Agenda item

8.11pm – Councillor Max Schmid moved, seconded by Councillor Wesley Harcourt, the special motion in their names.

“The Council notes recent demands made by Government that the borough’s residents and businesses face the consequences of paying an unprecedented £64million towards the repair of the 133-year-old Grade II* listed Hammersmith Bridge.

It also notes the £8.6million LBHF has been investing to repair the bridge since residents elected the current administration into office in 2014 and how that is ten times more than the previous administration spent during the whole of its eight years in office.

The Council recognises how the £64m demanded by the government is substantially more than any other London Council has paid for bridge maintenance noting: it is twenty-five times greater than the £2.6m the Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea was required to invest in the repair of Albert Bridge; and that data from the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government demonstrates how, since 2010, only £100m has been spent by London Councils in total maintenance and repair of London road and river bridges – equivalent to less than £400,000 a year for each borough which, even then, saw most of that money eventually paid by the government or Transport for London.

The Council notes that the government has advised the Council that because the residents of Hammersmith & Fulham enjoy the third lowest Council tax in the country, they should and can afford to pay a significant increase (£800+ per taxpayer) in Council tax to meet their £64m demand.

The Council supports the Labour administration’s commitment to keep Council tax and all resident charges low with H&F’s Council tax remaining the third lowest in the country. It recognises that this is particularly important as residents face the consequences of a difficult recession which will see business failures and unemployment affecting many people’s livelihoods across our borough and agree that our residents must remain our priority.

The Council recognises that Hammersmith & Fulham’s low Council tax and improved services has been achieved despite a decade of Austerity which was introduced in 2010 by the Conservative/LibDem government, and which cut LBHF’s budget as follows:

·       in 2010/11 LBHF’s total net budget was £184.345m

·       in 2020/21 LBHF’s total net budget is £121.003m

And it notes that the pandemic has caused the Council to spend millions of pounds keeping people safe and that these sums have not been fully repaid by government despite government’s promises to do so.

The Council is therefore dismayed to note that on 7 December 2020, Lord Greenhalgh (Minister of State in the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government) called for Hammersmith & Fulham’s residents and businesses “to stump up the cash” to repair Hammersmith Bridge over just five years. He said: “Surely £50 million over 5 years is a reasonable contribution from the Council that owns the bridge”. He also made the inaccurate statement that “LBHF has £61m in unearmarked Council reserves + a £20m general fund balance!”

The Council recognises that Lord Greenhalgh appears to have misunderstood the issues around local government finance when he stated that the borough has “£61m in unearmarked Council reserves + a £20m general fund balance!” The Council’s 2019-20 accounts clearly set out £61m of earmarked, not unearmarked, reserves and a further £19m general fund balance. Earmarked reserves have been set aside for particular purposes, and the Council’s auditors have recommended that to ensure financial resilience the Council work to increase, not decrease, reserves over the medium term.

The Council notes the contrast of Lord Greenhalgh’s current position to that when he led this Council between 2006 to 2012 as he spent just £64,000 on the upkeep and maintenance of Hammersmith Bridge, which is 1,000 times less than the £64,000,000 the government has now requested the residents and businesses Hammersmith & Fulham pay toward its repair.

The Council regrets the slow progress made by the Government Task Force (set up by the Secretary of State on 9 September 2020) which is in large part because “financing options” for the repair works has not been allowed onto any of the Taskforce meeting’s agenda.

It recognises that the Government Taskforce was set up to “effectively take over this project”, to “get this thing sorted” accompanied by promises from Conservative national and London politicians that the Government has “provided the money... to repair the bridge”.

The Council recognises that Hammersmith Bridge is an important road link largely benefitting people outside of Hammersmith & Fulham and that must be reflected in any agreed financial scheme.”

Speeches on the special motion were made by Councillors Max Schmid, Wesley Harcourt, Andrew Jones, Rowan Ree, Christabel Cooper, Rory Vaughan, and Iain Cassidy (for the Administration) – and Councillor Andrew Brown (for the Opposition)

Councillor Schmid summed up.

