Agenda and minutes

To approve the record of the meeting held on 13 December 2012.

The record of the meeting held on 13 December 2012 was agreed and signed as correct by the Chairman.  

There were none. 

The Chairman will announce any late items which do not appear on the main agenda but which he/she has agreed should be considered by reason of special circumstances to be specified in the report. 

There were none. 

A member need only disclose at any meeting the existence of a disclosable pecuniary interest (DPI) in a matter to be considered at that meeting if that DPI has not been entered on the disclosable pecuniary interests register maintained by the Monitoring Officer.

A member disclosing a DPI at a meeting must thereafter notify the Monitoring Officer in writing of that interest within 28 days from the date of disclosure at the meeting.

A member may not participate in a discussion of or vote on any matter in which he or she has a DPI (both those already registered and those disclosed at the meeting) and must withdraw from the room during such discussion/vote.

Members may choose to voluntarily disclose a DPI at a meeting even if it is registered on the council’s register of disclosable pecuniary interests but there is no legal requirement to do so.

In line with the training provided to members by the Monitoring Officer members will also need to consider bias and pre-determination in certain circumstances and whether they have a conflict of interest or should otherwise leave the room for Code reasons. 

There were none. 

The Portfolio Holder for Community Safety and Customer First will attend the meeting in order to be held to account for matters within the remit of this committee. 

Discussion:

The Portfolio Holder for Community Safety and Customer Contact had given information in a report about achievements within his portfolio during the past year and the committee asked him questions about these, which included:

·        Environmental health checks on food, following the recent national publicity about horsemeat found in beef burgers.

Councillor O’Brien advised that food safety was taken very seriously but he could not comment on the current situation about horsemeat. The Local Authority carried out all the relevant checks within Medway, which were at the end of the food chain but the national problems had been at the start of the food chain. The environmental health team had recently undergone a food safety health check, which it had passed with flying colours.

The council was also due to launch a Hygiene Registration Scheme, where food venues such as restaurants would be judged on hygiene, content and environmental standards and given a mark of excellence, if appropriate.

·        A recent re-structure in the police force had resulted in changes to personnel working at ward-level, which had not been communicated to Councillors.

The Portfolio Holder confirmed that there had been a re-structure in the police force including Police Community Support Officers (PCSOs) and the new structure was now in place. He would ask the police to notify Councillors of the names and contact numbers for the officers working within each ward.

·        Could the CCTV system be developed further to include other Local Authorities.

The Portfolio Holder advised that the CCTV Partnership had worked together to create a system that worked for all the Local Authorities involved in the partnership. Staff had re-located from the other councils to work in Medway to operate the enhanced coverage, with better quality equipment, which also created financial savings for all the authorities.

·        Were all CCTV cameras operational, as some cameras in Chatham were rumoured not to work whilst others had poor resolution

Councillor O’Brien advised that the old analogue CCTV system was prone to breaking but the advantage of the new contract was that all cameras were being updated to digital. This project was currently on going. He was unaware of any problems with the current cameras but would look into this.

·        Environmental enforcement, particularly for litter, was a high priority in town centres but could this be enforced in urban areas, especially school routes.

The Portfolio Holder informed Members that the Community Safety team was currently being consulted about plans to split the engagement side from the enforcement function into two very different roles, which would result in a dedicated enforcement team with strong targets to reach. The engagement officers would change their shift pattern so that they would be more visible on the streets.

There was also an on-going education programme to encourage people to be proud of the area they lived in but the team could look at occasional visits to urban areas. PCSO’s were working with secondary schools as this was an on-going problem they were trying to tackle.

·        A Member  ...  view the full minutes text for item 796.

This report provides an update on the activity carried out by the three waste contractors to Medway Council within the second year of the waste services contracts. Representatives from Veolia and FCC will attend the meeting in order to answer questions from the committee.  

