Agenda and draft minutes

Apologies for absence were received from Councillors Clarke, Edwards, Etheridge, Filmer, Hamilton, Myton, Mark Prenter, Sands 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

Councillor Mahil declared an interest in agenda item No. 14 (Pavement Licensing Policy) and in agenda item No. 19 (Report on Overview and Scrutiny Activity). Councillor Mahil left the room during discussion and determination of the items.

Other significant interests (OSIs)

The Monitoring Officer stated that in relation to agenda Item No. 11 (Annual Review of the School Place Planning), the report recommended capital funding allocations for works to be undertaken at a number of schools, as set out in the recommendations of the report

The Monitoring Officer advised that where a Member was a governor at one of these schools, he considered that the Member had an Other Significant Interest (OSI) in the matter, arsing from the fact that the Member would be in position of general control or managerial control. In such cases, Members were advised they should declare their OSI, leave the chamber and not participate in the debate or vote.

Agenda item 8A was a motion to discuss the changes to the winter fuel allowance payable to pensioners. Some Members might be directly affected by the changes recently announced by the government regarding entitlement to the allowance. Other Members may have family members, friends or others with whom they had close personal relationship whose entitlement to the benefit may be affected. The Monitoring Officer advised that in those circumstances, Members should declare an OSI.

Due to the number of Members that may be affected and the impact that would have on proportionality of votes, the Monitoring Officer had exercised a delegation to grant a dispensation to all Members for a period of six months. This meant that Members who had an OSI would be entitled to remain in the meeting during discussion of the matter and to take part in the discussion and vote.

The following Members declared an OSI for motion 8A in relation to themselves: Councillors Anang, Browne and Van Dyke.

The following Members declared an OSI for motion 8A in relation to a close friend or relative: Councillors Bowen, Cook, Coombs, Field, Gilbourne, Gurung, Hackwell, Jackson, Joy, Lawrence, Mahil, Murray, Osborne, Paterson, Peake, Pearce, Perfect, Louwella Prenter, Stamp, Mrs Turpin and Wildey.

The following Members declared an OSI for motion 8A in relation to themselves and a close friend or relative: Councillors Crozer, Gulvin, Jones, Kemp and Price.

Councillor Cook declared an interest in agenda item No. 11 (Annual Review of the School Place Planning Strategy 2022-27) as she is an employee of the Leigh Academies Trust and her business relationship with a number of the schools mentioned in the report. Councillor Cook left the room during discussion and determination of the item.

Councillor Anang declared an interest in agenda item No. 11 (Annual Review of the School Place Planning Strategy 2022-27) as he is a Governor of Rivermead Inclusive Trust. Councillor Anang left the room during discussion and determination of the item.

Other interests

Councillor Howcroft-Scott declared an interest in agenda item No. 11 (Annual Review of the School  ...  view the full minutes text for item 355.

To approve the record of the meeting held on 18 July 2024.

The record of the meeting held on 18 July 2024 was approved and signed by the Worshipful Mayor as correct. 

The Worshipful Mayor of Medway announced that former Councillors, Bob Adcock and Mike Franklin, had passed away.

Bob Adcock had served as a Councillor on the Gillingham Borough Council from 1996 to1998 and then on Medway Council from 1998 to 2003.

Mike Franklin had served as a Councillor on the Rochester Upon Medway City Council from 1976 to 1991 and then on Medway Council from 2015 to 2019.

The Mayor offered condolences to the respective families. Councillor Price also paid tribute to Bob Adcock and Councillor Gulvin paid tribute to Mike Franklin.

The Mayor acknowledged the work of the former Mayor of Medway, Councillor Nina Gurung. During her year as Mayor, she had raised £9,430 for her three chosen charities, Young Medway, Medway Help for Ukrainians and veterans charity, SSAFA. As a result, each charity would receive £3,143.30 in recognition of their valuable work and support in the community.

The Mayor had undertaken a walk across Medway on 30 September 2024. He thanked everyone who had supported him by joining the walk, helping to organise it or by making a donation. £590 had been raised for the Mayor’s charities.

It was also announced that tickets were available for the Mayor’s next fundraising event at Gurkha Fire on 29 October.

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. These changes had initially been trialled at the January Council meeting.

