Agenda and minutes

Apologies for absence were received from Councillors Etheridge, Filmer and Hubbard.

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 17 October 2024.

The record of the meeting held on 17 October 2024 was approved and signed by Worshipful the Mayor as correct.

The Worshipful the Mayor of Medway announced that former Councillor, Ken Webber, had recently passed away. He had served as a Councillor between 1986-2007 in Rainham, both on the former Gillingham Borough Council and on Medway Council.

Former Councillor Webber had also served as Mayor in 2005-2006 and as Deputy Mayor in 1999-2000. The Mayor offered condolences to the family on behalf of the Council.

The Mayor also announced that Councillor Hackwell’s wife, Jacqui, had passed away. Jacqui had worked for the Council since 1998, most recently within the Adult Education Team and had also served as a Patient Governor at Medway Maritime Hospital from 2018 to 2024. The Mayor offered condolences to Councillor Hackwell and his family on behalf of the Council.

The Mayor thanked Councillor Gurung for collaborating with the Mayoral office to organise the Dickens Parade of Mayors and dignitaries. The parade had not taken place due to the weather, but the Mayor hoped that his successor would consider taking this initiative forward.

The next Mayoral event would be an adaptation of Puss in Boots on Thursday 30 January. A Quiz night would be held at Medway Rugby Club on 21 February and the Annual Mayor’s Ball would take place on 11 April.

Tickets for all events were available through the Mayor’s office.

The Mayor, supported by Members of the Council, moved a suspension of Council Rules. This was to facilitate continuation of the changes set out below to how the meeting would be run.

Decision:

The Council agreed to suspend Council rules to facilitate the following changes:

a)    Public questions would be extended from 30 minutes to 40 minutes with a reduction in the time allocations for the Leader’s Report from 35 minutes to 30 minutes and the Overview and Scrutiny activity report from 25 to 20 minutes.

b)    Public questioners unable to attend this evening had been allowed to send a representative to read out their question or the Mayor would put the question on their behalf. Only public questioners attending in person would be able to ask supplementary questions.

c)    The order of business had been changed as indicated on the Agenda. In summary the agenda item on motions would be taken after public questions. Any information reports or reports for noting would be the last agenda items.

d)    Limit the number of speakers per motion to the proposer and seconder, plus up to 10% of each group (rounded up) as follows;

Labour and Co-operative Group – 3

Conservative Group – 2

Independent Group – 1

Independent Members – 3

The same number of speakers would be allowed for each amendment to a motion.

There were none.

Public:

There were none.

Member:

There were none.

Question 7A – Peter Skudder, of Gillingham, submitted the following to thePortfolio Holder for Housing and Homelessness, Councillor Louwella Prenter:

“I hear that the travellers in Wigmore / Bredhurst have been given permission to stay, I am concerned as this could impact the value of our properties and have not seen any consultation with residents in the area, or any contributions that they are making to the local Council if the land was sold to them. How long will they be staying?”

In response, Councillor Prenter said that the Council had granted a licence to occupy for a specific period of time. The occupants had failed to leave at the end of the period which had resulted in the Council taking legal proceedings to recover the possession of the site. The Court had set a final hearing date for trial of 19-21 February 2025. The land remained in the ownership of the Council.

No supplementary question was asked as Peter Skudder was not present.

Question 7B – Robert Wyatt, of Cliffe, asked thePortfolio Holder for Community Safety, Highways and Enforcement, Councillor Paterson, the following:

“Could the Portfolio Holder for Community Safety, Highways and Enforcement please give an update on the Council’s progress with pothole repairs to date including information about any additional funding from the Government to tackle potholes?”

In response, Councillor Paterson said that during the current financial year, the Highways Team had repaired 4,800 potholes and carried out more than 2,385 highway inspections. The Team would continue to be responsive to further reports of defects and work to ensure all inspections were carried out on time.

The additional funding from the Department for Transport (DfT) for potholes in the current year was £401,000 of Network North funding, which was diverted from HS2. It was understood that there was no further HS2 funding available at the end of the current financial year.

