cabinet member describe the work we are doing

to tackle traffic in the area

and to hold both K and C and TFL to account?

So I thank Councillor Davies for her question.

Myself and officers are in regular contact with TFL

and with Kensington and Chelsea Council

in order to review these changes,

in order to reduce these changes

and make sure they're kept up to date.

We've got a new set of adjustments going in

later this month between Battersea Bridge Road

and West Bridge Road, Albert Bridge Road

and Prince of Wales Drive,

Battersea Bridge Road and Battersea Park Road.

And we've got further adjustments taking place

on the Chaney Walk and end of Battersea Bridge as well

with the traffic light signalling there among others.

Of course, talking of TfL, who of course own other nearby and impacted bridges such as

Battersea Bridge and Hammersmith Bridge, what actions is this administration taking to hold

TfL even more to account? I thank the Councillor for her supplementary

that. As you know, a lot of bridges in London are suffering significantly wear and tear.

We've had Hammersmith Bridge shut now since 2019. We've got a weight restriction on Vauxhall Bridge

and we've also got Albert Bridge closed. Myself and the leader recently supported a major

structures fund bid on Albert Bridge and on Vauxhall Bridge in order to get them back up

and running as quickly as possible.

We didn't support Hammersmith Bridge

and the reason we didn't support that

is that we will not support any bid

that does not open Hammersmith Bridge

to all forms of vehicle and traffic.

I do think that TfL need to look closely now

at bringing all of London Bridge's under TfL control

in order to solve this issue.

Thank you, Councillor Austin.

The fifth question is on green spaces during extreme heat.

Councillor Glynn to Councillor Ethan Brooks, the cabinet member for Environment.

Thank you.

What steps did the cabinet member take in response to this summer's extreme heat that

left our parks and green spaces dusty, dry and yellowed and how will he ensure our green

spaces are resilient in future?

Thank you, Councillor Corner. It occurred to me when the leader was speaking about the

rainy day funds that no Councillor perhaps has spent the summer hoping for rain more

than me. But as you and I were walking alongside Wandsworth Park at the weekend, it is less

of a savannah than it has been through the summer. Our focus is on making our parks and

space is more resilient to hotter, drier summers. This includes sourcing trees from nurseries

in the South East so they're better adapted to local conditions, selecting more resilient

species in increasing tree canopy cover, supporting drought tolerant planting, sustainable drainage,

meadow and biodiversity management. During periods of heat and drought, we also use council

communications and park signage to warn residents about fire risk and encourage safe, responsible

use of our parks. This summer's extreme heat had a very visible impact, you're right, with

many grassy areas becoming dry, dusty and yellow, just seen across London. In prolonged

drought established grass is not routinely watered. Where watering has taken place it

has been limited and targeted many young trees, newly planted areas and vulnerable planting,

but cannot fully offset exceptional heat and prolonged lack of rainfall. Thank you.

Thank You cancer Brooks up first supplementaries for cancer Glen the

Blue House the question thinking it's clear the climate crisis is already

affecting Wandsworth so will the cabinet member confirm whether the current

administration will continue the commitment to become a carbon -neutral

council by 2030 and a net zero borrow by 2043 thank you for the question we have

have not decided to abandon those pledges,

either the carbon neutral pledge by 2030

or the carbon net zero commitment by 2043.

Thank you, whoever that was helping me out.

So no, we're not abandoning those pledges.

The budgets for them remain and the teams remain.

So that is the answer.

Thank you very much.

Second summit of the Mancie Council, Mrs. Graham.

Thank you, Madam Mayor.

and this is to the cabinet member.

Yes, it has been a very, very hot summer we have had,

and I do commend the council's commitment

to keeping our trees watered to survive the summer,

but we also must thank all our volunteers

who have adopted so many trees within their streets.

What would his view be on that?

Thank you.

Thank you very much, Councillor Graham.

We do have provision for tree watering in the contract that was formed just before the council election.

That means that there is a rota for young trees in the first two years of their life to be watered.

However, I think it's plain given how many trees we lost this summer that that provision alone with the changing climate is not enough.

and we have been so lucky to have our many tree wardens

volunteering around the borough to keep our trees watered.

They were my first engagement as a cabinet member

for the environment, and I would like to put on record

this evening our great thanks for all their hard work.

Thank you.

Thank you, Councillor Brooks.

The time for questions to cabinet members has now finished.

Item seven is the statement on the spending review

by the Deputy Leader of the Council and Cabinet Member for Finance in accordance with Standing

Order 38. The procedure is the same as for the Statement on Housing. The Statement will

be followed by the Leader of the Opposition's response, a right of reply and questions from

Councillors. I now invite Councillor Peter Graham, Deputy Leader of the Council and Cabinet

Member for Finance to make the Statement on the Spending Review.

Thank you, Madam Mayor, and I'm glad to see the Leader of the Opposition return to his

place.

So, Madam Mayor, debate and scrutiny are only possible when those who are elected acknowledge

facts and value truth.

At the last Council meeting, I set out the figures contained in Labour's own budget from

February of this year.

The graphs in Brightside Magazine and once again tonight in the Marble Hall show Labour's

own figures.

Not mine, not new projections.

They show the budget gap that this administration inherited, the plans to borrow that we inherited,

the funding cuts that the government had already announced, and how the Council's reserves

were already running out.

These aren't just facts.

they are the opposition's own previously acknowledged facts.

It was the opposition that chose to set this year's budget

and chose to empty another 50 million from reserves

to fill their budget gap.

It was their decision to spend in total almost half

of the 206 million in usable reserves

that they had inherited from the last administration,

our administration that left in 2022.

And they spent most of those reserves

after they knew that their government

was going to remove 84 million pounds a year

from the council's funding.

The leader of the opposition produced and voted

for a budget which assumed that council tax

would increase by 21 and a half percent

over this council term.

I see people shaking their heads,

go and read your own budget papers.

Even then, even under that 21 and a half percent increase,

his own budget gap would have been over 160 million pounds

by 2030 -31.

In plain black and white,

Labor's budget showed that without tax increases,

the budget gap would reach 184 million pounds.

As we know, last time out, Councillor Hogg asserted

that he would find savings totalling £45 million a year.

If you believe that, as his budget, to be fair, did believe,

then do the maths.

184 minus 45 equals 139.

If you assume the tax increase, it's 164 minus 45 equals 119.

Either way, even $119 million is more in a single year

than the entirety of what is now left in reserves

after their spending sprees.

He produced and voted for that budget in February.

He vouched for the figures in that budget.

These basic facts should not be a matter for debate,

and I should not need to restate them now.