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 – 4

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.

A petition was submitted by Councillor Lawrence on behalf of 124 residents adjacent to Fairview Community Primary School. This opposed the establishment of a Safer School Street in the area.

Question A – Martin Hill, of Gillingham, asked the Portfolio Holder for Community Safety, Highways and Enforcement, Councillor Paterson, the following:

“I live in Napier Road, Gillingham, this used to be a quiet road, but now it is a racetrack for speeding motorists and motorbikes. Over the last 10 to 25 years we have had two children killed by speeding motorists, one suicide on a motorbike, several severe crashes and regular speeding cars going over 40 mph. This road has a school on it.

We need proper speed bumps and cameras, what can be done about this situation?”

In response Councillor Paterson said that selfish, speeding motorists were a scourge on communities and he sympathised with the concerns raised. The Council was not in a position to undertake all the road safety interventions that he would like and all road safety work was evidence based. Recent collision data was examined to ensure resources were used most effectively to reduce the number of people being harmed while traveling on Medway’s roads.

Earlier in 2024, collision data for several streets in the Gillingham area, including Napier Road, had been analysed. This study indicated that Napier Road did not meet the criteria for further intervention when compared against other locations in Medway, it was also noted that vehicle activated speed limit signs had been installed on this road to influence driver behaviour and traffic speeds.

Councillor Paterson said that he worked with officers and partners, including Kent police, to promote safe road use and prevent casualties wherever possible. However, priority must be given to locations where recent road casualties were being recorded. This meant that the Council was unable to prioritise additional measures on Napier road at present. Road safety in the area would continue to be monitored over the coming months.

Martin Hill chose not to ask a supplementary question:

Question B – Liz Sweet, of Hempstead, asked the Deputy Leader of the Council, Councillor Murray, the following:

“I would like to start by placing on record the thanks of Medway Help for Ukrainians to the former Mayor, Councillor Nina Gurung, for choosing us as one of her charities. We are extremely grateful for the funds raised.

Can I also thank the Council and their excellent Homes for Ukraine team for their support since our creation at the start of the war.

Although not in the same media spotlight as at the start of the conflict, the risk to lives in Ukraine remains real and present, and our and your continued support is very needed.

One area where there has been a reduction is individuals and families stepping forward as sponsors for those seeking support in the UK. 

Will the Council work with Medway Help For Ukrainians to find a means of attracting people in Medway to become sponsors to Ukrainians wishing to flee the war?”

In response Councillor Murray thanked Liz Sweet for the kind words about Councillor Gurung’s charity support for Medway Help for Ukrainians, a grass roots organisation that  ...  view the full minutes text for item 360.

This report sets out motions received for this meeting.

Motion A – proposed by Councillor Wildey and supported by Councillor Tejan:

“Changes to the Winter Fuel Allowance and protecting pensioners from fuel poverty

The Council notes:

•        The Labour Government’s recent decision to restrict the Winter Fuel Payment to only pensioners in receipt of means-tested benefits like Pension Credit, as announced by Chancellor Rachel Reeves.

•        Both Councillor Edwards MP and Councillor Osborne MP voted to remove winter fuel payments in the House of Commons on Tuesday 10^th September 2024.

•        The estimated impact of this decision, which Age UK says will mean 2 million pensioners who badly need the money to stay warm this winter will not receive it.

•        The significant role that Winter Fuel Payments play in helping older residents of Medway and across the UK afford heating during the coldest months, thereby preventing 'heat or eat' dilemmas and safeguarding health.

•        The criticism from Age UK, the Countryside Alliance and other charities, highlighting the social injustice and potential health risks posed by this sudden policy change.

•        The additional strain this decision will place on vulnerable pensioners, many of whom do not claim Pension Credit despite being eligible, further exacerbating their financial hardship.

The Council believes:

•         That the Winter Fuel Payment has been a lifeline for many older people across the UK and that restricting its availability solely to those on Pension Credit risks leaving many pensioners in financial hardship.

•         While some pensioners currently in receipt of the Winter Fuel Payment may not require it, many thousands acrossMedway sit just above the cut-off for Pension Credit and will now lose their allowance.

•         The decision to means-test Winter Fuel Payments, especially with such short notice and without adequate compensatory measures, is deeply unfair and will disproportionately affect the health and well-being of our poorest older residents.

