Agenda and draft minutes

Apologies for absence were received from Councillors Animashaun, Barrett, Browne, Campbell, Spalding, Wildey and Williams.

Members are invited to disclose any Disclosable Pecuniary Interests or Other Significant Interests in accordance with the Member Code of Conduct. Guidance on this is set out in agenda item 2.

Disclosable pecuniary interests

There were none.

Other significant interests (OSIs)

There were none.

Other interests

There were none.

To approve the record of the meeting held on 25 February 2026.

The record of the Full Council meeting held on 25 February 2026 was approved and signed by Worshipful the Mayor as correct.

The Worshipful The Mayor of Medway announced that his final Mayoral event of the year would be a Thanksgiving Celebration evening at the Corn Exchange on Friday 1 May.

The Mayor said he had recently met a 10 year-old, Bobby, who had  raised over £1000 for the Oliver Fisher NICU at Medway Hospital, following his younger brother having received life saving treatment there. The Mayor had met Bobby in the previous week and presented him with the Young Citizen Award.

The Mayor announced that agenda item no.11 (HRA Acquisition of Registered Providers Residential Stock Profile in Medway) would be moved to be considered as the last agenda item during the meeting. This was to facilitate discussion of the exempt information contained within the report. It was anticipated that the press and public would be excluded from the meeting during this discussion and that they would be readmitted in advance of decision making.

The Leader wished everyone a happy St George’s Day.

To receive any petitions from members of the public or Members of the Council.

Public:

There were none.

Member:

There were none.

Question A – Alan Wells, of Chatham, asked the Leader of the Council, Councillor Maple, the following:

"I am asking this question on behalf of myself as part of Medway United Nations Association. I am sure the Council would agree with me that the appalling scenes we have witnessed in the Middle East have been shocking to witness.

The UK is one of the world's top arms exporters, with 2025 seeing a record-breaking £20 billion+ in defence export deals.

The Kent Pension Fund (KPF) operates under the Local Government Pension Scheme (LGPS) funds. Funds are invested in a number of companies supplying weapons or military technology.

The Kent Pension Fund manages pensions for Medway Council employees. These investments total hundreds of millions of pounds across the LGPS.

The Kent County Council (KCC) pension fund has faced scrutiny for investments in companies implicated in international arms trades, including those linked to conflicts in Yemen and Gaza. The LGPS funds, including Kent's, by investing in companies, have enabled violations of international law.

Waltham Forest Council's Pension Committee formally confirmed on 25 March 2026 that it can divest from companies linked to the international arms trade without any material detrimental impact on its financial position.

When explosive weapons are used in populated areas, civilians account for roughly 90% of all casualties.

My question is this: There have been calls to move towards more ethical investments, including divesting from potential military ties, with campaigns highlighting the ethical implications of using public sector pensions for these investments. Would the Council consider using Waltham Forest Council's example and commit to a gradual and proactive divestment, from some of those companies recklessly supplying weapons, as part of the international arms trade, resulting in widespread civilian casualties?”

In response, Councillor Maple said that unlike other councils across the country, Medway Council was part of a wider pension fund, in this case the Kent Pension Fund. These structures would be looked at as part of Local Government Reorganisation. Medway Councillor, Mark Jones, who had significant pensions expertise and knowledge, both from his civil service and trade union background, was ensuring that those conversations were happening.

The Pension Fund had recently started an investment sub-group, which had held its first meeting and would be meeting again the following month. Councillor Jones had attended both the main Committee and the sub-group. Various aspects of pension fund investments had been considered previously, such as environmental issues or tobacco and most recently the situation raised by the question. There was a statutory responsibility for the funds to be managed carefully for those who had given service to local government in Medway and Kent. This management needed to take into account issues such as war, defence investment and the environment. Councillor Maple was confident that the sub-group, which was looking at these ethical issues, would take that into account in due course.

Alan Wells asked the following supplementary question:

‘Several councils had passed symbolic motions asking their pension fund representatives to raise ethical  ...  view the full minutes text for item 872.

This report sets out motions received for this meeting. 