In other councils, including other labour councils,

and even some green ones, the financial reality

of the government's cuts is acknowledged.

Here, instead, we are faced with an extraordinary

combination of delusion and denial

on the opposition benches.

The final dissent into Councillor Hogg's

alternative universe began at our last meeting

when he claimed there was no financial crisis,

just a challenge.

Every financial difficulty can apparently,

and I quote,

be met with a growth, openness, and fresh talent mindset.

We are just seeing things the wrong way, Madam Mayor.

When we look in his budget and observe

that there's a gap larger than the council's

total expenditure on staffing,

it's a failure of mindset.

If only our heads, like his, were upside down

and buried in sand, reality would cease to matter.

The opposition claimed during this by -election many things,

and reality seemed to cease to matter altogether.

They claimed that the council's total usable reserves

were 673 million pounds.

An absolute refutation of that claim is on page 69

of paper 2663, the paper that they produced,

that he produced as leader.

The opposition claimed that the council has zero debt.

We inherited borrowing of 184 million pounds,

as is shown on pages four and 13 of paper 2664,

among others, the paper that they produced,

the paper that he produced as leader.

There's a reason that the UK Statistics Authority

wrote a formal warning letter to Councillor Hogg

back in March, but of course, other letters are now emerging.

Both in this chamber and on Labour's literature,

we have been accused of unnecessary, cruel,

and vindictive cuts, of being extreme people,

of pretending the council has run out of money

so they can bring in austerity policies.

In other words, not just being wrong, but being immoral.

The refutation is on all four pages of this letter,

dated the 15th of August, 2025,

a letter that Councillor Hogg wrote and signed.

He wrote that government cuts on this scale

will inevitably mean difficult decisions about services

and the income will be felt by all our residents,

especially those on lower incomes.

He begged the labour government to lengthen

the transition period to prevent a cliff edge

and give us time to adjust the changes,

avoiding a scenario of radical service cuts

and unintended impact on our residents.

His government didn't listen.

And then he told the world

that there was nothing to see here and no problem at all.

He said and kept repeating

that his group had not been asking for the power

to increase council tax beyond the referendum limit

and wouldn't be using it.

His group's manifesto said it again

and committed to the same low council tax.

There are only three possibilities after an outright lie

or just expecting us to win.

One, cuts far beyond those that we have been able to find

when in practise he still has spending commitments beyond those for which he budgeted.

Two, issuing a section 114 notice and letting the government,

his government appoint commissioners to take over the council and do it for him.

Three, applying for EFS, which stands for

Exceptional Financial Support.

EFS means being allowed to borrow to fill a budget gap.

First you burn through the reserves

and then you put it on the credit card,

hoping you can kick the can down the road for long enough

to make it somebody else's problem.

But there is a additional problem with that approach

beyond admitting the existence of a financial crisis

in the first place.

The government would have no reason to grant EFS.

Not only would it require a plan to stabilise the finances that

didn't exist, but the government has already

provided its alternative, the power

to make an unlimited increase in council tax.

We know the government's position.

The Labour government regards Wandsworth's previous funding

as, and I quote, a subsidy.

Indeed, Torsten Bell has gone further.

He was a treasury minister

when the funding settlement came out.

He was part of those discussions

and he describes the same plea

that featured in Councillor Hogg's letter as,

a moan about us reforming a Tory funding system

that let richer Wandsworth set artificially low council tax.

That is the Labour government's position.

That is their rejection of the opposition.

That is the measure of Councillor Hogg's complete

and abject failure when running this council.

And what we get isn't an apology.

What we get is a preposterous denial

of the most basic facts, a rejection of arithmetic,

a rejection of officer's professional advice,

even the rejection of his own words.

You can't talk about having values

until you value the truth.

It's actually more fundamental than that.

You have no genuine values unless you value the truth.

Councillor Hogg didn't just drive this council

towards financial bankruptcy, spending money,

as Councillor Grimston noted, like you were increasing

council tax by 15 % a year.

He has driven this borough's discourse

into a state of moral bankruptcy.

Madame Mayor, I now turn to the sorry and difficult task

of cleaning up their mess.

This administration inherited the largest government cuts,

the largest projected overspending,

and the largest predicted budget gap in Wandsworth's history.

When we published the initial report in July,

the scale of the financial challenge was clear.

This final report adds the additional demand

and inflationary pressures now facing the council.

After the diagnostic work

that the previous administration commissioned,

this amounts to an additional 31 million pounds.

Instead of 184 million, the budget gap

in four years is 215 million.

The consistent overspends seen

in the last four years, including an inherited in -year overspend that's now reached £7 million,

was the result of excluding those underlying demand pressures in the MTFS and budget figures.

Not only were those overspends predictable, but I predicted them myself when I was the

opposition speaker. We have revised down the figure that the Council was actually recommended

to adopt because we believe that the Council can get a better grip on demand. But £215

15 million is still a vast gap to fill. That is why we have attempted to do everything

possible. And there are three basic levers. The first is income, which we have sought

to maximise, where this doesn't have directly unacceptable implications for residents. Then

there is spending, which we have worked incredibly hard to reduce. And last, there is council

tax which has to pick up whatever is left.

This spending review sets challenging financial spending

envelopes for the next four financial years

across the key areas of spending.

We are doing everything we can to avoid relying on tax

and we will keep working for more savings

through the MTFS, the medium term financial strategy

that will flow out of the spending review.

I would like to thank officers and colleagues for all their hard work over the recent months.

The challenges ahead will require significant organisational change,

which the new chief executive has already signalled by announcing a return for all desk -based staff,

working for at least three days a week in Town Hall and other offices.

and indeed we want to give them an office and a town hall campus that is fit for purpose

and reflects the value we place on our staff.

Madame Mayor, we have had to take many difficult decisions, some of which were outlined in

my previous statement. For example, at that time, grants to charities through the Wandsworth

Grant Fund were suspended. I regret that this programme will remain suspended, although

we hope to resume it before the end of the council term.

This is one example among many where

we have had to break with our own past practise

to keep spending under control.

A different example, where instead we

have been forced to revert to previous norms,

is in reintroducing charging for bulky waste collections.

This, however, will pay by itself

for the improvements to street cleaning

that we announced in July.

But we have rejected Councillor Hogg's advocacy,

or previous advocacy, of radical service cuts.

Indeed, we cannot proceed down that path,

even if we wanted to.

We have already heard tonight about the problems

in the Council's housing service.

That requires investment, for example,

in a new executive director.

We cannot, at the same time,

if we wish to get the housing regulator standards back up,

a service that was failed on your watch,

we have to invest properly in that service and make it work.