Decision:

The representatives from Veolia (Melanie Tong) and FCC (Steve Bell and Neil Jones) gave presentations and answered questions on the work carried out within the past year, which included:

Veolia

·        The council’s bid for DCLG funding

·        Introduction of a weekly recycling collection but overall there had been a reduction in the total tonnage collected for the year due to issues with the implementation of the scheme

·        Weekly garden and food waste collection, with an increase in the total tonnage collected

·        Launch of a WEEE (waste electrical and electronic equipment) kerbside collection

·        Separation of waste and recyclable materials - plastic, cans and glass picked up by the manual street cleansing staff

·        Litter and detritus clearance were both above target, as was public satisfaction with refuse collection at an average of 92.75% (target of 90%)

·        Veolia was a very large employer nationally and provided local employment opportunities which last year in Medway included 12 apprenticeships and two NEETs (young people who were not in education, or employment or on a training scheme)

·        89 staff had given at least half a day’s voluntary service to a variety of projects in Medway.

FCC

·        FCC managed 220 licensed waste management facilities in the UK and 120 waste contracts for 60 Local Authorities, handling over 9 million tonnes of municipal, commercial and industrial waste per year

·        20,839 tonnes of materials were brought to the Medway Household Waste Recycling Centres (HWRC) in 2011/2012 and of this 12,875 tonnes were recycled

·        During 2011/2012 the Environment Agency had inspected all three sites and no breaches were found at any of the sites

·        During 2011/2012 there were no RIDDOR (health and safety) reportable incidents at any of Medway’s HWRC’s

·        Recycling rates had risen from 52% in 2010/2011 to over 61% in 2011/2012

·        Customer satisfaction levels were greater than 97%

·        A new re-use service had begun in partnership with a local reuse charity, Abacus, which was hoped could be developed further

·        FCC recognised that the council had to make savings and proposed to meet this challenge by:

-         increasing recycling rates which would result in reduced disposal costs

-         the development of a Trade Waste Service at one or more of the HWRC’s. The provision of such a service would help support local businesses and generate revenue

·                    Plans to enhance the existing service include:

      -     re-development of the Hoath Way HWRC

-            reduced trade waste abuse at the sites through the development of the Trade Waste Service. This would result in a reduction of disposal costs for the council

-            continued site layout improvements to encourage recycling activities and increased diversion of waste from landfill

-         continued training of staff in relation to customer services

-         undertaking six-monthly customer satisfaction surveys

-         incentivisation of staff to encourage high quality customer service standards

-         development of new opportunities to recycle materials, for example carpets.

The committee asked various questions, which included:

·        The apprenticeship scheme that Veolia ran for young people who were not in education, or employment or on a training  ...  view the full minutes text for item 797.

This report sets out a response to questions raised by a Member regarding works at Darnley Arches in Strood. 

Discussion:

Councillor Igwe was invited to address the committee as he had submitted the Member’s Item for consideration. He voiced his concern that not all of the questions he had raised had been answered in the report, for example there was no mention of the date when the council became aware it could not meet the original agreement, there was no indication in which year the £153,836 had been spent and no timescale for the future proposals.

The Director of Regeneration, Community and Culture advised that the council had found out in October 2012 that Network Rail could not build the pedestrian subway due to the poor state of repair of the railway bridge and the council had only three months to arrange the relevant road closures to allow Network Rail to carry out the necessary urgent repair works. The monies received from Morrisons had been spent on studies carried out with regard to the construction of the subway and a feasibility study carried out in 2012 for pedestrian improvements to be made before 2014.  The council had issued joint statements with Network Rail to residents, traders and Ward Councillors regarding the road closure relating to the Network Rail bridge replacement.

A Member advised that Councillors representing the Strood area had been invited to a meeting with the Head of Capital Projects, Road Safety and Networks in the summer of 2012, where they were informed that Network Rail wished to replace the bridge at Darnley Arches and that this would be an opportunity for pedestrian improvements in that area.

The Member laid out the history of the planning application in 1998 and why the S106 monies had been requested as part of that application, following which a design for improvements was produced by an engineering contractor in 2006. In his opinion, since that time, the council had failed to be proactive about the improvements and had failed to pursue them once the monies had been received. The only thing that had happened since 2006 was that a recent survey of the bridge had shown it to be in a much worse state of repair than previously thought and Network Rail had brought forward their plans for repair due to health and safety concerns. Prior to this, the council had the opportunity during the previous six years to have plans in place in order to implement them when necessary and had missed this opportunity as the plans were not in place.

