Agenda and minutes

There were none.

To approve the record of the meeting held on 28 March 2017 and of the Joint Meeting of Committees held on 17 May 2017.

The record of the meeting held on 28 March 2017 and the record of the Joint Meeting of Committees held on 17 May 2017 were agreed and signed by the Chairman as correct. 

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

There were none.

(A)         Disclosable pecuniary interests and other interests

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.

Members should also ensure they disclose any other interests which may give rise to a conflict under the council’s code of conduct.

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.

(B)          Whipping

The Council’s constitution also requires any Member of the Committee who is subject to a party whip (ie agreeing to vote in line with the majority view of a private party group meeting) to declare the existence of the whip.

Disclosable pecuniary interests

There were none.

Other interests

There were none.

This report provides a further response to the issues relating to Splashes Leisure Pool which were raised as a Member’s Item by Councillor Stamp.

Discussion:

The Committee received a report setting out a further response to issues relating to Splashes Leisure Pool raised as a Member’s item by Councillor Stamp.

All other issues had been covered in a report considered by the Committee on 17 January 2017 and the current report set out a response to that element of the original Member’s item concerning the chlorine doses in the pool when the pool water had been dyed for an event on 28 October 2016. This element of the Member’s item had been delayed pending a report from Public Health England (PHE) following its investigation.

The Committee noted that arising from its investigation, PHE had established that two members of staff and one survey respondent had reported being unwell but had not entered the pool. The PHE had therefore concluded that it was not possible to identify how or where norovirus had been introduced or spread during the affected period.

The PHE had suggested that a review of scientific evidence may be needed to determine how much chlorine was necessary to prevent the spread of norovirus in water. PHE would therefore take this up with the Pool Water Treatment Advisory Group (PWTAG) as the body responsible for publishing national guidance on pool water safety.

The Head of Sport, Leisure, Tourism and Heritage confirmed that the service had taken on board lessons learnt from the incident and, in the light of the comment from PHE that chlorine levels of 1ppm or above might be necessary to prevent transmission of norovirus in water, as a precaution, the Council would no longer use dye in its pools.

The Head of Sport, Leisure, Tourism and Heritage confirmed that the service had taken on board lessons learnt from the incident and, in the light of the comment from PHE that chlorine levels of 1ppm or above might be necessary to prevent transmission of norovirus in water, as a precaution, the Council would no longer use dye in its pools.

A Member commented that it was unfortunate that a copy of the PHE report had not been appended to the agenda and he therefore circulated a copy of the PHE report to each Member of the Committee. He expressed concern that he considered the Council report to be misleading, as the PHE report had demonstrated that the Council could not evidence that it had followed some of its normal operating procedures and guidelines of the Pool Water Treatment Advisory Group. In particular, he drew attention that no recording of chlorine levels had taken place after 14:00 hrs on Friday 28 October 2016.

In response, the Head of Sport, Leisure, Tourism and Heritage advised that following his internal investigation, he was satisfied that the chlorine levels had been tested after 14.00 hrs, but acknowledged that they had not been recorded. This was unfortunate, and a lesson learnt that all testing of chlorine levels must be recorded. In response to a question, he confirmed that chlorine levels in pool  ...  view the full minutes text for item 67.

This report provides a response to a petition referred to the former Regeneration, Community and Culture Overview and Scrutiny Committee in December 2015 on the possible introduction of a 20’s Plenty scheme for residential roads in Medway either as a pilot or Medway-wide.

Discussion:

The Committee was reminded that at its meeting on 10 December 2015, in response to a petition, the former Regeneration, Community and Culture Overview and Scrutiny Committee had requested a report upon the possible introduction of a 20’s plenty scheme for residential roads in Medway either as a pilot or Medway-wide. Such report was to include information as to the operation of 20’s plenty schemes within other local authority areas and the estimated costs involved should the Committee wish to recommend to Cabinet the implementation of a pilot scheme in Medway.

The Assistant Director Front Line Services presented a report which outlined:

·         the difference between 20pmh ‘limits’ and ‘zones’

·         national policy

·         local policy

·         case studies

·         implementation issues

·         options available and financial implications

The following issues were discussed:

·         It was noted that it was not permissible for a time limit to be placed upon a 20mph zone.

·         Enforcement of vehicle speeds in 20mph zones was the responsibility of the Police.