•         The government’s approach fails to consider the administrative barriers and stigma that prevent eligible pensioners from claiming Pension Credit, leaving many without the support they desperately need.

The Council resolves to:

•         Bring forward a Council-led local awareness campaign to alert those eligible of Pension Credit which in some respects will help access to the Winter Fuel Payment for those most in need.

•         Ahead of the Autumn Statement, request that the Leader of the Council write to the Chancellor of the Exchequer, urging a review of the decision to means-test the Winter Fuel Payment and asking the government to ensure that vulnerable pensioners, particularly those who do not claim Pension Credit, are protected from fuel poverty.

•         Request that the Leader of the Council, on behalf of the Council, sign the ‘Save the Winter Fuel Payment for Struggling Pensioners’ petition being run by Age UK and write to all Members offering them the opportunity to sign the petition themselves.

•         Encourage local efforts to promote Pension Credit uptake through Council services and partnerships with local charities and community organisations to ensure that all eligible pensioners in Medway are supported in claiming their entitlement.”  ...  view the full minutes text for item 361.

Discussion:

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

·      The possibility of devolution of powers to local authorities and what this could mean in practice and the need for any increased responsibilities to be matched by increased resources.

·      The development of Medway’s new Local Plan and the review of responses being undertaken following the recent consultation. There had been effective cross party work and officers were thanked for their work.

·      Two important inspections of Council services had recently been undertaken by the Care Quality Commission and by the Regulator of Social Housing. The results of these inspections were awaited.

·      Cross party conversations being undertaken with a view to reducing the length of full Council meetings.

·      Fundraising activities undertaken by Councillor Mrs Elizabeth Turpin for Demelza Hospice were recognised as were Councillor Mandaracas and Khan’s activities for One Big Family.

·      The Paddock regeneration project in the centre of Chatham that had recently been completed.

·      Recent events and commemorations in Medway, such as the International Dance Festival, the 40^th anniversary of Wisdom Hospice, the 200^th anniversary of Thomas Aveling, the Big Day Out love Gillingham event, the 40^th anniversary of the Medway African and Caribbean Association, the Rainham Community Awards and Super Saturday, part of the child friendly Medway programme.

·      Development of the Children’s Assessment Unit at Eden House.

·      Updating of the Council’s Cost of Living Plan and the extension of the Household Support Fund.

·      The UK Shared Prosperity Fund Round 3 which had received nearly 100 applications in Medway.

·      Development of the Medway 2.0 transformation project.

·      The forthcoming Hoo St Werburgh and Chattenden Neighbourhood Plan referendum.

·      Olympic gold medallist shooter, Nathan Hales, who is from Medway.

·      Discussion and concern about some historic social media posts made by a Member of the Council

·      The centralisation of some health services with some patients having to travel out of Medway.

·      The Hoo Peninsula and North Kent Downs and potential for these to be designated as areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty.

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

Question A – Councillor Pearce asked theLeader of the Council, Councillor Maple, the following:

“Does the Leader of the Council believe the Member of Parliament for Rochester and Strood should respond to constituent emails and letters from residents in my ward?”

In response Councillor Maple said that at the General Election, Medway had  elected three new MPs to represent the local community in the Houses of Parliament. After having been in the spotlight for a number of weeks campaigning in advance of the election, the new MPs effectively had to set up a small business as that was the reality of becoming an MP.

All three local MPs were working hard for their constituents, but there were some challenges in finding the relevant staff and officers, which was a work in progress.

Councillor Maple considered it fair to say that there had been zero handover between the three outgoing MPs and the three incoming MPs. All MPs should respond to emails and letters, and all MPs were responding to emails and letters, as well as being present in the Houses of Parliament, attending the  Chamber and Westminster Hall debates. These colleagues had made interventions there and other Kent MPs had hosted Westminster Hall debates.

Lauren Edwards MP held an adjournment debate on the UK Shared Prosperity Fund. She was working hard, highlighting the work she had done as a Council Cabinet member, which Councillor Mahil was continuing. Her office had responded to over 900 emails already. This was compared to at least one example where a constituent didn’t get a response for more than three years from the previous MP. The former Leader of the Council had not responded to an important employer for close to four years.