Motion A – proposed by Councillor Perfect and supported by Councillor Joy:

‘The Council notes that Medway Council’s statutory role in health is on improving public health, reducing health inequalities, and integrating care services. Established under the Health and Social Care Act 2012, the Council works through its Health and Wellbeing Board to assess local needs via the Joint Strategic Needs Assessment (JSNA) and set strategy, while the Director of Public Health produces an independent annual report on population health.

The Council notes the significant change and pressure currently within the local healthcare system including within the Medway NHS Foundation Trust and the Kent and Medway Integrated Care Board (ICB). The Council regrets another change in leadership at Medway NHS Foundation Trust (the Trust) and is concerned about the emerging financial crisis at the Kent and Medway ICB. These changes directly impact the Council's ability to ensure its social care services can be delivered alongside a strongly performing healthcare system, as well as ensuring it can focus on improving public health and reducing health inequalities.

The Council notes that Adult Social Care has the most pressure of any division within the Council, with the most recent Round 3 Revenue Budget Monitoring showing a pressure of around £12m, and the fact that Adult Social Care shows growing demand every year, it being widely accepted that additional pressure on the system is created by other parts of the healthcare system failing.

The Council resolves to write to the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care to raise concerns regarding the way in which challenges within the current healthcare system could impact on the Council’s ability to provide public services and meet its statutory duties laid out above.’

Councillor Mrs Turpin, supported by Councillor Pearce, proposed the following amendment:

‘The Council notes that Medway Council’s statutory role in health is on improving public health, reducing health inequalities, and integrating care services. Established under the Health and Social Care Act 2012, the Council works through its Health and Wellbeing Board to assess local needs via the Joint Strategic Needs Assessment (JSNA) and set strategy, while the Director of Public Health produces an independent annual report on population health.

The Council notes the significant change and pressure currently within the local healthcare system including within the Medway NHS Foundation Trust and the Kent and Medway Integrated Care Board (ICB). The Council regrets another change in leadership at Medway NHS Foundation Trust (the Trust) and is concerned about the emerging financial crisis at the Kent and Medway ICB. These changes directly impact the Council's ability to ensure its social care services can be delivered alongside a strongly performing healthcare system, as well as ensuring it can focus on improving public health and reducing health inequalities.

The Council notes that Adult Social Care has the most pressure of any division within the Council, with the most recent Round 3 Revenue Budget Monitoring showing a pressure of around £12m, and the fact that Adult Social Care shows  ...  view the full minutes text for item 873.

Members received the Leader’s Report. The following issues were discussed:

• The development of Local Government Reorganisation (LGR) proposals and the public engagement held. Medway Council would not challenge the outcome of the process.
• Initial feedback received on Medway’s Local Plan and preparation for the inspection process.
• Impact of the recent Meningitis outbreak and the antibiotic programme to combat it.
• Launch of the Adult Social Care Strategy and of the Crisis and Resilience Fund.
• The Medway Lottery which was helping local voluntary sector organisations.
• Allocation of more than £1million funding for Strood Community Village Hall.
• Hosting a visit to Medway of the Slovakian Ambassador.
• The Dialogue Society Iftar held at Rochester Cathedral.
• The Allotments Federation Annual General Meeting and the return of allotments to being directly managed by the Council.
• Hosting of the Medway Voluntary Action Awards and the Pride in Medway Awards to be held the day after the Council meeting.
• A Nepalese New Year Event and Chinese New Year Parade held in Medway.
• An Opportunities Fair held in the Pentagon Centre which provided hundreds of young people information on employment, training and education opportunities.
• The first anniversary of the Wigmore and Parkwood Armed Forces Breakfast Club.
• Launches of the Medway Together Fund, Women and Homelessness Project and Cozenton Park Tree Nursery.
• Councillor Maple had Chaired the 2^nd Annual Region of Kent MPs and Council Leader sessions at the Houses or Parliament. There had been consensus on issues such as public transport, international rail and the Grow in Kent service.
• Support of a bid submitted for Chatham to become the inaugural UK Town of Culture.
• Launch of the Medway Youth Horizons Rotary Project.
• Prevent conferences and briefings held in Medway and in Maidstone.
• Hosting of the Rochester Art Fair.
• The Return to Starboard ships that had recently visited Chatham.
• £60 million of funding that had been allocated to Medway as part of the Pride in Place Programme.
• Exceptional Financial Support.
• Concern about withdrawal of funding from Hoo Cares.
• The Hoo Peninsula’s ability to cope with development and whether infrastructure plans were sufficient.