·         It was possible to consider the provision of a 20mph zone in an area where traffic calming measures were already in place e.g. outside a school.

·         A Ward Councillor for Rainham North observed that the safety record in Lower Rainham Road had improved following the introduction of a 20mph zone but recognised that the installation of speed humps as traffic calming measures was not popular with residents.

·         It was suggested that when monitoring blanket 20mph zones in London and other Boroughs, account also be taken of CO2 emissions and the effect upon the environment and those schemes in neighbouring local authorities

·         The importance of noting the length of time 20mph zones have been in place when using a zone as a case study.

·         It was suggested that Councillors be involved in the scoping report for any areas suggested to be the subject of a pilot 20mph zone.

·         It was suggested that the Committee receive a briefing note in 6 months’ time setting out the methodology to be used by officers in monitoring blanket 20mph zones in other areas.

Decision:

The Committee requested:

a)            that the Director of Regeneration, Culture, Environment and Transformation monitor the current blanket 20mph zones that have been implemented in London and other Boroughs, including neighbouring local authority areas, to determine their cost effectiveness, their ability to reduce casualties and impact on air quality, also giving consideration to how long the schemes have been in place.

b)        that the Director of Regeneration, Culture, Environment and Transformation establish a baseline for the 8 existing schemes in Medway and review the speed of vehicles and the casualty figures over the coming 12 - 18 months to assess the effectiveness of each scheme.

c)         that no action be taken at this stage in recommending to Cabinet that a blanket 20mph zone is implemented or piloted.

d)        that Councillors be involved in any scoping report for any areas suggested to be the subject of a pilot 20mph zone.

e)        that a briefing note be provided to Members of the Committee in  ...  view the full minutes text for item 68.

This report summarises how the Council has performed in Quarter 4 2016/17 for the key measures of success and projects for this Committee.

Discussion:

The Committee received a report setting out performance at the end of year Quarter 4 for 2016/17 for the key measures of success and projects relevant to this Committee.

In response to a question concerning the measurement of performance indicators, it was confirmed that the Council Plan 2016/17 – 2020/21 had been agreed by the Council on 25 February 2016 and that the performance monitoring reports regularly reported to the Committee set out the performance summary against the Council’s priorities relevant to this Committee.

Decision:

The Committee agreed that the end of year Quarter 4 2016/17 performance against key measures of success used to monitor progress against the Council Plan 2016/17 be noted.

This report advises the Committee of any petitions received by the Council which fall within the remit of this Committee including a summary of the response sent to the petition organisers by officers.

Discussion:

The Committee received a report advising of those petitions received by the Council which fell within the remit of the Committee, including a summary of the response sent to the petition organisers by officers. No petitions had been referred to the Committee for consideration by the lead petitioners.

Decision:

The Committee noted the report.

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 Committee received a report setting out the Committee’s work programme for 2017/18 along with suggested changes from the Committee’s pre-agenda meeting on 1 June 2017.

The Democratic Services Officer provided an update arising from the latest Forward Plan published on 12 June 2017.

The Committee was also advised of the process for the selection of the next round of Scrutiny Task Groups and was invited to submit any ideas for topics based on the criteria set out in paragraph 5 of the report.

Decision:

The Committee:

a)     noted the current work programme.

b)     agreed the following changes to the work programme:

·         The report on information on the levels of finance needed to be invested in the highways network in order to maintain current levels of performance be rescheduled to March 2018 on the basis that the new contract is due to go live in August.

·         The report on the pilot scheme for Street Licensing – Placing Objects on the Highway be rescheduled to January 2018 to enable an extension of the pilot scheme.

·         The report providing a 6 month update on the recommendations from the Dementia Task Group be scheduled for January 2018.

·         The update from the Kent and Essex Inshore Fisheries and Conservation Authority be provided by a briefing note rather than a report to Committee.

·         The report on the associated benefits and the costs involved in the possible provision of a mini roundabout at the junction of Palmerston Road with Magpie Hall Road be provisionally scheduled for August 2017.

·         A report on the outcome of consultation on the Declaration of Four Elms Hill Air Quality Management Plan be submitted to the Committee in August 2017 subject to the consultation process having ended.   

c)    noted that the process for selection of topics for the next round of Scrutiny Task Groups in 2018/19 and invited all Members of the Committee to submit ideas based on the criteria set out in paragraph 5 of the report to the Democratic Services Officer ahead of the next agenda planning meeting for this Committee.