For 2025/26, £1.289m had been allocated from the DfT for road maintenance, which included resurfacing works.

Robert Wyatt chose not to ask a supplementary question.

Question 7C – Carolyn Hart, of Gillingham, asked theLeader of the Council, Councillor Maple, the following:

“Could the Leader of the Council give an update on what is being done to support those who may need additional assistance but might slip through the net following the Government’s decision to means test Winter Fuel Allowance?”

In response, Councillor Maple said that a range of activities had been undertaken or were planned to encourage take up of Pension Credit and to highlight the wide range of support available to Medway’s Pensioners.

Through the Cost-of-Living Crisis Response Plan, the Council had purchased a tool called the Low-Income Family Tracker (LIFT), and this had been used to identify Medway residents in receipt of Housing Benefit and Council Tax Reduction who may also be entitled to claim Pension Credit. These 440 residents were sent a letter from Councillor Murray, as the Portfolio Holder for Adult Social Care, to explain how to claim Pension  ...  view the full minutes text for item 633.

 This report sets out motions received for this meeting.

Motion A – As Councillor Etheridge had submitted apologies for the meeting, the motion was proposed by Councillor Lawrence and supported by Councillor Tejan:

“The Council notes that on the 30^th October 2024, Labour Chancellor of the Exchequer, The Rt Hon Rachel Reeves MP, delivered the largest tax raising budget since the Second World War with the biggest burden falling on businesses. The £40bn tax raising measures included adding inheritance tax to farmers, as well as increases including inflation busting national minimum wage rises, national insurance increases and higher capital gains tax liabilities. The national insurance rises alone will cost business more than £24bn and will be devastating for the charity sector and vulnerable residents dependent on Council services provided by the private sector.

The Council further notes that each one of these measures affects families living in Medway who have worked hard to create businesses to pass on to their loved ones. The impact of the Budget has been a plunge in business confidence, economic output going into reverse, inflation increasing, and hiring rates down.

Medway’s economy is dependent on small and medium enterprises (SMEs), and it is important that this sector thrives for the future of our community and future economic wellbeing.

For farmers, this is especially galling as farming is capital-intensive with extremely low margins and will mean the end of family farming across the country. It will affect the country’s food security, biodiversity and employment opportunities as farmers reduce investment.

The Council believes that the Labour government have committed shameful betrayal of working people and let down farmers by breaking their promise not to raise taxes nor introduce a family farm tax.

The Council resolves to request that the Leader of the Council writes to the Chancellor of the Exchequer, Secretary of State for Business and Trade, and the Secretary of State for the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs to outline the Council’s dismay at the recent Budget and call on the Government to stop the family farm tax.

The Council further resolves to request that the Portfolio Holder for Economic and Social Regeneration and Inward Investment engages with local businesses and farmers to understand the impact of the budget and to better understand what the Council can do to support them.”

Decision:

Upon being put to the vote, the motion was lost.

Motion B –

A Member questioned whether the motion should be permitted to be considered by the Council on the basis that it was so far removed, it should be considered to be de minimis as the motion would, if passed, amount to a direct interference with a local business and it was not for Medway Council to interfere with any business in those circumstances.

The Monitoring Officer advised that the rules in relation to motions at Council meetings were contained within Rule 10 of the Council’s procedural rules within the Council’s Constitution. Paragraph 10.1b dealt with motions involving debate. A debate could take place in relation to a motion that related  ...  view the full minutes text for item 634.

Discussion:

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

·      The Care Quality Commission inspection of Medway’s Adult Social Care provision, which had rated the Council as ‘requires improvement’. Medway’s score was only a small amount below ‘good’ and there was confidence that the score would be higher if the inspection was undertaken now.

·      The inspection of Medway’s Social Housing provision by the Regulator of Social Housing. The Council had achieved a score of C2, which was the second highest grade.

·      Hosting of the successful Rochester Christmas Market, which was now in its 15^th year and this year had been visited by over 130,000 people.