We will also meet our promise on policing.

In fact, we will exceed the promise,

as I stated it in July, employing not just 24 officers,

but 25 officers.

After initial spending this year from ENSIL receipts,

This cost will be met from ordinary revenue budgets

Madam mayor we inherited plans to borrow over

1 .14 billion pounds

The actions we are setting out will not only reduce long -term borrowing over the next four years

But get that borrowing well below a billion pounds over the longer term

We also inherited reserves that are about to be exhausted altogether

That exposes the council to significant financial risk.

Unforeseen events, delays to savings, increases to costs,

all of these things require us to retain some reserves

or risk ending back in the crisis that we are working

so hard to remove the council from.

We therefore plan to stabilise the remaining reserves

at around 76 million pounds, far lower than we would prefer,

but enough to give credibility to our plan.

Madam Mayor, we have not merely sought efficiencies,

but to change some of the fundamental ways

in which the council functions,

while stopping some other discretionary activities

altogether.

Sadly, despite many difficult decisions, a budget gap

of this scale cannot be closed by savings and efficiencies alone.

Few would want to consider a substantial increase

in council tax.

For this conservative administration,

with a proud record of decades of careful financial management,

it is a last resort.

It is, quite frankly, not what any of us on this side

of the chamber entered politics to do.

We have been able to identify 79 million pounds

in net annual savings by 2030 -31.

This leaves a budget gap of 143 million pounds,

which at this stage can only be met through higher council tax.

This spending review therefore provides unequivocal evidence

that the council is being forced to increase tax,

and it forms a basis for a change

in the government's position.

We are formally challenging our funding settlement

and the limited transition period of three years.

the government can still reconsider its cuts

to the borough's funding.

However, unless they do,

Wandsworth Council tax will have to increase significantly.

There is only a two year window to make such an increase

and a two stage approach would leave no reserves at all

with the risk of the council falling back

into that position of crisis.

Therefore, at the same time

as challenging the government's cuts,

we unfortunately need to prepare residents for a single potential increase to their bills in April 2027.

Unless the government reconsiders its position, BAND -D bills will need to increase by £958 to £1 ,978.

That represents an increase of 94 % to total annual bills.

Individual bills will continue to vary according to bands, discounts, exceptions, premiums,

and the conservators levy in public.

This administration recognises the financial pressures

that many households already experience and extent

to which they are already taxed by other means.

Higher council tax will not be easy or welcome.

We do not regard it as fair and will continue to challenge the government by every possible means.

Residents can help us with that challenge

by responding to the consultation

that was launched in the last week or so.

The council will also write to every primary account holder

giving them advance notice of what will happen in April

unless the government thinks again.

This will include relevant links to the consultation

and advice on their household's bill.

Madam Mayor, I'm particularly concerned

about those on very low incomes.

For that reason, we intend to nearly double the support provided

through the council tax reduction scheme next year, slowing and phasing the impact

over the council term.

We will also expand eligibility for the scheme by including income bands that fall just outside

the current criteria.

Everyone of working age will pay something, but no one will be faced with a large one -off

increase to their bill.

Unfortunately, that scheme can only be expanded so far

without requiring a higher overall increase

in council tax.

We will be consulting on the details

of the proposed changes in the coming weeks.

The final spending review report will be published

and made available to members when I sit down.

But many aspects will also appear in greater detail

in reports of overview and scrutiny committees,

again, in the coming weeks.

This administration committed to being honest and transparent

about the council's finances.

It also committed to fixing them.

If the government refuses to act, a duty is placed on us.

It is our responsibility to balance the books.

We can choose to meet it or we can choose the kind

of reckless brazen denial that created this whole mess.

We can take difficult decisions or we can postpone.

We can be truthful with residents or we can obfuscate.

We choose to govern.

Thank you, Councillor Graham.

I now invite the leader of the opposition to respond.

You have exactly 20 minutes, thank you.

Thank you, Madam Mayor. Wandsworth Conservatives have decided to double your council tax. It's

outrageous, it is stunning. People who don't know how to run the council panicking and

making you pay the price. This increase is unfair, it's unnecessary and we oppose it

and as soon as we can, Labour will scrap it.

This is your choice.

This is your decision, and you need to own it.

This is a cruel and selfish and very political decision,

and you're seeking to blame everyone but yourselves.

And you have been dishonest.

Every single figure you've quoted tonight, as you accept,

was in the public domain.

It was available before May.

You had this information in front of you

when you wrote your manifesto, when you knocked on doors,

when we took part in hustings,

it is absolutely wrong that you've concealed your intention

to double council tax on local people.

This is being done with no mandate, with no scrutiny,

and you are not putting it to a referendum of local people.

This news will stun local families.

It is so unnecessary.

I will explain another way, our plan,

backed by our record of smart financial management.

But let's not lose sight of the fact that this is a product of Tory internal chaos.

A leader that lasted 44 days, a new leader who caused two cabinet resignations.

You lost the Trinity Ward by -election and you double cancel tax.

What are first hundred days? I mean, amateurs creating absolute chaos in our council.

Before I go into more detail, I'd like to emphasise a key point. This isn't over. This

isn't a done deal. I would encourage you to take part in our campaign to let them know

what you think of their plans. Send them a message they can't ignore.

I'll start by saying the obvious, which is you haven't listened. There was no listening.

There have been no scrutiny committees.

New councillors have had no opportunities to look at this in finance committee, to look

at the housing proposals in housing committee.

There have been no public meetings with the leader.

It's just been this sort of bunker mentality that leads to these bizarre decisions that

benefit the town hall blob, not local people.

No businesses would behave this way.

Your broadband, your supermarket wouldn't provide you with a worse service and then

more than double the cost of it. You, as local residents, are being made to pay for Tory party

politics. These decisions could have been different and they will be under a Labour council.

And just bear in mind, any one of you can stop this. You can save the Wandsworth Conservative

Party. I look forward to seeing how the vote goes after this debate. I look forward to see

how the votes go in future cabinet,

in future council meetings.

So let's look at the impact of this tax rise,

which to be clear is Britain's biggest ever

council tax increase.

Far too many local people already feel under pressure.

They are managing, but just one bill

can push you over the edge.

You know there's a lack of trust in politicians,

a feeling of a lack of control over people's own lives.

People want cost of living measures. They're hungry for them.

Like our Labour Council provided. Free books for local children. Free gym and swim. 50 % off council services.

And as we said time and time again, low council tax is the best and fairest cost of living measure of all.

It is right to keep this unfair, unpopular tax as low as we can.

I can't believe I'm having to tell you this, but I can exclusively reveal residents don't like paying high tax.

