Agenda and minutes

There were none.  

To approve the record of the meeting held on 27 September 2011.

The record of the meeting held on 27 September 2011 was agreed and signed by the Chairman as correct.  

(a)               Personal interests under the Medway Code of Conduct.

A Councillor who declares a personal interest in a matter, including the nature of the interest, may stay, speak, and vote on the matter.

(b)               Prejudicial interests under the Medway Code of Conduct.

A Councillor who declares a personal and prejudicial interest in a matter, including the nature of the interest, must withdraw from the room and take no part in the debate or vote on the matter.

Councillors who have declared a personal and prejudicial interest may make representations, answer questions and give evidence before leaving the room but only if members of the public are allowed to attend for the same purpose.

If an interest is not declared at the outset of the meeting, it should be disclosed as soon as the interest becomes apparent.

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.  

This report sets out revised proposals for the South Thames Gateway Building Control Draft Business Plan following consultation and seeks agreement of the revisions.

 Background:

The Director of the South Thames Gateway Building Control Partnership presented a report that sought agreement to the revised South Thames Gateway Building Control Partnership's Business Plan. The draft business plan had been initially considered by this Committee on 27 September 2011 at which point the plan had been circulated for comments to the three partner authorities.

The business plan outlined how the building control function would be delivered for the three partnership Councils. It identified five main objectives for 2012/14 and contained delivery plans for each, together with actions. It was noted that the Partnership's constitution required the Joint Committee to approve and send a revised draft of the business plan for the following year to each partner authority for comments no later than 5 January each year.

The Director provided an overview of the business plan and explained that no comments had been made by the partner authorities on the draft plan but that a number of charts, and text where necessary, had been further updated to reflect a half-yearly position. He stated that it was necessary to invest in IT improvements to relieve pressure on staff and deliver improvements for customers. In addition, partner contributions had reduced by 34.42% over the four year lifespan of the Business Plan reducing the percentage of contributions by 2% each year for 2011/2012 onwards.

Members discussed the future of the partnership including additional Local Authorities joining the Partnership becoming one of the Business Plan’s main objectives.

An Exempt Appendix set out the Business Plan 2011/2014.

Decision:

a)     The Joint Committee approved the updated version of the Business Plan now incorporating any comments received and referred it back to the Cabinet of each partner authority to approve the Final Draft Business Plan subject to the revision to objective No. 2:

·        To raise the profile of STG by developing a dynamic marketing strategy and pursuing the expansion of the Partnership through additional partners.

b)     The Joint Committee noted the final contributions figures which will be included in each authority’s budget planning process for 2012/2013.

Suggested Reason for Decision:

The Constitution of the Joint Committee requires approval of the Business Plan for the following year by the Cabinet of each Partner Authority.

The first term of the partnership ends on 30 September 2012.  Whilst it is a decision for each authority to continue in to a second term, this report reflects some of the achievements of the partnership over the past 5 years and provides a recommendation for Joint Committee to endorse continuing onto a second term.

Background:

The Director of the South Thames Gateway Building Control Partnership presented a report that reflected on the achievements of the Partnership over the past 5 years and sought the Joint Committee’s endorsement of continuing onto a second term. The report provided details of the achievements under a number of headings: financial; resilience; staff development and flexibility. The Director stated that the direct costs of the partnership had reduced, in real terms, by 17% whilst external income had fallen by 19% in its first five years. As such, the partnership had been successful in dealing with the outcomes and pressures of the economic downturn since 2008. The Director also referred to the proposals for a second term including the possibility of more Local Authorities joining the partnership.

Members discussed a range of issues including the possibility of the partnership giving a presentation to Elected Members of the partner authorities to highlight the work and the benefits of the partnership and the possibility of more Local Authorities joining the partnership. Officers confirmed that they were actively speaking to other Local Authorities including Dartford and Canterbury Councils.

Decision:

a)     The Joint Committee agreed to recommend to Gravesham, Medway and Swale Councils that the South Thames Gateway Partnership continues for a second term from 1 October 2012 and requested that the Director of the South Thames Gateway Partnership, in consultation with the Officer Steering Group, submits reports to the respective authorities.

b)     The Joint Committee agreed that the above recommendation be presented to the respective authorities at the same time as the report on the Business Plan 2011/14 which incorporates the financial plan up to 2015.

Suggested Reason for Decision

Through Joint Committee’s monitoring role they should advise their respective Cabinets on the progression of the partnership into a second term.

This report asks the Joint Committee to consider a provisional programme of meetings for the 2012/2013 municipal year.

Background:

The Clerk to the Committee submitted a report which set out the proposed meeting dates and venue for 2012/2013.

Members discussed the possible venue for the meetings and expressed a preference to continue to hold meetings at Gun Wharf, Chatham.

Decision:

The Joint Committee noted the timetable of meetings for the 2012/2013 municipal year.  

This report summarises the content of the appendix to agenda item 5 and agenda item 9, which, in the opinion of the proper officer, contain exempt information within one of the categories in Schedule 12A of the Local Government Act 1972. It is a matter for the Joint Committee to determine whether the press and public should be excluded from the meeting during consideration of documents. 

Resolved:

That the press and public be excluded from the meeting during consideration of the exempt material relating to agenda item 9 (Monitoring Report September to November)because consideration of this matter in public would disclose information falling within Paragraph 3 of Part 1 of Schedule 12A to the Local Government Act 1972 as specified in agenda item 8and, in all the circumstances of the case, the Joint Committee considered that the public interest in maintaining the exemption outweighed the public interest in disclosing the information.

This report updates the Joint Committee on the current forecast for the 2011/12 financial year and gives details against the progress of the objectives of the Business Plan 2011/2014

Background:

This report updated the Joint Committee on the current forecast for the 2011/12 financial year and gave details against the progress of the objectives of the Business Plan 2011/2014. 

Details of applications and income received compared against the last two years was shown in Appendix 1 to the report. An interim November monitoring report was shown in Appendix 2 to the report and continued to reflect a balanced budget estimated on likely income to the end of the year.

Members discussed a range of issues including the partnership’s charging policy in relation to those building control applications which had remained live over a certain period of time. The Director confirmed that applications made since 2010 were subject to revised legislation and as such additional charges could be applied in certain cases, however, he would require further legal advice with regards to cases before 2010.

Decision:

The Joint Committee noted the report.

Suggested Reason for Decision:

The constitution requires the Joint Committee to maintain a monitoring role on the progress of the partnership.