This report sets out the Members’ questions received for this meeting.

Question A – Councillor Myton asked the Portfolio Holder for Business Management, Councillor Van Dyke, the following:

“Can the Portfolio Holder provide the number of Medway Council Staff who reside in Medway and in doing so break this data down to ward level number(s)?”

In response, Councillor Van Dyke said that based on the workforce snapshot as of 10 April 2026, Medway Council employed 3,313 staff, of which 65.3% lived within Medway. This data excluded agency workers but did include casual and relief staff. The remaining 34.7% of staff lived outside the Medway area.

The ward?level data showed that staff living in Medway were distributed across all wards, with higher numbers in wards such as Watling, Rainham North, Rainham South East, and Strood North & Frindsbury, which reflected population patterns across the authority.

The following ward level breakdown of staff numbers was provided to all Members of the Council:

Question B – Councillor Mrs Turpin asked the Leader of the Council, Councillor Maple, the following:

"Further to the Portfolio Holder for Community Safety, Highways and Enforcement’s comments that potholes “is something that elected Members should keep well out of”, can the Leader of the Council advise Members of any other areas that elected Members, including his own backbenchers, should keep well out of?”

Councillor Paterson provided a point of personal explanation, in accordance with paragraph 11.1.4 of the Council Rules. He said that Councillor Mrs Turpin had chosen eleven words to quote in her question that failed to convey the entirety of the paragraph, which had been said on a Podcast.

Councillor Paterson quoted what he had said as follows “Road prioritisation does not happen on my whim, on my say so as an elected Member, I think this is something that elected Members should keep well out of the decision making process on and so the prioritisation is based on professional assessments, inspections, the data that we are gathering from the cameras on the front of bin lorries and actually making sure that we are doing it where it’s needed, not where those who shout loudest live”.

In response to the question, Councillor Maple said that his advice for all Councillors regarding things that they should keep well out of was  ...  view the full minutes text for item 875.

This report presents the Council’s first Annual Overview and Scrutiny Report following changes to the Council Rules, as set out in the Constitution.

Background:

This report presented the Council’s first Annual Overview and Scrutiny Report following changes to the Council Rules, as set out in the Constitution.

Councillor Tejan, supported by Councillor McDonald, proposed the recommendations set out in the report.

The following issues were discussed:

·       The four Overview and Scrutiny Committees had looked closely at service performance, policy development, budget pressures, transformation programmes and the work of Council partners.

·       The collaborative, cross-party nature of scrutiny with Members working constructively to improve services for residents.

·       Scrutiny Members, the Democratic Services Team and senior officers were thanked for their support of the scrutiny function.

·       The Parent and Carer Forum, co-opted Committee Members, Parent Governors and teachers were also thanked for their contribution to the Children and Young People (CYP) Overview and Scrutiny Committee.

·       Each Committee had received regular performance monitoring and revenue and capital budget reports covering the Council services within their remit.

·       Business Support and Digital undertook pre-decision scrutiny of the Council’s Procurement Strategy and considered a call in of Local Government Reorganisation.

·       Health and Adult Social Care had examined services that people relied upon. This had included pressures within Medway Maritime Hospital, discharge delays and complaints handling. Other topics considered included community mental health provision, service transformation across Kent and Medway and pharmacy access in Rainham.

·       The Regeneration, Culture and Environment O&S Committee had held to account the six Cabinet Portfolio Holders whose responsibilities fell within the Committee’s remit, undertaken annual scrutiny of the Medway Community Safety Partnership, reviewed performance of the waste management and highways maintenance contracts and considered progress on the Climate Change Action Plan. It had also reviewed the Air Quality Action Plan and the updated Housing Allocations Policy, received updates on the Get Kent and Medway Working Plan, the Shared Prosperity Fund, the Local Transport Plan and School Streets.