The low tax is a key part of Wandsworth life.

It is absolutely outrageous to behave the way you have during that election and then just tear it all up in year one, in

the first hundred days with no notice or consultation.

It is absolutely baked into Wandsworth life. Whether you're renting a house or buying it, you know it will be cheaper.

However, talking to local estate agents,

doubling council tax will take thousands of pounds

off the value of existing homeowners' properties.

And I wonder if people in Northcote and Wandsworth Common,

the high householder areas have thought through the impact

that that will have on their own voters.

And by the way, it's not just the most affluent.

I was talking to a Tory councillor recently

and she realised she lived in a band F property

and she realised too late,

well, I couldn't afford to pay that.

If you're more than doubling it for Band D,

if I'm in Band F, that's gonna be

a couple of grand a year more for me.

I can't possibly afford that.

And I think that's the thought process

that is currently happening in the minds

of many of your current voters.

Because people didn't vote for this,

not just if they read your manifesto,

because most people voted Labour,

or they voted Green, not for Tory,

austerity, emergency, and chaos.

And this is the classic right -wing playbook.

Declare an emergency, blame your opponents,

give yourself sweeping powers with no accountability,

declare something must be done,

and just hope that you get away with it.

Well, that's not gonna fool people in Wandsworth.

It's not what they voted for, and it's not what they want.

They expect us to drive every drop of efficiency

out of this council before we even think

of going back to them for more tax.

If you can't drive 10 % efficiency out of this council next year and 10 % out of it the year

after, you should be in a different business.

And we should always remember sound financial management is just the foundation to help

build a good life and a good community.

Those spreadsheets are not an end in themselves.

And now we turn to the issue of government funding.

I see you are complaining again to the government about the funding settlement that was closed

last year, the mansion tax announced last year, Harlan's goal on Saturday, the outcome

of Eurovision. I mean, your core skills are moaning about things, but now you're running

the council, you actually have to decide. You blame everyone but yourselves. Just do

your job. And your appeal to government to reopen the

funding settlement which concluded last year is a pointless blame game. You know it has

zero chance for success. He talks about tough choices. He talks about hard work and tough

choices. He isn't doing the hard work. He's not making the tough choices. This is a politician

pressing send on a bill to hard working families. They have to do the hard work. They have to

make the tough choices, go without a summer holiday, turn off the heating, go into more

debt, with the Tories safe in the knowledge that however angry you are, you can't have

any say on this for the next four years.

And that's the point.

This vast increase in year one, which no one told you about, is a purely political act.

Have a look.

They're not required for next year's budget.

They're pulling the old trick of a vast council tax increase in year one, so they can then

bribe you with your own money in year four.

It's outrageous and local people won't fall for it.

The head of a local school got in touch today to say

that the council have withdrawn funding for magic breakfast

for those incredible breakfasts that children,

particularly those who aren't getting food at home,

can have so they can study properly,

begin their school day with focus and dignity.

Children are going hungry.

We still have more than 100 million pounds in the bank.

Children are going hungry.

Is this why you became Conservative councillors?

Are you gambling everything on his version of events?

You're about to realise how local people feel about these issues.

Because you can pretend it's sensible or even tough,

but it just comes across as cruel and incompetent.

We know more than you about running this council.

We do actually know.

Well, we do.

We've been running it for the past four years,

where we set Britain's lowest council tax,

where we had the highest reserves of any neighbouring borough,

and we had zero external debt.

You've come back in with people who haven't served

in cabinet roles, some who haven't been on the council

for more than a decade, and frankly,

you've bought some of the stuff

that they were trying to sell to us.

What you have to do, you have to stand up for local people and say,

what is the outcome that that family that I spoke to on the weekend would actually want?

While they're trying to distract you with tales of me spending 600 pounds on writing paper,

back in the real world, the adult social care budget is once again so overspent

that as per our Constitution, a paper now has to be sent to committee to say

that it's more than a million pounds in year overspent.

You haven't got to grips on the absolute basics of controlling by far the largest budget within the council

And here you are punishing hungry children and withdrawing much -needed services

It is a tragedy as are tonight's cuts to the voluntary sector and to free bulky waste

You are offering just this diet of misery much worse services for much higher costs

I've no idea why you think just Councillor Graham reading stuff out in a slow creepy

voice is going to convince your residents that this is a really good deal.

Much worse services for much higher cost.

More than 20 ,000 people use that free bulky waste.

There's no chance that you don't know someone who likes that and values it and sees it as

a core part of why they even pay the council tax they currently pay.

Thousands of people will know those hardworking charity volunteers who are only getting 1 ,000

2 ,000, 3 ,000 pounds to actually help provide

those crucial support services in our community.

You'll be hearing from them soon as well.

So what's the alternative?

It is only fair that I outline our plan,

and to be clear, when Wandsworth Labour

regains control of the council,

we will of course stick to our manifesto pledge

to not increase council tax above the 5 % referendum limit.

We carefully costed this plan and it works,

and I want voters to understand,

Every time you vote from now on,

Wandsworth Tories doubled your council tax without asking you.

Wandsworth Labour promises to not increase it above that referendum limit 5 % a year.

Under Labour, we all recall, you paid the lowest council tax in the country

because value for money is at the heart of everything we do.

Wandsworth has some of the highest reserves and the lowest debt of any London borough.

This means we kept council tax low while continuing to invest in excellent services.

Both parties had the figures and saw this coming. We put together a plan that protects local people

and we were honest about it. They put together a secret plan to rinse local people and they

misled you about it. The regular budget gap is comparable in size to what we inherited four

years ago. Every organisation in Britain will have a gap between income and expenditure,

That's just how inflation and future years works.

Councillor Ireland, who I would love to be speaking this evening,

but as Councillor Moritz says, that's not possible in this format that they keep using,

close that gap while protecting frontline services, and we would have done it again,

largely through the 45 million pounds of budget reductions,

which as Councillor Graham now admits, we had already planned out.

These did not involve any service cuts.

The 80 million fair funding budget reduction is clearly a serious challenge, but we have time.

We don't have to dive into this.

We have reserves, we have time that other councils do not.

The Tory plan is to cover this loss

with massive immediate tax increases.

They're front loading a massive council tax increase.

We would do pretty much the opposite.

We would take several years to adjust the council

to its new funding without hitting local people

with large tax increases.

We would cut temporary accommodation payments

to private landlords significantly through reform, reduce duplication within the Council's

corporate services, modernise other services, deepening the successful partnership with

Richmond and we would increase Council tax by up to 5 % a year as we said in our manifesto.

So by the time you have used part of the reserves to smooth the journey, you are almost at that

new level of funding.