·      The English Devolution White Paper – the cross party approach was welcomed. Around 40 Members had attended a cross party Member briefing. It was considered that Medway would be well placed going forward due to it already being a unitary authority.

·      Recent events held including the Medway Business Awards, Medway Sports Awards and the Make a Difference Employee Recognition Awards.

·      National level recognition of the Council’s Safer Streets initiative and of the Public Health team.

·      The sending of a letter to Baroness Sharon Taylor asking the Government to consider granting Medway city status.

·      Thanks were given to Jane Ringham, Head of Member Services and Elections, for all her hard work. Jane was due to retire shortly and Members wished her a happy retirement.

·      The continued development of the Medway Local Plan.

·      Exceptional Financial Support provided to the Council and concern about associated interest payments.

·      The Plough Sunday Service held at Rochester Cathedral.

·      Ensuring good access to Primary Care and the need to consider those not able to use digital channels.

·      Christmas waste and recycling collections, which had been good this year following previous challenges.

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

Question 10A – Councillor Spalding, asked thePortfolio Holder for Climate Change and Strategic Regeneration, Councillor Curry, the following:

“On 8 July 2024, the new Labour Chancellor, Rachel Reeves, in her first speech promised 300 additional planning officers across the country.

Chatting about this to the new MP for Rochester and Strood, I was advised that in Medway’s case this did not have to be a planner but could be a much needed Planning Enforcement Officer.

Could the Portfolio Holder confirm Medway has received the funds to recruit and pay for an additional officer and when the person is likely to be in post or was this simply another case of the Labour Party making a promise and not keeping it?”

In response, Councillor Curry said that it was great news that the Chancellor had recognised the need to properly resource planning departments with the officers and skills necessary to make sure all local authorities had a Local Plan in place as soon as possible. It was also good that the need had been recognised for there to be staff within the development management team of sufficient experience and with the skills to properly process within the necessary timescales, the significant number of applications for sustainable development that would be needed to deliver the homes Medway and the country needed, in the right places, with the right infrastructure.

The Government had specifically set aside a £46m package of investment to recruit and train 300 graduate and apprentice planners. The Council would be looking at the relevant criteria and submitting a bid shortly.

There was also £14.8m set aside to support Local Authorities with Local Plan delivery and Green Belt review, subject to meeting all the necessary criteria. While Medway did not meet the criteria of Local Plan delivery, nor on its own, the criteria for Green Belt review, as part of cross border working with Gravesham, Medway would be submitting a bid for funding to support the green belt review.

The Government was also funding the not-for-profit Public Practice, whose aim was to assist local authorities to recruit mid and senior level professionals by matching candidates to vacancies. While Medway did not have such vacancies at present, having recently undergone a successful recruitment campaign following a re-structure of the planning service in 2024, it would, if necessary, utilise public practice in the future. That recruitment campaign had included filling the important Derelict and Empty Properties officer post within the planning enforcement team.

The Council has been successful in securing £750k of funding to support advancements in digital planning, for which Medway was now one of the leading councils in the country. Officers were currently rolling out a series of training evenings for Members on digital planning to show how it could assist ward Councillors in helping their constituents. This would be the way forward for planning authorities and would help free up professional staff from more mundane tasks so that they could focus on their areas of professional expertise.

In  ...  view the full minutes text for item 636.

The English Devolution White Paper was published by the Government on 16December 2024. The Council was invited to respond to the White Paper and to indicate its desire to be included in the first tranche, the ‘Priority Programme’, by Friday 10 January 2025.

Background:

This report set out details of the Devolution White Paper, which had been published by the Government on 16 December 2024. This focused on the following areas:

·       Implementing a new framework of Government that makes devolution from the centre the default;

·       Integrated funding settlements;

·       Devolved control of transportation, housing and skills;

·       More local oversight of delivering climate change commitments;

·       Joining up public services and moving towards prevention; and

·       Reorganising local government and moving towards a single tier structure.