·       The CYP O&S Committee had undertaken a review of Elective Home Education and had made recommendations for improvements. It had worked closely with Children’s Social Care following Ofsted’s ‘Good’ rating to monitor continuous improvement and had championed the importance of Early Help and Prevention. Engagement with young people, including the Medway Youth Council, had also been important.

·       A Joint Task Group between the Regeneration, Culture and Environment and Health and Adult Social Care O&S Committees had looked at Air Quality, Public Transport and Active Travel.

Decision:

The Council noted the report.

This report summarises the content of an exempt appendix, which, in the opinion of the proper officer, will contain exempt information within one of the categories in Schedule 12A of the Local Government Act 1972. It is a matter for the Council to determine whether the press and public should be excluded from the meeting during consideration of this document.

Decision:

The Council agreed that the press and public be excluded from the meeting during the consideration of the exempt material relating to agenda item 11 because consideration of these matters in public would disclose information falling within one or more categories of exempt information contained in Schedule 12A of the Local Government Act 1972 as specified in agenda item 17 and, in all the circumstances of the case, the Committee considered that the public interest in maintaining the exemption outweighed the public interest in disclosing the information.

This report seeks approval to formally commence due diligence [financially and regulatory] and approval of the necessary capital budget to enable the transfer of the Medway portfolio of the Registered Provider stock to Medway Council’s Housing Revenue Account (HRA).

Background:

The report set out that a Registered Provider (RP) of Social Housing was seeking to transfer their Medway housing stock [excluding two specific assets] to a new registered social provider, this being Medway Council, this was in line with the RP’s long term asset disposal strategy. Medway Council’s Landlord Services [Housing Revenue Account - HRA] had been advised of a potential RP transfer opportunity of social housing properties as part of this organisation’s larger asset disposal and rationalisation strategy. It was noted that HRA funding was ringfenced from the Council’s general finances.

The report sought approval to formally commence due diligence and recommend to full Council approval of the necessary capital budget to enable the transfer of the Medway portfolio of the Registered Provider stock to Medway Council’s HRA. Enabling an alternative registered provider to take ownership of the existing RP’s Medway properties and maintaining much needed social housing, it was important to note that the properties would be tenanted at the time of transfer to the Council.

Two Exempt Appendices to the report set out financial information, which was of a commercially sensitive nature and a breakdown of locations of the acquisition portfolio which was covered under a Non-Disclosure Agreement.

A diversity impact assessment had been undertaken in relation to the proposals and was attached as Exempt Appendix 3 to the report.

The report had previously been considered by the Cabinet on 7 April 2026, the decisions of which were set out at section 6 of the report.

The decisions made by the Cabinet had been called in by six Members of the Council, therefore, approval of the requested addition to the Capital Programme by the Council would be subject to the outcome of the call-in process.

The Portfolio Holder for Housing and Homelessness, Councillor Louwella Prenter, supported by the Portfolio Holder for Climate Change and Strategic Regeneration, Councillor Curry, proposed the recommendations as set out in the report, with the alteration that these were subject to the outcome of the call-in process.

Revised recommendations:

1.1.        The Council is requested to note the decisions of the Cabinet, as set out at section 6 of the report.

1.2.        The Council is asked to approve the necessary addition to the Capital Programme of £45.95million, including associated fees, subject to the outcome of the current call-in process in relation to the Cabinet decisions made on 7 April 2026, as follows:

·        The Cabinet approved the transfer/acquisition of the Registered Providers Medway Portfolio of 791 properties [portfolio breakdown in section 4 of the report] to Medway Council’s HRA, subject to financial and regulatory due diligence (decision no. 60/2026);

·        The Cabinet approved the procurement of an appropriate consultant to support the transfer of stock, including the necessary due diligence (decision no. 62/2026) and;

·        The Cabinet agreed to delegate authority to the Director of Place and Chief Operating Officer, in consultation with the Leader of the Council and Portfolio Holder for Housing and Homelessness to authorise the transaction, subject to final due diligence (decision  ...  view the full minutes text for item 878.