We would have used those three years to reform and to streamline the Council to be a more

effective digital council? How can we be talking about this and still pretend that any workplace

in Britain in four or five years' time in the age of artificial intelligence will look

anything like it does now? This is 1970s central planning.

Things change. The Prime Minister is looking at major reforms to adult social care that

may partly or fully relieve the Council of Responsibilities for its biggest single budget

item. It's also possible in time council tax will be reformed and there are proposals out

there already. So our position remains the same. No council tax increase beyond 5 % on

this dreadfully unfair tax and we will drive every drop of efficiency. It is politically

motivated madness to double council tax now. Thank you. Residents do expect us to try harder.

that you've tried absolutely nothing and given up

and said, right, we'll whack it onto your tax bill.

Why on earth should a child miss out

on all her after school clubs next year

while the corporate core of Wandsworth

is roughly double the size of the average London council?

Councillor Grimston was sharing with me the other day,

I'll get this wrong, but it was a quote

from former Councillor Heaster along the lines that,

the council is here to provide services to local people.

Local people aren't here to provide a living to the council.

and we should bear that in mind and cut our cloth accordingly, because this leadership is just too weak to take on vested interests.

It's too divided to bring people together and it's too insular to make the creative partnerships that really generate value with Apple, with Dolly Parton, with Parkrun.

And it's too ideologically blinkered to properly work with the Mayor of London and the government to secure extra funding.

Which, to conclude, brings us back to the politics.

Wandsworth Labour is clear and united.

Wandsworth Tories are a shambles.

Maybe Wandsworth Conservatives never actually knew how to run a council.

Maybe they were just always lucky welfare recipients.

Certainly any knowledge about how to radically reform a council has left the building long

ago.

And, yeah, this decision is the end of the Wandsworth Tories.

It completely misunderstands voters.

Ads did, ending our status as a borough sanctuary

for refugees, not supporting net zero by 2030,

sending children to school, hungry.

I mean, do you even like the people of Wandsworth?

Do you even listen to the people

that you're making decisions on behalf of?

You're not listening to them,

and I'm afraid they will now not listen to you.

Any conversation you want to start about social housing

or about children's services will now be drowned out.

And this is the sort of council you get when you have people stuck in the town hall looking

at spreadsheets.

No human feel, no vision, and no optimism.

So as I say, this is your decision.

You need to own it.

You need to go out there and sell it.

And I know you want to make this a national storey about the government, but this is a

local storey.

It's a local storey about parents who can't afford the summer holiday next year.

Well, they can't afford a new pair of shoes for their children.

And it's the storey of another set of politicians misleading the public to get power

and then betraying their trust on the central issue of the election.

And we know your values because we know your record.

The last time you ran the council, you sold off half the affordable housing,

you cancelled Black History Month, and you tried to charge children 2 pounds 50

to use a playground.

You love attention.

Well, now you've got it.

The whole country will be looking at you tomorrow.

Wandsworth was held up as a model local authority.

Now we're under the spotlight for a chaotic administration

of Tory boys fighting each other, doubling council tax,

and blaming everyone but themselves.

This is a sad day.

This is a shocking move.

It is dishonest, and it is incompetent.

But this isn't over.

Please join the campaign.

Please sign the petition, email their councillors to let them know the impact

this has on your lives. You can change this, don't let them double your council

tax.

Thank you Councillor Hogg. I now invite Councillor Graham to exercise the right

of reply. You have up to five minutes Councillor Graham. After that I'm not sure

whether we should laugh or cry, but mostly I think residents should feel disgusted by

that performance. I will judge Councillor Hogg on the difference

between what he says in private when he thinks no one is looking and is not responding for

over a year to an FOI request, and what he says in public. In private, he admitted that

the impact of these government cuts will be felt by all our residents, especially on lower

incomes in private.

These are his words.

This is his letter.

Is he claiming he didn't write it or sign it?

This is his words.

He said the government would leave no alternative but

radical service cuts.

Now he pretends nothing is required at all.

There's no support for challenging his government,

which he failed to do in public, just hire a lobbyist that

cost tens of thousands of pounds to fail

to do properly in private.

Nothing.

So it's a tale on his telling of two manifestos.

Well, I'm not sure he read ours

because its first point was fixing the financial crisis.

It spent most of its pages spelling out the problems

facing this council, admitting the things

that he pretended didn't exist at all.

Our manifesto was precise and clear

about the difficulties that were being faced

and the scale of the challenge, his pretended it didn't exist.

He's still saying that under a Labour administration,

they wouldn't need to increase tax,

that they would reverse in its entirety this increase in tax.

From what?

He admitted for a moment that the numbers were out there.

What he says does not make the first bit

of arithmetical or any other sense on those very numbers.

He said it costed it.

We heard that he said it costed it.

Show us the costings.

It's not in any council document.

It's not in any document you provided to anyone else to cheque,

and I don't believe that document exists.

And if it does exist, if you seriously believe

that you're interested in what's good for the residents of this borough,

bring it to us.

If you've got some idea we've missed, we'll implement it.

But if you don't, it shows what you really are.

But I think we already knew that.

Denial is, as you will know, Madame Mayor,

just the first of the five stages of growth.

I'm not sure when we will see angering,

bargaining, and depression,

but acceptance will be when he finally leaves politics

in this borough to adults.

He made many claims.

I don't have time to go all through his claims,

But the fact is he is out on a limb even with his own party

I can tell him now H &F labour aren't going to be cutting Hammersmith and Fulham's reserves in the reckless way

He advocates here. No other council will do what he advocates here

Yeah, he talked about the by -election

Well, frankly, he said these things on doorsteps when he was claiming 160 percent

Thanks, something he had no evidence for and our vote share went up by eight points

But most of all, he says we have done nothing.

We did no work.

We found 79 million pounds a year.

Actually almost as much as the 84 million

his government is cutting,

but presumably he's going to refuse

to help us get that money back from.

His argument does not make sense.

He says that we want to cut spending unnecessarily

and increase tax unnecessarily,

which would produce a surplus.

There is no surplus.

If tax rises above 5 % are not needed,

then rather than a balance of zero in 2030 -31,

we would have a surplus of tens of millions of pounds.

And not just that year, but in every year,

hundreds of millions of pounds would be missing.

So should we expect the full inquiry at Audit Committee?

Should we expect them to be providing their evidence

to our external accountants?

Should we frankly expect prosecutions?

Because that is what would follow

if hundreds of millions were missing in that respect.

And the answer is of course we shouldn't,

because he is making it up.

It is an absolutely disgraceful denial of the reality,

an abjication of his responsibility

as an elected Councillor and Representative.

