Agenda and minutes

There were no apologies for absence received.

If a Councillor has a disclosable pecuniary interest in a particular item, whether or not it is entered in the Authority’s register of interests, or any other significant interest which they consider should be declared in the public interest, they should declare the existence and, unless it is a sensitive interest as defined in the Member Code of Conduct, the nature of the interest at the commencement of the consideration of that item or as soon as it becomes apparent.

At meetings where members of the public are allowed to be in attendance and speak, any Councillor with a disclosable pecuniary interest or other significant interest may also make representations, give evidence or answer questions about the matter.  The Councillor must then withdraw immediately from the meeting before the matter is discussed and any vote taken.

Where Members of the public are not allowed to be in attendance and speak, then the Councillor with a disclosable pecuniary interest should withdraw from the meeting whilst the matter is under consideration. Councillors who have declared other significant interests should also withdraw from the meeting if they consider their continued participation in the matter would not be reasonable in the circumstances and may give rise to a perception of a conflict of interest.

Councillors are not obliged to withdraw from the meeting where a dispensation to that effect has been obtained from the Audit, Pensions and Standards Committee.

There were no declarations of interest.

To approve as an accurate record, the minutes of the meeting held on 23^rd June 2021.

Miriam Shea (Co-opted Member) noted that the following three amendments be made to the previous minutes:

Amend

Expenditure Budget 2021/22

Carmen explained that this budget was set fairly cautiously, and it didn’t factor in

any additional income for weekend parking.

Amend

Any Other Business

HS2 had advised officers that as a result of the delays their works would not be completed before the 23^rd  February 2022.

To be removed

RESOLVED:

The Committee approved access across WSCT land for the Met police as part of policing arrangements for Notting Hill carnival.

Stephen Waley-Cohen (Co-opted Member) requested that the minutes be brought back to the next meeting to discuss the matters arising.

Action: Amrita White

RESOLVED:

That the minutes of the meeting held on 23^rd June 2021 were approved.

Steve Hollingworth, Advisor to the Trust, presented the report and provided a summary of the key points. HS2 had indicated that it intended to exercise its power under section 4 of  the High-Speed Rail (London-West Midlands) Act 2017 ( the HS2 Act)  to compulsorily purchase parts of Wormwood Scrubs. This intention had been most recently set out in a public meeting on 26^th July 2021. HS2 had stated that the need for the compulsory purchase order was to enable HS2 to complete the construction works and grant rights to utilities providers to carry out works.

The HS2 Act gave HS2 powers to carry out the works to divert the Stamford Brook sewer and other utilities on Wormwood Scrubs. These statutory powers would  expire in February 2022. To avoid the risks to its programme, HS2 intend to exercise their powers under the HS2 Act to compulsorily purchase two areas of the Scrubs.

The plots that HS2 proposed to compulsorily purchase were shown in the plan included at Appendix B and C.

Referring to the UTX works, Miriam Shea (Co-opted Member) raised concerns on why HS2 had requested to move 6 of the utilities back under the road. She asked if there were any legal concerns with HS2 retaining the ownership of the sub soil. In response Adesuwa Omoregie, provided a summary of the rights which gave the Secretary of State rights to acquire certain parts of the Scrubs to undertake works. The area of land known as Plot 75 which included the sub soil was within the limits that could be acquired by HS2 as permitted under the HS2 Act. The Act only permitted the acquisition of land for the purposes set out within the Act.  If the land was acquired and was then not used for the permitted purposes, then action could potentially be taken.  

Stephen Waley-Cohen (Co-opted Member) queried if the Trust received a written guarantee  from HS2 that the land would be returned) upon completion of works. In response Adesuwa Omoregie explained that the Trust representatives had raised this concern with HS2, and they had advised that they would provide legally binding assurance that the land would be returned as soon as the works had been finished. This was an ongoing matter and the Trust representatives were waiting for HS2 to provide confirmation so that this could be assessed. Further advice would be provided to the Trust in due course.

Action: Trust Manager

The Chair noted that a list of questions had been sent to the Trust from various parties and the answers were provided in Appendix A of the report. Members discussed Appendix A in detail and full details and answers can be viewed here: https://youtu.be/K3kvIerIqK0

Members requested that the following actions be carried out:

-        Find out whether HS2 had consulted he Ministry of Defence regarding HS2’s intention to serve notice of the compulsory purchase order.

-        Further discussions to be held with HS2 to ascertain when the land would be returned to the Trust.  ...  view the full minutes text for item 4.