Councillor Maple said that when he and the Chief Executive took up their posts they had responded very quickly and quick responses would continue. He was proud of the work that all three local MPs were doing for the residents of Medway.

Question B – Councillor Perfect asked theLeader of the Council, Councillor Maple, the following:

“Can the Leader of the Council please update the Council on conversations surrounding devolution?”

Councillor Maple thanked Councillor Perfect both for the question and for the conversations that had been had at their cross-party Leader’s meetings, which had been helpful. There had been a number of conversations surrounding devolution. An important Kent Leader’s meeting had taken place in Maidstone,  There had been a number of individual conversations between Councillor Maple and the Leader of Kent County Council, Roger Gough, and their teams.

Councillor Maple had spoken to a number of Labour Group Leaders and Council Leaders and had undertaken other conversations with key stakeholders. One example of that was meeting with the Senior Leadership Team from the University of Kent. It had been made clear that all fourteen voices of Local Government from Kent and Medway should be around the table and at the appropriate time conversations would be had at Medway Council  ...  view the full minutes text for item 363.

This annual summary report provides an update on the progress made during the lifetime of the 2022-27 School Place Planning Strategy. It identifies areas of demand and makes recommendations to ensure that appropriate levels of good quality school places are available through to 2027 and beyond.

Background:

This report provided an update on the progress made against the School Place Planning Strategy 2022 - 2027, highlighting areas of demand for school places and made recommendations to ensure that sufficient good quality school places would be available through to 2027 and beyond. The report set out options to fund the proposals.

This annual review report and the recommendations in it were based upon the annual round of forecasting undertaken in April 2024, using the latest available data.

The report had previously been considered by the Cabinet on 1 October 2024, the decisions of which were set out at section 19 of the report.

The Portfolio Holder for Education, Councillor Coombs, supported by the Portfolio Holder for Children’s Services, Councillor Price, proposed the recommendations set out in the report.

Decisions:

a)    The Council agreed the addition of £5.4m High Needs Provision Capital Allocation to the SEND capital programme and approved the addition of:

i)      £600k to Rivermead at Stoke (9x589) to fund additional costs in the project as set out in paragraph 16.3 of the report.

ii)     £200k to Danecourt to fund additional costs in the project as set out in paragraph 16.3 of the report.

iii)   £4.6m to increase education provision for children with Education, Health and Care Plans (EHCPs).

b)    The Council agreed the addition of £798k of s106 funding to the Hundred of Hoo Academy expansion 9x592, as set out in paragraph 23.9 of the report.

c)    The Council agreed the addition of £21k to the capital programme for Pilgrim Primary School, as set out in paragraph 23.10 of the report.

d)    The Council agreed the addition of £35,799.51 of s106 funding to Greenvale Primary School (9x566) as set out in paragraph 23.11 of the report.

The Medway Youth Justice Plan is a completely new plan in line with guidance distributed to local authorities in March 2024. The Format of the plan follows guidance and headings provided by the national Youth Justice Board in the guidance mentioned, detailing best practice in the Youth Justice Plans completion. The Council is requested to approve the Plan.

Background:

The report presented the annually reviewed Medway Youth Justice Partnership Strategic Plan, which was a strategic plan that formed part of the Policy Framework for Medway Council. The Plan had also been updated in line with guidance received by the National Youth Justice Board in March 2024.

Consultation had taken place primarily through the multi-agency Youth Justice Partnership Board, which was the main forum for governance and oversight of the Youth Offending Team in Medway and had good representation from all statutory partners and a range of non-statutory partners.

The report had previously been considered by the Children and Young People Overview and Scrutiny Committee on 1 August 2024 and by the Cabinet on 1 October 2024. The comments of the Committee and the decisions of the Cabinet were set out in sections 7 and 8 of the report respectively.

A Diversity Impact Assessment had been undertaken and was attached at Appendix 2 to the report.

The Portfolio Holder for Children’s Services, Councillor Price, supported by Councillor Animashaun, proposed the recommendations set out in the report.

Decisions:

a)      The Council noted the comments of the Children and Young People Overview and Scrutiny Committee, as set out at section 7 to the report and the decisions of the Cabinet set out at section 8 of the report.

b)       The Council approved the Medway Youth Justice Partnership Strategic Plan 2024 – 2025.