It is toxic. It is the toxicity he created and the sooner he and this brand of politics is gone, the better off everyone in this borough will be.

Thank you, Councillor Graham. I now invite members to ask questions. Please indicate that you wish to speak by standing or if you are unable, by raising your hand and I will call you.

Councillor Gather.

Well, I've been a counsellor a long time and I'm as depressed now as I ever have been.

One of your speeches, that's one of the nastiest speeches I've ever heard. You are cruelly

cutting vital services. It's cruel what you're doing. And then you are whacking up the council

tax. It's not necessary. We did have a plan. We could have done it with compassion and

fairness. I dare you do this. Anyway, I have a question for you. I can hardly speak. I'm

upset by what you're doing. It is the worst council meeting I've ever ever been to.

You are still the nasty party, you really are.

So my question to you is, what's your advice for ones worth families?

They've got a huge council tax hike on top of a cost of living crisis,

on top of energy bills going right up, on top of exorbitant rents across London,

cuts to breakfast clubs. You cut the breakfast clubs, that wasn't necessary.

The government's about to fund them all. You could have carried on funding them

until the government does.

You cut in food and uniform support,

you cut access for all, you cut in bulky waste,

which is a lovely thing for families.

It's all just horrible.

What are you going to advise families?

How are you gonna tell a parent?

How are they gonna manage?

What is your advice?

How is a parent gonna manage in the next four years?

Thank you, Councillor Gasser, Councillor Graham.

My first advice to Wandsworth families

would be to respond to our consultations

so we can mount the evidence we need

to challenge this government's decisions,

something her administration completely failed to do.

In some parts, she answers her own questions.

She asks why school breakfast schemes are disappearing.

It's because they are moving to the national scheme,

and we request that transitional support be provided

where that was required.

She says there is a plan.

Has she seen the plan?

Did she see the costings that Councillor Hogg talked about?

No officer has seen any of these costings.

No one has seen this.

It is a figment of imagination.

And I'm sorry, we do not wish to be here doing these things.

We are not doing this from cruelty.

We are doing things that we do not wish to do

because we have to try to close the gap

and limit that council tax increase.

And even then, we are still,

if the government does not change its mind,

required to make a council tax that we think is unfair,

that is too large, that will have real world impacts,

but we are protecting those on the lowest incomes.

Thank you, Councillor Graham.

I've got Councillor Mission from the administration.

Thank you.

We have three MPs in Wandsworth, Labour MPs.

We have rightly launched a challenge to the government

on their cut of 40 % of our funding.

I know that the three Labour MPs have been invited

to support our challenge.

Would the cabinet member of finance be able to give us

what their response was?

Thank you.

Well, the first thing I should note is that one of those

three MPs voted for our funding to be cut

in the House of Commons, and the other two

absented themselves and weren't there.

Standing up for Wandsworth in exactly the manner

the Wandsworth Labour has demonstrated this evening.

I regret to inform councillors that the three MPs have responded and they have refused to

challenge the government, despite its position that our funding was a subsidy, despite their

position that our council tax is artificially low, they refuse to defend and fight for Wandsworth's

residents, just as you refuse to defend and fight for Wandsworth's residents.

Thank you, Councillor Graham. I've got Councillor Rigby next.

If the Trinity by -election was a pilot for this narrative, how did it go?

Well perhaps our next Deputy Leader would like to resign and tell us.

Councillor Murtagh.

Thank you Madam Mayor. Could you please remind us all the level of cuts for each year that

this government is making. Thank you.

It is as Councillor Morritt outlined and rises to £84 million a year before the end of this

financial term. That's £230 odd million I believe, trying to tot it up mentally over

the course of this term that is removed.

It is simply impossible to face that,

to face all of the other financial pressures

that they failed to resolve,

which is why they had this deficit of 50 million

in this financial year alone.

It is simply impossible to go as far as to close that gap.

But in fact, if it were, the government's 84 million alone,

we've found 79 million.

We'd have got close to it.

Unfortunately, it is in some sense a local matter.

The rest was on them.

Thank you, Councillor Graham. I've got Councillor Apps.

Has the deputy leader considered the need to spread the cost across the term that's

remaining rather than to throw families into financial difficulties with a sudden increase,

causing significant distress to many local people? I note that he's talked about changes

to the low -income group, but this is going to affect almost all families.

So can we confirm that that cost will be spread of the council tax increases?

So, we would like to spread the cost. The government has not spread the cuts.

We will act to spread...

No, over three years, which Councillor Hogg himself said was completely unacceptable

and isn't in any way comparable to previous changes of this kind ever in local government

finance.

It's not just me saying that, it's him saying that.

You said this.

We would dearly like to spread this.

The government has given us two years in which the referendum cap does not apply.

And you may think if you had such a plan, the government would not have given you that

freedom because you wouldn't have needed it.

Nevertheless, we can only do it over two years.

As I explained in my statement, that would mean the most we could phase the increase

was between this next budget and the one after, and that would be at the cost of emptying

out the remaining reserves without solving the problem, but giving us no ability to deal

with any deviation from the plan.

We believe we can deliver that 79 million, but things may go awry within delivering those

savings or it may take longer than we think.

We may also face external events.

We've seen in recent years a pandemic, all sorts of things happen that were not expected.

We have seen inflation increasing substantially in recent times, which is why we have had

to increase the amounts given for inflation.

Those reserves cannot be lowered.

And that's not just our approach, that's everyone's approach.

We are at 76 million, which is where we will leave them.

We may not get to that point.

They may have to be used more than that and be lower.

To take them down to nothing would be recklessly irresponsible.

Thank you, Councillor Graham.

Councillor Grimston.

Thank you.

I'd say to start off with, I do like the people of Wandsworth.

The relationship I've been fortunate to develop

with the people of West Hill is one of the greatest

joys of my life.

That doesn't prevent me from facing numbers and facts

as they arise.

I wonder if the cabinet member could perhaps help me with this.

If it is the case that by whatever engineering is done,

we could survive with a zero council tax

or less than 5 % council tax rise on a sustainable basis.

My calculations roughly is that 84 million,

rather elegantly, represents almost exactly a 100 % increase

in the council tax.

It follows from this, if what we're being told is the case,

then we're heading back, we could be heading back,

if it were not for the government putting the 84 million up,

to the glorious days of zero council tax.

Because it was indeed the fact

that those savings are available,

we could stop charging council tax altogether.

Now 188 % increase, which is what we're talking about here

in the Wandsworth part of this,

is a horrendous thing for any of us to face.

And I hope that it will be recognised ultimately

across this chamber,

that nobody would do anything of that nature there.