This report recommends changes to two polling stations in Watling, Rochester West and Borstal and Fort Pitt wards in preparation for the May 2027 Elections.

Background:

This report recommended changes to two polling stations in Watling, Rochester West and Borstal and Fort Pitt wards in preparation for the May 2027 Elections.

The report set out that under the Representation of the People Act 1983, the Council had a duty to divide Medway into polling districts and to designate a polling place for each district for UK Parliamentary elections. It also had to keep these arrangements under review. It was good practice to undertake the same exercise for local government elections and in doing so, every effort had to be made to ensure that the polling district scheme mirrored as closely as possible that agreed for Parliamentary elections. A full polling district review had been carried out for the implementation of new Ward arrangements in 2024. It was now only necessary to review two polling districts where the polling places were unavailable or unsuitable.

The Leader of the Council, Councillor Maple, supported by the Portfolio Holder for Economic and Social Regeneration and Inward Investment, Councillor Mahil, proposed the recommendations set out in the report.

Decisions:

a)      The Council approved the scheme of Polling Districts and Polling Places as set out in Appendix 1 to the report, in respect of Parliamentary elections and designated the Parliamentary Polling Districts and Polling Places as the Polling Districts and Polling Places for Local Government elections.

b)      The Council noted the designation of all polling stations recommended by the Returning Officer, as set out in Appendix 2 to the report.

c)      The Council noted the maps showing the recommended new polling districts for Watling Ward, as set out in Appendix 3 to the report.

d)      The Council noted the maps showing the recommended polling places for Rochester West and Borstal and Fort Pitt Wards, as set out in Appendix 4 to the report.

e)      The Council authorised the Chief Executive, in conjunction with the Informal Working Group on Polling Districts and Polling Places to designate a Polling Place where no suitable polling station was available within the original Polling Place.

f)       The Council noted that the Chief Executive would consult with the Informal Working Group on Polling Districts and Polling Places if it was necessary to change any polling stations prior to the elections in May 2027.

The Localism Act 2011 requires the appointment of an Independent Person to investigate allegations that a Member is in breach of the Code of Conduct and the appointment of an Independent Person must be approved by the majority of the Members of the authority.

In addition, the Local Authorities (Standing Orders) (England) Regulations 2015 (SI 2015/881) provide that a local authority must include at least two independent persons to a panel hearing the dismissal of a senior officer (Chief Executive, S151 Officer or Monitoring Officer).

Background:

This report set out that the Localism Act 2011 required the appointment of an Independent Person, who must be consulted on allegations that a Member was in breach of the Code of Conduct, and that the appointment of an Independent Person must be approved by the majority of the Members of the authority.

In addition, the Local Authorities (Standing Orders) (England) Regulations 2015 (SI 2015/881) provided that a local authority must include at least two independent persons to a panel hearing the dismissal of a senior officer (Chief Executive, S151 Officer or Monitoring Officer).

The report recommended the appointment of a second Independent Person.

Councillor McDonald, supported by Councillor Howcroft-Scott, proposed the recommendations set out in the report.

Decisions:

a)    The Council agreed the appointment of Mrs Rebecca Bayoji as an Independent Person under section 28(7) of the Localism Act 2011, with effect from 24 April 2026, for a period of 4 years, or until Medway Council ceased to exist if that occurred before the end of the 4 year term, to carry out the functions required by section 28(7) of the Localism Act 2011 and where necessary, the Local Authorities (Standing Orders) (England) Regulations 2015 (SI 2015/881).

b)    The Council agreed that the fee for an Independent Person be set at £350 (£175 per half day).

c)    That Council agreed to delegate authority to the Monitoring Officer to agree the fee with the Independent Person on a case by case basis.

This report asks the Council to make a number of recommendations to the Annual meeting of the Council on 13 May 2026 regarding the committees and other bodies to be appointed for 2026/2027 and also a programme of meetings.

Background:

This report asked the Council to make a number of recommendations to the Annual meeting of the Council on 13 May 2026 regarding the committees and other bodies to be appointed for 2026/2027 and also a programme of meetings.