This report seeks Council approval to use capital savings identified from underspend on the allocated Cozenton Park Sports Centre budget to undertake a range of improvements to Medway Park and Strood Sports Centre.

Background:

The report sought approval from Council to use capital savings identified from an underspend on the allocated Cozenton Park Sports Centre budget, to undertake a range of improvements to Medway Park and Strood Sports Centre. Allocation of the underspend to Medway Park and Strood Sports Centre, together with the planned investment in Hoo Sports Centre and The Strand, would mean that all five sports centres would benefit from Council investment over the coming year.

This would increase the longevity of the centres, improve sustainability through increased income generation opportunities, and not require any additional Council capital investment beyond what was already committed. This created the potential for ongoing improvements to the Council’s revenue budget position and aligned with the ambition to remove the operational subsidy required for the sports centres without increasing projected capital expenditure beyond that already within the capital budget.

The Portfolio Holder for Culture, Heritage and Leisure, Councillor Gurung, supported by the Portfolio Holder for Economic and Social Regeneration and Inward Investment, Councillor Mahil, proposed the recommendations set out in the report.

Decision:

The Council agreed the addition of a new scheme to the capital programme for sports centre improvements, which would undertake improvements to Medway Park and Strood Sports Centre with the aim of improving income generation.  This was proposed to be funded by £1.5 million capital investment savings arising from the delivery of the Cozenton Park Sports Centre scheme.

Note: Councillor Pearce requested that his vote against the decision be recorded in accordance with Council rule 12.6.

This report requests Council approval of the draft Pavement Licensing Policy.

Background:

This report set out the draft Pavement Licensing Policy and proposed fees.

The report explained that amongst other provisions, the Business and Planning Act 2020 had introduced a new ‘Pavement Licensing’ regime to support businesses selling food and drink only, in order to support economic recovery and growth as Covid lockdown restrictions were lifted but social distancing guidelines remained in place.

It was implemented as a fast-track process in light of the reopening of premises following the disruption caused by COVID-19 and was initially due to expire on 30 September 2022, but later extended until 2023 and then again until 21 September 2024.

As the Business and Planning Act 2020 had been amended to include the ability to enforce food and drink premises putting table and chairs on the highway without a licence, Medway was now in a position to implement the Pavement Licensing regime in Medway.

The report had previously been considered by the Licensing and Safety Committee on 6 August 2024, the minutes of which were set out at section 4 of the report.

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

Decisions:

a)      The Council approved the draft Pavement Licensing Policy, as set out at Appendix A to the report.

b)      The Council approved the proposed fees set out in section 8 of the report.

c)      The Council agreed the proposed review procedure set out in section 6 of the appended Draft Policy.

d)      The Council agreed for all powers and functions relating to Pavement Licensing as set out in the Business and Planning Act 2020, including any legislation amending or replacing the same, to be included within the existing delegations set out in the Constitution made to the Licensing and Safety Committee, and Assistant Director, Legal and Governance, respectively.

This report presents the consultation responses received in respect of the draft revised Statement of Gambling Policy and asks the Council to approve the Policy.

Background:

The report sought the Council’s approval of the Statement of Gambling Policy 2025 to 2028. It presented the consultation responses received in respect of the draft revised Gambling Policy: along with an evaluation of each response; a recommendation as to whether to amend the draft revised policy statement; and, if so, in what way and to what extent.

The report had been previously considered by the Licensing and Safety Committee on 6 August 2024, the Business Support and Digital Overview and Scrutiny Committee on 21 August 2024 and the Cabinet on 1 October 2024. The comments and decisions arising were set out in sections 6, 7 and 8 of the report, respectively.

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

Decisions:

a)    The Council noted the responses received during the consultation.

b)    The Council noted the comments made by the Licensing and Safety Committee on 6 August 2024 and the Business Support and Digital Overview and Scrutiny Committee on 21 August 2024 and the decisions of the Cabinet, as set out in sections 6, 7 and 8 of the report.

c)    The Council approved the Draft Statement of Gambling Policy 2025-2028, as set out in Appendix A to the report.