But what happens if we don't do that?

What has happened to those councils

that have let their finances hit a brick wall

in a most dreadful way?

And indeed has the government bailed those councils out or is it increasingly saying if you make the mess you clean the mess up?

Can't scream well, I I thank councillor Grimston from those extremely cogent points

And the government has not been in the habit of bailing anybody out

Until the point of which they send in commissioners and they take control

We are not prepared to sit here

run this council's finances into a brick wall

and then have the government be forced

to take the council over in order

to ensure responsible decision making.

I fear that is exactly what would have happened

if the other side had remained in power.

And though I share Council Grimson's sentiments

about what councils in all sides of this chamber should fill

and I know that some of those on that side

do feel that way, clearly not enough do.

We do not wish to be in this place.

It is a absolute last resort for us,

particularly us as conservatives,

to have to recommend, unless the government acts,

an increase in council tax at all,

let alone an increase of this vast scale

compared to what has been the case in the past.

We have done our part, as he said,

in finding that 79 million.

If the government now does its part,

if perhaps they could help support us

to get the government to do its part. We could bring that bill down substantially and possibly

get rid of the increase altogether.

Thank you, Councillor Graham. I think I want Councillor Critchard.

Thank you, Madam Mayor. I'm always interested to hear the other side talk about facts. One

of the things I would like to point out to everyone in this room is this is a document

produced from your side but it does not have the financial, the stamp of the financial director.

These documents, these papers, these figures including the sudden announcement of 250 million

debt have not gone past any scrutiny committee or us. So please everybody, first of all,

When Councillor Graham talks about facts, please take some of his facts with a pinch of salt.

He is, after all, a politician, as we all are.

My question is this.

The Labour team left office with a fully funded budget for the financial year 26.

Sorry, Councillor Graham, laughing demeans you.

right? If you think everyone is funny it is actually rude. The question is

this, as he well knows, we left office with a fully funded budget for 26 -27

which gives gave the residents the excellent services that they expect and

deserve. So why is this administration trying to scare everybody and making cuts that are

unnecessary at this point? Because you have a fully funded budget to work with, which

would also give you the opportunity to look at ways to bridge the gap.

Thank you, Councillor Critchard. Councillor Graham, can we have fewer speeches, more questions,

thank you.

See, the budget that they left us for this year alone was funded from 50 million from

reserves.

They had almost halved the reserves they inherited.

Those reserves, if she kept down that path, were set to exhaust themselves altogether

because the gap is going up each year.

The gap in a single year by the end of this term would be greater than the entirety of

what's in reserves right now.

You cannot just rely on reserves.

And there was no plan.

As for her comments about this document,

I wrote the foreword in this document.

Officers drafted the rest of the document.

Officers have been busily checking it for days

to make sure that the figures in this are correct.

All of the figures in the tables came from officers.

She will have her chance to hear precisely what officers think

of these figures at the OSCs,

as all councillors will who are on OSCs

and asking in their respective areas.

but there is no question that we have produced a document or produced figures or produced a plan

without the full involvement of officers and if only that had been the case for the last

administration we wouldn't be in this mess. Thank you Councillor Graham. Councillor Givindja.

Thank you Madam Mayor. Councillor Graham will have heard Councillor Hogg talk about 10 % efficiency

in year one and a further 10 % efficiency in year two

in order to provide their kind of budgetary rigour

and avoid the tax increases that he's announced.

In his perusal of counsel's papers

and counsel's documentations,

has he come across evidence over the last four years

of their spectacular efficiency discoveries

and their stewardship of budgets

that gives him confidence that the promise he's just made is deliverable.

Thank you, Councillor Gwinian.

Well, the short answer is no.

The longer answer is that on most of these variables,

they were moving in the wrong direction,

a direction he now says he does not approve of.

There was no plan.

There is no basis for getting this back under control

on what they left us.

His assumptions were that he would save £45 million

pounds and 45 million pounds alone.

Of what was identified from that 45 pounds back in May,

it was 7 million.

But even if we granted the full 45,

it would not, as a matter of basic arithmetic,

solve the budget gap we face.

And I'm sorry, but logic and numbers and arithmetic

isn't cruel.

It is what is necessary to avoid cruelty

and to avoid catastrophe.

Thank you, Councillor Graham. Councillor Giorgiani.

Thank you, Madam Mayor. First of all, I just need to apologise to the residents of Trinity

who we've misinformed about a 160 % increase. I think it's going to be 190, so I just wanted

to say that, sorry. Councillor Graham, can you just explain, please, your decision to

oppose the fairer concept of mansion tax that impacts so few and hoarding the Council's

reserves whilst cutting vital care for children, our elderly and DV survivors, please. Thank

you.

Well, a glass of an apology from the Labour benches, so I can welcome that much. But the

fact is that the mansion tax will not lead to a single penny coming back to this borough.

It is a tax, an additional tax on residents in this borough that will do nothing to improve

this council's finances yet be levied through council tax.

And it is designed with ridiculous cliff edges

that will lead to avoidance behaviour, exactly

the same kind of thing.

You see it with the windows tax.

330 years ago, this is the most badly designed tax since.

Thank you, Councillor Graham.

I think I've got Councillor Eyelith, administration.

Thank you.

Tonight, Labour Wandsworth have called the Fair Funding Review

the cuts from central Labour government a challenge.

So my question is this, why don't they challenge it?

Well, quite, why didn't they challenge it?

They sat there and in public they said nothing,

while in private they knew that the game was up.

It is totally dishonest.

There is still the opportunity for those

that have any public spirited sense of responsibility

to respond to our consultation, to join with us

in trying to get the government to think again.

It's not just us using that challenge mechanism.

It's Labour councils, it's Green councils.

I suspect it will be Liberal Democrat councils.

There is a reason that we are challenging,

because these cuts, instead of being fair as build,

are the opposite.

They are totally unfair,

and their reprehensible lack of a challenge to the government

is part of why we are where we are.

I no longer have any questions from the administration, so as I need to ensure alternation, I'll take

Councillor Belton's question as the last question. Thank you.

Thank you, Madam Mayor. Lies, damn lies, statistics. Can I just stick to the one fact, I think?

Does the chair deny that the net debt of this council on the 1st of April was zero?

And how many other London boroughs does he think are in such a healthy position?

The net debt of this borough was not zero.

What would be accurate is to say that there was no external debt at that point.

But internal borrowing has to be repaid.