The report set out that the establishment of committees and the appointment of Members to serve on committees and outside bodies was a matter for decision by the Annual Meeting of the Council together with approval of the annual schedule of meetings.

The appointment of Chairpersons and Vice-Chairpersons of some committees, the establishment of sub-committees, and the appointment of Members to serve on them was a matter for decision at a Joint meeting of Committees, which would take place immediately after the Annual Council meeting.

Councillor Peake, supported by Councillor Kemp, proposed the recommendations set out in the report.

Decisions:

The Council recommended the following to Annual Council on 13 May 2026:

a)    To agree the establishment of committees, sub committees and task groups, their size and the allocation of seats to political groups,as set out in Appendices A and B to the report, together with terms of reference as set out in the Council’s constitution (with nominees to be reported at the Annual Council meeting).

b)    To agree to decommission the School Transport and Curriculum Appeals Committee.

c)    To agree appointments to Joint Committees, outside bodies and other bodies, as set out in Appendix C to the report (with nominees to be reported at the Annual Council meeting).

d)    To agree the timetable of meetings for the 2026/2027 municipal year, as set out in Appendix D to the report.

e)    To agree to delegate authority to the Chief Executive, in consultation with Group Whips, to vary the schedule of meetings during the 2026/2027 municipal year as required, on the basis set out in paragraph 5.3 of the report.

This report sets out details of a review of the Council’s Petitions Scheme and seeks approval of a revised Scheme from full Council.

Background:

This report set out details of a review of the Council’s Petitions Scheme and sought approval of a revised Scheme from full Council.

The report set out that in June 2025, the Business Support and Digital Overview and Scrutiny Committee had considered an annual report in relation to the Council’s Petitions Scheme and in doing so had asked officers to review the scheme and bring proposals to a future Committee meeting, including reference to accepting external online petitions, whether Artificial Intelligence (AI) was a risk to the integrity of petitions, and issues around awareness of the Scheme.

The Scheme had been reviewed accordingly taking into account the experience and practice of administering the Scheme for over 15 years.

A Diversity Impact Assessment had been undertaken in relation to the proposed changes to the Scheme. This was attached as Appendix C to the report.

The report had been considered by the Business Support and Digital Overview and Scrutiny Committee on 26 March 2026 and by the Cabinet on 7 April 2026.

It was confirmed that, following a request made by the Committee that consideration be given to enhancing security for e-petitions on the Council system, the CAPTCHA system was now used on the Council’s website for new users of the e-petitions platform.

The Leader of the Council, Councillor Maple, supported by Councillor Hamilton, proposed the recommendations set out in the report.

This proposal was taken forward without discussion to the next ordinary meeting of the Council, in accordance with Council Rule 16.2, as it involved making changes to the Council Rules in the Council’s Constitution.

The following reports are presented to Full Council for information purposes, without debate, in accordance with the Council rules.

The report includes:

Use of urgency provisions – Appendix 1

Contract letting – exceptional circumstances – Appendix 2

The disposal of the Bobby’s Food’s Unit at Vantage Point, Holborough Road, Snodland, Kent – Appendix 3

The following reports were presented to Full Council for information purposes, without debate, in accordance with the Council rules.

The reports included:

a)    Use of urgency provisions (Appendix 1) - This report provided details of recent usage of urgency provisions contained within the Constitution.

b)    Contract letting – exceptional circumstances (Appendix 2) - This report detailed contracts awarded in accordance with the provisions of section 12 of the Contract Procedures Rules. Exemptions to Contract Procedure Rules dealt with the letting of contracts in exceptional circumstances where it was considered to be in the best interests of the Council to do so.

c)    The disposal of the Bobby’s Food’s Unit at Vantage Point, Holborough Road, Snodland, Kent (Appendix 3) – This report advised the Council of the sale of the Council owned freehold of the Bobby’s Food’s Unit at Vantage Point, Holborough Road, Snodland, Kent. This sale followed inclusion of the property on a list of non-operational properties which were declared surplus by the Cabinet on 29 October 2024.