Medway Council had responded to the proposals by the Government deadline of 10 January 2025, setting out the desire to be included in the first tranche of authorities to move forward with the policy, the ‘[Devolution] Priority Programme’.

The report explained that it was now necessary to consider how to position Medway Council most strongly in the conversations that were beginning in earnest around the real impact of devolution and, more specifically, Local Government Reorganisation (LGR), across Medway and the wider Kent area.

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

Decisions:

a)        The Council noted that the Leader of the Council wrote to Minister McMahon on 10 January 2025, indicating the Council’s preference to be included in the Devolution Priority Programme.

b)        The Council agreed to delegate authority to the Chief Executive, in consultation with the Leader of the Council, to establish the appropriate support and resource to deliver this programme of change (inclusive of recruitment to new posts as deemed necessary).

c)        The Council agreed to establish a Member Working Group which would work closely with officers and to agree its membership and terms of reference as set out in paragraphs 4.4 - 4.7 of the report).

This report presents the Hoo St Werburgh and Chattenden Neighbourhood Plan for formal adoption by the Council. The Council held a referendum on the Neighbourhood Plan in the parish of Hoo St Werburgh and Chattenden on 7 November 2024. The majority of voters were in favour of the plan, so the plan is recognised as ‘made’.

Background:

This report presented the Hoo St Werburgh and Chattenden Neighbourhood Plan for formal adoption by the Council.

The Council had held a referendum on the Neighbourhood Plan in the parish of Hoo St Werburgh and Chattenden on 7 November 2024. The majority of voters were in favour of the plan, so the plan now needed to be recognised as ‘made’.

The Neighbourhood Plan formed part of the development plan for Medway and would be used to help decide planning applications in the Hoo St Werburgh and Chattenden Neighbourhood Area.

The Portfolio Holder for Portfolio Holder for Climate Change and Strategic Regeneration, Councillor Curry, supported by Councillor Stamp, proposed the recommendations set out in the report.

A Diversity Impact Assessment had been completed in relation to the Neighbourhood Plan. This was attached at Appendix 2 to the report.

Decision:

The Council approved the Hoo St Werburgh and Chattenden Neighbourhood Plan (as set out at Appendix 1) be ‘made’, as part of the statutory development plan for Medway Council.

This report sets out a review of the changes as to how full Council meetings are conducted and proposes to make some permanent changes. It is also proposed to trial some further changes with regards to public and Member questions at Council meetings. The report also recommends changes to the Constitution.

Background:

This report set out a review of the changes as to how full Council meetings are conducted and proposed to make some permanent changes. It was also proposed to trial some further changes with regards to public and Member questions at Council meetings.

This report also recommended the following changes to the Constitution:

• Inclusion of an overview and scrutiny task group protocol;
• A revised Ward Improvement Fund criteria and;
• Employee Scheme of Delegation (minor change).

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

Decisions:

a)    The Council approved the changes to the Council Rules as set out in Appendix A to the report in respect of changes to the arrangements for conducting full Council meetings. (Note: This recommendation would be taken forward without discussion for debate at the next ordinary meeting of the Council, as set out in paragraph 3.4 of the report).

b)    The Council noted the further changes for trialing how public and Member questions are dealt with, as set out in paragraphs 3.5-3.10 of the report.

c)    The Council approved the inclusion of the Overview and Scrutiny Task Group Protocol in the Constitution, as set out in Appendix B to the report.

d)    The Council approved the revised Ward Improvement Fund Criteria, as set out in Appendix C to the report.

This report asks full Council to support the appointment of the Director of Public Health, following the decision made by the Appointments Committee on 6 December 2024.

This report also seeks approval to recruit to the vacant post of Assistant Director, Children’s Social Care.

Background:

This report asked full Council to support the appointment of the Director of Public Health, following the decision made by the Appointments Committee on 6 December 2024.

This report also sought approval to recruit to the vacant post of Assistant Director, Children’s Social Care.