There is minimum revenue position of a provision which is exactly the same as interest payments

Moreover as they as they've admitted blast would have blasted through the rest of reserves

There wouldn't be the balances to internally borrow against and the internal debt will become flushed out and become external debt to claim

There was zero debt is an absolute lie and they know it

External debt, the technicality of external debt, when this internal borrowing would become

external is a fabrication.

Thank you, Councillor Graham. Thank you, members. That concludes the questioning on the state.

Madam Mayor, could I just ask a question? Is there any reason why Councillor Ireland,

who's the shadow spokesperson for finance, hasn't been able to ask a question?

I will take a question from Councillor Ireland if she wishes to ask one.

Councillor Ireland. Thank you, Madam Mayor. I'm wondering what

to tell the 40 residents who come to our community kitchen on Thursday what we're going to do

about feeding them from now on. Very disappointed about that. But my question is a clarification

really about the council tax reduction scheme.

Because I think, Councillor Graham

said on several occasions, that you will

be improving the current scheme.

Now there are residents, disabled residents, residents

in receipt of war disability pensions and war widows,

who receive 100 % reduction.

But I thought I heard you say, but it's not in the report,

that all people of anyone of working age

will have to pay something.

So please, can you confirm if the 100 % reduction

will still be given to those groups or any other groups.

Thank you.

So some of those groups are pensioners.

The scheme and criteria for pensions are set nationally.

We cannot alter it.

Those positions will stay.

For working age, we are reverting to a position

where everyone will pay something.

But that will still involve the amount

we spend on cancer tax reduction next year nearly doubling

in order to assist.

The individual discounts that people will receive

will have to move towards the London norm,

the norm in labour boroughs,

in order to maintain the affordability of the scheme overall.

Otherwise it would more than double.

But we have an extraordinarily generous financial package

in the first year.

That will then taper as it goes on.

But it is precisely in order to smooth that transition

and to avoid people being given a large one -off increase in their bills,

that we're doing it in that way.

But everyone of working age will pay something.

That was the case before 2022, and it will need to be the case again.

Sorry, just for clarity...

This is just for clarity.

Your improvement will actually mean that people who are the most vulnerable...

And by the way, you don't have to be of state pension age

to get a disability pension...

We'll have to pay something.

Can you tell us how much?

Give us an indication how much.

I'm only allowing this for the first, on this occasion.

But we won't be having that in the future.

Thank you, Peter.

OK, it's going.

We will be publishing the full details

of the scheme in the coming weeks for consultation.

There will be the full opportunity at OSC and elsewhere

to look at those things that will set out

all of the different bands.

There are a number of different bands.

I can't verbally describe what is an extremely complicated

system.

but we have been generous and we are avoiding people

getting large one -off increases,

and the system, the provision that we will have

in terms of discounts at the end of four years

will still be generous by many standards.

We cannot just maintain things as they are,

but we are trying to go about things in such a way

that we do not present people with unfair bills

at those lower income levels, and we are adding bans.

So there'll be people that currently don't get any reduction who will now get help and get assistance and won't see the full impact of those

Increases who would not have got any help at all under the scheme that we inherited

Thank You cancer Graham and Thank You members that concludes the questioning on this on the statement counsellor

Counsellor rugby I am I am let's let's commend this to the council

Madam Mayor, can I cheque that Councillor Rigby is wishing to vote to commend the motion?

No.

Well then, you can't move a motion if you're not going to vote for it.

That's a standard part of public law prevention.

I am.

Sit down, Peter.

Sorry, so, Councillor Rigby, are you moving that the statement be commended to the council?

Right.

Is Councillor Wiggly going to vote for the thing that she's proposing?

Wait and see, love.

You can't propose it if you cannot propose a motion if you're not going to support it yourself.

If the Councillor isn't prepared to commit to voting for the motion, she can't move it.

That's how moving a motion works.

As I understand, it's not a requirement to say that you're going to support a motion.

Madam Mayor, the standing orders don't say that. Public Law Convention does.

Okay. Sorry, on the point of order, Mr. Mayor, I don't understand what I'm being asked to

And until I get a better idea of it, I'm not sure what to do about it

could could counsel Rigby maybe say what she means by

Commend to the council does she mean that she wants the council to recognise this is all a very good idea

Which is what the word commend means it's like quantum physics. It's you when you observe it. It does something different

You know, it's that's how I do, you know

We were

accusing us

Being taking this not seriously. I'm afraid you're in danger of doing exactly the same thing by this action

and it just looks loose.

Sorry, can we stop interrupting one another?

I'm gonna ask the monitoring officer to explain

how this works under the standing orders.

Thank you, members.

Just for reason, I'm going to read out standing order 38G,

which is the relevant provision on statements.

Standing order 38G states that once the mayor has determined

that there will be no further questions,

if appropriate, a procedural motion may be moved

commending the statement to the council.

It will be put to a vote without debate.

There are no qualifications around that,

therefore there is not a requirement to state

which way you will vote.

It is simply a vote.

On a point of order, Madam Mayor,

it is not the case that on matters where the standing

orders are silent, anything can happen.

There are standard conventions that apply in public law,

that apply in councils and chambers and a house of commons

and everywhere else across the country

that work to fill those voids.

That is how an entire common law system works.

The fact that the standing orders are silent on it

is irrelevant, but it would be helpful

that for all the effort the opposition are taking

to move a motion to commend a statement they disagree with,

they could just give us the plan that they claim exists.

I'm accepting the advice of the monitoring officer on this.

So Councillor, it's Councillor Rigby, isn't it?

Councillor Rigby, you're moving that the statement be commended to the Council?

If yes, the motion does not require a seconder and it is put directly to the vote without

debate. So the motion is that the statement be commended to the council. Those in favour

please raise your hands.

Can I second that?

Yeah, they can.

Can I have a vote?

Okay. There's no reason why it can't. On voting, it can have a name vote.

You can't do it, Peter. Okay. Mmm? Okay. And those against?

It looks like those against. There is provision for a name vote, I'm afraid.

it's okay.

Okay, hand me again.

Any abstentions?

Sorry, my vote for against was not recorded there

because we were asking about a named vote.

Could we do that again?

As I understand you Kevin, an individually recorded vote.

Any member?

So members, if any member wishes to have

the way in which they voted recorded, that can be done individually.

And if the opposition members wish for their votes

to be recorded as against, then that can be recorded in the minutes.

Madam Mayor, we've had a vote and it's been put to the vote and the number's been counted.

Why do we need to do it again?

Okay, we have the result here. 25 in favour, 28 against.

Thank you, councillors. That concludes the business of the extraordinary

Council meeting. Thank you.

Interactive webcast player

CouncilTuesday, 15th September 2026 at 7:30pm

Council
Tuesday, 15th September 2026 at 7:30pm