This report sets out a review of the constitution, for consideration and approval of the recommended changes to the financial limits at chapter 3, part 5 and the rules at chapter 4, parts 3 and 6.

Background:

This report set out a review of the constitution, for consideration and approval of the recommended changes to the financial limits at chapter 3, part 5 and the rules at chapter 4, parts 3 and 6.

The report explained that the Constitution is reviewed and updated on an on-going basis to ensure it remains fit for purpose including compliance with legislation, in accordance with Article 14 of the Council’s Constitution.

As part of the on-going requirement to review the Constitution, the Chief Operating Officer had recently reviewed the Council’s budget and policy framework rules, financial rules and financial limits, which had not been reviewed for many years.

The Leader of the Council, Councillor Maple, supported by Councillor Browne, proposed the recommendations set out in the report, subject to the removal of ex gratia payments to Members of the Council from the Financial Limits set out within Appendix 1 of the report.

Decision:

a)    The Council approved the changes to the Constitution as set out in Appendix 1 to the report, subject to the removal of the reference to ex gratia payments to Members, as set out in paragraph 5.5(b) of Appendix 1 to the report.

b)    The Council approved the changes to the Constitution as set out in Appendices 2 and 3 of the report:

i)        Budget and policy framework rules (chapter 4, part 3)

ii)      Financial rules (chapter 4, part 6)

This report sets out the position regarding the overall allocation of seats on committees on a receipt of a notice from the Independent Group requesting a review following notification that Councillor Williams had joined the Independent Group on 16 July 2024.

Background:

This report set out the position regarding the overall allocation of seats on committees on a receipt of a notice from the Independent Group requesting a review following notification that Councillor Williams had joined the Independent Group on 16 July 2024.

The result of this change required the Council to allocate two additional seats to the Independent Group whilst the Conservative Group would lose two seats. Specifically, the Independent Group gained one seat on both the Appointments Committee and the Governor Ad-Hoc Committee, both at the expense of the Conservative Group.

The Labour and Co-operative Group retained an entitlement to three additional seats on the Children and Young People Overview and Scrutiny Committee to preserve its majority, in view of the seats for statutory voting co-opted Members on that Committee.

There were six unallocated seats to which none of the three political groups were entitled to.

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

Decisions:

a)   The Council noted the review of the allocation of seats on the committees of the Council as set out in section 4 of the report.

b)   The Council agreed the allocation of seats on the committees of the Council as set out in Appendix B to the report.

c)   The Council agreed to remove the following Conservative Group Members from the following committees: the “relevant Spokesperson” from the membership of the Appointments Committee and Councillor Kemp from the membership of the Governor Ad-Hoc Committee.

d)   The Council agreed to add the following Independent Group members to the following committees: Councillor Crozer to the membership of the Appointments Committee and Councillor Mrs Turpin to the membership of the Governor Ad-Hoc Committee.

This report provides an update on progress made in recruitment to the Independent Person positions and recommends the appointment of one Independent Person.

Discussion:

This report provided an update on progress made in recruitment of an Independent Person to investigate allegations that a Member is in breach of the Code of Conduct and recommended the appointment of one Independent Person.

The Localism Act 2011 required the appointment of an Independent Person and this appointment was required to be approved by the majority of the Members of the authority.

The Portfolio Holder for Heritage, Culture and Leisure, Councillor Gurung, supported by Councillor Browne, proposed the recommendations set out in the report.

Decision:

a)    The Council agreed the appointment of John Greenhill as an Independent Person under section 28(7) of the Localism Act 2011 with effect from 18 October 2024 for a period of 4 years, 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 provides a summary of the work of the Council’s Overview and Scrutiny Committees since the last report to Council on 18 July 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 18 July 2024.

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

Members raised the following issues during debate:

·      The development of and focus on governance and improving Overview and Scrutiny (O&S) at Medway.

·      The effective cross party working undertaken by the O&S committees and the need to keep party politics out of scrutiny committees, including seating order.

·      The work being undertaken by the Kent and Medway Integrated Care Board to transform community health services and the concerns raised by Medway. The Health and Adult Social Care O&S had determined that the proposals amounted to a substantial change to health services in Medway. 

·      Good scrutiny work undertaken in relation to topics such as the Local Plan and Asset Management Strategy.

Decision:

The Council noted the report.