A Member added that he also thought this was a missed opportunity and asked why the matter had not been sufficiently escalated with Network Rail early enough to ensure it was embedded in their bridge re-structure works. He also asked what could be learnt from this and were the proposals in 2006 now outdated which meant that the proposal for a pedestrian subway should warrant re-investigation. He did not believe subways to be popular with the public, as they were being closed elsewhere in Medway and therefore it would not  ...  view the full minutes text for item 798.

This report provides an update to the information submitted on 13 December 2012. 

Discussion:

The Assistant Director of Legal and Corporate Services introduced the report which included a presentation setting out the procedure followed from when identifying that works were required through to their completion and payment of the contractor. He also informed the committee on how the system was double-checked throughout the process, including 10% of completed works checked by ‘mystery shoppers’ to ensure the work had been carried out appropriately and that the customers were satisfied.

The Members who had requested further information on this matter at the previous meeting advised that the information in this report was more meaningful and that they had held a productive meeting with the Assistant Director on this matter.

Decision:

The committee agreed to note the report and the progress made to date. 

This report presents the Housing Revenue Account (HRA) capital and revenue budgets for 2013/14 and provides details of proposed rent and service charges levels for 2013/14.

Discussion:

The Chief Finance Officer introduced the report that set out the council’s expenditure against income which had resulted in a surplus of £1 million, together with £4 million brought forward from the previous year’s balance, resulting in £5 million future investment in the current housing stock. The committee was also advised that the proposed rent increase was set to a formula produced by the government to progress rent convergence between Local Authorities and Registered Social Landlords with a target date of April 2015.

The committee was further advised of the welfare reform, which would have a significant impact on rent collection as it radically changed the welfare benefits system from April 2013. The payment of Universal Credit in the future would also have a big effect, as benefits would be paid directly to the recipient and not, as at present, to the Local Authority. There was also the introduction of ‘bedroom tax’ for under-occupation of a property, for example tenants under-occupying a property by one bedroom would see a reduction in their housing benefit of 14%, those under-occupying by two bedrooms or more would see a reduction of their benefit by 25%. Members were informed that the council would write to all those affected, approximately 1300 residents, to advise them of these changes.

The Chief Finance Officer also informed the committee that the government had also localised Council Tax Benefit with the introduction, from 1 April 2013, of a new Council Tax Support scheme. This would have an impact on working-age benefit recipients such that they would be required to pay a contribution to their Council Tax in the order of 25%. These were likely to be the same tenants affected by the under occupation penalty and who would likely not have had to pay before. The average Council Tax demand at approximately £230 would make debt collection more difficult.

Members asked how many council-owned properties had not yet reached the government’s policy of rent convergence between Local Authorities and Registered Social Landlords and were advised that approximately 230 properties were not yet at that point.

The committee voiced its concern at the probable increase in rent arrears once the ‘bedroom tax’ and Universal Credit came into force and asked what measures were in place to overcome this. The Head of Housing Management advised that since October 2012 tenants were able to pay their rent by direct debit and officers would continue to encourage tenants to use this method to pay their rent. There was also a team of dedicated staff to advise tenants on welfare reform and the Citizens Advice Bureau (CAB) was also working with officers with the potential to develop financial assessments for customers, run financial workshops and be pro-active, as many customers were unused to managing their own monies.

The committee also discussed the problems facing tenants who may already have other debt, with their benefit being used to pay off the debt, rather than to pay their rent. Members discussed the possible role of  ...  view the full minutes text for item 800.

The report addresses concerns raised by a Member as to whether current planning policy is effective in controlling over-development or ‘town cramming’. 