Councillor Max Schmid made a speech summing up the debate before the special motion was put to the vote:

FOR                        34

AGAINST                10

NOT VOTING:        0

The motion was declared CARRIED.

9.00pm – RESOLVED

The Council notes recent demands made by Government that the borough’s residents and businesses face the consequences of paying an unprecedented £64million towards the repair of the 133-year-old Grade II* listed Hammersmith Bridge.

It also notes the £8.6million LBHF has been investing to repair the bridge since residents elected the current administration into office in 2014 and how that is ten times more than the previous administration spent during the whole of its eight years in office.

The Council recognises how the £64m demanded by the government is substantially more than any other London Council has paid for bridge maintenance noting: it is twenty-five times greater than the £2.6m the Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea was required to invest in the repair of Albert Bridge; and that data from the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government demonstrates how, since 2010, only £100m has been spent by London Councils in total maintenance and repair of London road and river bridges – equivalent to less than £400,000 a year for each borough which, even then, saw most of that money eventually paid by the government or Transport for London.

The Council notes that the government has advised the Council that because the residents of Hammersmith & Fulham enjoy the third lowest Council tax in the country, they should and can afford to pay a significant increase (£800+ per taxpayer) in Council tax to meet their £64m demand.

The Council supports the Labour administration’s commitment to keep Council tax and all resident charges low with H&F’s Council tax remaining the third lowest in the country. It recognises that this is particularly important as residents face the consequences of a difficult recession which will see business failures and unemployment affecting many people’s livelihoods across our borough and agree that our residents must remain our priority.

The Council recognises that Hammersmith & Fulham’s low Council tax and improved services has been achieved despite a decade of Austerity which was introduced in 2010 by the Conservative/LibDem government, and which cut LBHF’s budget as follows:

·       in 2010/11 LBHF’s total net budget was £184.345m

·       in 2020/21 LBHF’s total net budget is £121.003m

And it notes that the pandemic has caused the Council to spend millions of pounds keeping people safe and that these sums have not been fully repaid by government despite government’s promises to do so.

The Council is therefore dismayed to note that on 7 December 2020, Lord Greenhalgh (Minister of State in the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government) called for Hammersmith & Fulham’s residents and businesses “to stump up the cash” to repair Hammersmith Bridge over just five years. He said: “Surely £50 million over 5 years is a reasonable contribution from the Council that owns the bridge”. He also made the inaccurate statement that “LBHF has £61m in unearmarked Council reserves + a £20m general fund balance!”

The Council recognises that Lord Greenhalgh appears to have misunderstood the issues around local government finance when he stated that the borough has “£61m in unearmarked Council reserves + a £20m general fund balance!” The Council’s 2019-20 accounts clearly set out £61m of earmarked, not unearmarked, reserves and a further £19m general fund balance. Earmarked reserves have been set aside for particular purposes, and the Council’s auditors have recommended that to ensure financial resilience the Council work to increase, not decrease, reserves over the medium term.

The Council notes the contrast of Lord Greenhalgh’s current position to that when he led this Council between 2006 to 2012 as he spent just £64,000 on the upkeep and maintenance of Hammersmith Bridge, which is 1,000 times less than the £64,000,000 the government has now requested the residents and businesses Hammersmith & Fulham pay toward its repair.

The Council regrets the slow progress made by the Government Task Force (set up by the Secretary of State on 9 September 2020) which is in large part because “financing options” for the repair works has not been allowed onto any of the Taskforce meeting’s agenda.

It recognises that the Government Taskforce was set up to “effectively take over this project”, to “get this thing sorted” accompanied by promises from Conservative national and London politicians that the Government has “provided the money... to repair the bridge”.

The Council recognises that Hammersmith Bridge is an important road link largely benefitting people outside of Hammersmith & Fulham and that must be reflected in any agreed financial scheme.