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

Decisions:

a)   The Council supported the appointment of Dr David Whiting as the Director of Public Health, which had been agreed by the Appointments Committee on 6 December 2024.

b)   The Council approved recruitment to the role of the Assistant Director, Children’s Social Care.

This report sets out the results of the calculations under Council Rule 20 to select the Mayor and Deputy Mayor for the 2025/2026 municipal year.

The report also sets out the provisional programme of meetings for the 2025/26 municipal year.

Background:

This report set out the results of the calculations under Council Rule 20 to select the Mayor and Deputy Mayor for the 2025/2026 municipal year.

The report also set out the provisional programme of meetings for the 2025/26 municipal year.

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

Decisions:

a)   The Council noted the entitlement of the Conservative Group to nominate a Mayor and Deputy Mayor for the 2025/2026 municipal year and that the entitlement would be accepted or declined at the Council meeting on 27 February 2025.

b)   The Council agreed a provisional programme of Council and Committee meetings for 2025/2026, as set out in Appendix 2 to the report, for recommendation to the Annual Meeting of the Council on 14 May 2025.

This report covers the outcomes of the public consultations carried out seeking views on the introduction of a Medway wide Dog Control Public Space Protection Order (PSPO). The Council is recommended to approve the introduction of a Medway wide Public Spaces Protection Order to control the behaviour of dogs.

Background:

This report covered the outcomes of the public consultations carried out seeking views on the introduction of a Medway wide Dog Control Public Space Protection Order. The Council was requested to agree the introduction of a PSPO.

The report explained that the introduction of the PSPOs should help to control several issues that arose as a result of people failing to exercise proper control of dogs in public places. 

The PSPO included controls on dog fouling, defining areas where dogs were not permitted – such as playgrounds; and requiring dogs to be on leads in some public spaces across Medway and over the long-term improve the quality of life for residents, visitors, and local businesses.

This report had previously been considered by the Regeneration, Culture and Environment Overview and Scrutiny Committee on 10 October 2024 and by the Cabinet on 29 October 2024. the relevant minutes and decisions of which were set out at sections 6 and 7 of the report below.

The Portfolio Holder for Community Safety, Highways and Enforcement, Councillor Paterson, supported by Councillor Browne, proposed the recommendations set out in the report.

Decisions:

a)       The Council noted the comments of the Regeneration, Culture and Environment Overview and Scrutiny Committee, as set out in section 6 of the report and the decisions of the Cabinet, as set out at section 7 of the report.

b)       The Council approved the introduction of a Medway wide Public Space Protection Order (PSPO) to control the behaviour of dogs.

c)       The Council approved Option 3, hybrid enforcement, as the mechanism of enforcing this PSPO. This activity would be delivered within the existing service resources and would be performed as an adjunct to the existing duties and statutory responsibilities.

This report provides a summary of the work of the Council’s Overview and Scrutiny Committees since the last report to Council on 17 October 2024.

 Background:

This report provided a summary of the work of the Council’s Overview and Scrutiny Committees since the last report to Council on 17 October 2024.

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

The reports considered by the Council’s four Overview and Scrutiny Committees during the previous three months were highlighted.

Decision:

The Council noted the report.

This report gives an overview of treasury management activity since 1 April 2024 and presents a review of the Treasury Strategy approved by Council on 29 February 2024.

Background:

This report provided an overview of treasury management activity since 1 April 2024 and presented a review of the Treasury Strategy approved by Council on 29 February 2024.

The report had previously been considered by the Audit Committee on 26 November 2024, the minutes of which were set out at section 9 of the report and by the Cabinet on 17 December 2024, the decisions of which were set out at section 10 of the report.

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

Decision:

The Council noted the comments of the Audit Committee set out at section 10 of the report and the decisions of the Cabinet set out at section 11.

This report provides details of a recent usage of urgency provisions contained within the Constitution.

Background:

This report provided details of recent usage of urgency provisions contained within the Constitution.

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

Decision:

The Council noted the use of urgency provisions as set out in section 4 of the report.