Discussion:

Councillor Adrian Gulvin was invited to introduce the report, as he had requested that this matter for consideration. He advised that the council had strong planning policies to protect unwanted development in rural areas but in urban areas there was not such a high level of protection. He stated that if the council did not have strong policies, the chances of defending a decision at appeal was very difficult. He proposed that officers set up workshops with Councillors and officers (including officers in health and children’s departments, together with the Youth Parliament) to look at how the current policies could be improved, so that once the Core Strategy was in place, this would give the opportunity to add other policies to it.

Other Members supported the approach that workshops should be programmed when appropriate into the planning policy timetable, once the Core Strategy had been finalised.

The Planning Policy and Design Manager stated that it would be a positive step to involve Members in a range of workshops. He did not think the council had a weakness in this type of policy for urban development but at the next stage of the timetable there would be an opportunity to look at this issue. Officers had recently met about health and obesity problems and how to link measures into planning, licensing and other policies. As an interim measure, he hoped to produce an informal paper to discuss this with Members. However, it was critical that the Core Strategy reached a conclusion and when that had happened, officers could immediately begin work to arrange some workshops.

Decision:

The committee agreed to note the report and asked for workshops to be convened, once the Core Strategy had been adopted.

Following a committee request, this report reviews progress made since the approval of the Cultural Strategy and sets out the steps taken to market and promote the Council’s activities. 

Discussion:

The Assistant Director, Customer First, Leisure, Culture, Democracy and Governance gave a presentation, which included the priorities set out in the Cultural Strategy, the 2012 Year of Celebration, Olympic and other sporting events held in Medway, the Diamond Jubilee River Festival and the current ‘Enjoy Medway’ campaign.

Members asked that officers consider the inclusion of the 350^th anniversary of the dutch raid on the Medway (second Anglo-Dutch War 1665-1667) into forthcoming events for 2017, as the 300^th anniversary had been a large and successful event in 1967 and it seemed appropriate and achievable for 2017, alongside the emerging annual River Festival and the improvements to Upnor Castle. The Netherlands Maritime Museum housed artefacts from that period and a request could be made to the museum to loan some items for this event.

A Member advised that, in his opinion, the two theatres had held very high quality productions over the past few years but that they had not always been fully attended. He asked officers to consider the options available to fill the empty seats, such as offering university students a seat for £1 at one day’s notice. This also had the possibility of expanding the future audience.

Another Member asked whether it was time to consider the future of the two theatres in Chatham and how the promotion of the programmes on offer could be improved to attract more people to attend them. Members raised the difficulty of the small entrance to the Central Theatre and access to the bar area which could deter customers and queried the possibility of purchasing the neighbouring shop to increase the frontage of the building.

Decision:

The committee endorsed the presentation and report and asked for a review of the Cultural Activities programme to be submitted on an annual basis.

This item advises Members of the current work programme and allows the committee to adjust it in the light of latest priorities, issues and circumstances. It gives Members the opportunity to shape and direct the Committee’s activities over the year. 

Discussion:

The Democratic Services Officer introduced the report and advised the committee that the Housing Scrutiny Panel, which was due to be held to account at the next meeting, had recently disbanded and therefore this item would be removed from the work programme. If the panel re-formed, this would be added to the work programme when appropriate. She also reminded Members to forward any ideas for future in-depth topics for 2013/2014 to the Chairman or Spokespersons before they met to discuss this at the end of February 2013.

A Councillor raised the issue of the road network in Chatham and how, in his opinion, it did not flow properly with two major ‘pinch points’ which made journeys through Chatham town centre difficult. He acknowledged that the Chairman had offered to consider this matter as part of the ‘De-cluttering Town Centres’ task group review but that it was an issue to be looked at in its own right and he therefore requested a Members Item report on this as soon as possible.

Another Member stated that the Council Plan also included six major routes into Chatham as one of its targets, which were not performing well and should also be looked at. Officers suggested that these two matters could be combined and put forward as a possible topic for an in-depth review for 2013/2014, which was due to be considered by the Chairman and Spokespersons of the committee next month.

Decision:

The committee agreed to:

(a)         note the report;

(b)         add a Member’s Item report on traffic flow in Chatham town centre to the work programme as soon as possible and that this is not included as part of the in-depth review into ‘De-cluttering Town Centres’.