Agenda and minutes

Apologies for absence were received from Councillors Brake, Bowen, Jones, Lammas and Nestorov.

The Chairperson 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.

Thee were none.

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 4.

Disclosable pecuniary interests (DPI)

There were none.

Other significant Interests (OSI)

There were none.

Other Interests

There were none.

This annual report provides an account of the role of the Portfolio Holder for Community Safety, Highways and Enforcement. It details their ambitions for their areas of responsibility, how they have and will undertake political challenge and leadership and what their priorities and ambitions are for the year ahead.

Discussion:

The following issues were discussed:

Measuring improvements – it was asked how the Council measured improvements to services and value for money when scrutinising the effectiveness of Medway 2.0. The Portfolio Holder explained there was no longer a separate savings target assigned to the programme as it disincentivised individual departments from coming up with savings and efficiencies. He added that savings made were reported as part of departmental savings in the regular revenue monitoring reports and this sat within the wider FIT plan, which was supported by Medway 2.0 to target savings of £11.3m and an increased income target of £17.4m.

Members requested more information on progress of savings and subsequent reduction in posts. The Portfolio Holder stated that it was not a question of savings within a single financial year, rather the purpose was to change how the Council provided services, this would provide savings year on year into the future. One example of this was the vehicle reporting process which would create significant efficiencies, enabling officers to provide an improved service for residents. The initial design process had been completed, and this would be replicated across more than 70 further processes to create efficiencies across the Council.

External partners - further information was requested regarding the Portfolio Holder’s links with external partners in relation to Medway 2.0. The Portfolio Holder stated that Medway 2.0 had good links with technology providers such as Microsoft, in addition Medway Council had been praised by Jadu at the LGA conference and had also received recognition for its use of Magic Notes which created significant efficiencies for Social Workers.

Translation Services – information regarding the cost of translation services was requested, the Portfolio Holder undertook to provide this following the meeting, however he noted that the Council had a legal duty to provide equality of access to services for its residents.

Speed of change – a Member expressed disappointment at the pace of change to services and that some web services were not mobile compatible. The Portfolio Holder stated that in his view services were updated quickly following feedback, in particular from the Member User Testing Group.

The Chief Information Officer added that it was a key priority to ensure that all Council services were available online using mobile compatible devices and this should be completed by the end of the financial year

Digital Infrastructure– further information was requested regarding paragraph 6.6 of the report (page 12 of the agenda refers). The Portfolio Holder explained that it was the aim to bring processes within the Jadu and Microsoft eco-system where possible. This would reduce the number of software, systems and licenses the Council required and consequently reduce costs.

The Chief Information Officer added that the Council was creating an Azure Data Platform with Microsoft to join up Council systems and create efficiencies.

Challenges – A Member asked the Portfolio Holder how he had provided challenge to the service. The Portfolio Holder stated that he facilitated discussion with the Member User Testing  ...  view the full minutes text for item 400.

This report provides Members with an update on the roll out of Universal Credit and other work streams associated with welfare reform.

Discussion:

The Head of Benefits and Financial Welfare Introduced the report which outlined a very busy year for the service responding to national issues such as the changes in Winer Fuel Allowance and local changes, for example the revised cost of living plan.

The Kent Operational Leader for Thames Gateway, Maidstone, Medway & Swale Clusters, Department of Work Pensions (DWP) added that the final migration notices from benefits to universal credit had now been sent. Locally, the Department continued to focus on payment timeliness achieving a performance of 96%-98% of 1st payments being made on time and in full within the first payment period which compared favourably with national performance at 93%.

The following issues were discussed:

Processing times - further information was requested regarding processing times, The Kent Operational Leader for Thames Gateway, Maidstone, Medway & Swale Clusters, DWP stated that this could be provided following the meeting.

Future challenges – in response to a question about future challenges for the DWP the representative stated that there were no significant changes planned to DWP presence in Medway. The regular outreach sessions at the Pentagon Centre and Salvation Army amongst others would continue. The DWP would also take part in a Youth Hub at Mid Kent College which will become a priority over the next year.

Remaining benefit claimants - it was asked what support was provided to the remaining 313 people claiming which had not been transferred to Universal Credit. The Head of Benefits and Financial Welfare stated there were a number of support options provided including financial welfare a benefit check to ensure claimants were in receipt to all the benefits they were entitled. The DWP representative added they would continue to make attempts to contact hard to reach clients, including using their safeguarding team and other government departments as required.

Discretionary Housing Payment Budget – a Member noted there were already more applications than the whole of the last financial year and asked how the service forecasted need. The Head of Benefits and Financial Welfare explained that the amount of money received from central government was capped and awards were prioritised on the basis of need with particular priority to vulnerable groups and those at risk of homelessness. The amount provided in awards varied significantly, if there was any variation from the budget, this would be reported as a budget under or overspend through regular monitoring.

Council Tax repayment - More information was requested regarding non-payment of Council tax and how those issues were considered. The Head of Benefits and Financial Welfare stated that a welfare based approach was taken, the Council could go through the court system, however, if people in council tax debt contacted the council, it would seek to find a solution to spread payments and use its discretion to ensure payments were made by the end of the financial year. There was also other support Council could provide including benefits checks, and hardship payments.

Decision:

The Committee noted the work referenced in this report.

This report seeks endorsement from the committee for the proposed Counter Fraud & Corruption Strategy and to recommend Council approval.

Discussion:

The Head of Internal Audit & Counter Fraud introduced the report. He explained that the Counter Fraud and Corruption Strategy was subject to annual review, but Member approval only sought when significant changes were required. This was the first significant change since 2022.

Changes to the strategy were required following the Economic Crime and Corporate Transparency Act 2023 which created a new offence of failure to prevent fraud. The offence would occur where a large organisation benefited from the fraud of an employee and had failed to put in place reasonable measures in place to prevent that fraud.

The strategy had been rewritten to provide clarity and a clear policy statement by management to set expectations and make the strategy more understandable for staff. The Head of Internal Audit and Counter Fraud added that the Service had undertaken a self-assessment of against Home Office guidance which would be considered by the Audit Committee in October 2025.

The following issues were discussed:

Audit Procedures – a Member commented on a recent high-profile incident in another authority and asked what measures were in place to prevent similar incidents of fraud in Medway. The Head of Internal Audit and Counter Fraud stated that regular Internal Audits were undertaken to assess effectiveness of internal controls, and there was also assessments of fraud risk as well as fraud awareness training for staff. Council procedures also ensured effective segregation of duties to prevent members of staff having the ability to carry out fraud, however fraud was often found where staff became complacent, so vigilance was required.

Self-Assessment - further information was requested regarding the outcome of the self-assessment, the Head of Internal Audit and Counter Fraud stated that the only defence for organisations was to have appropriate procedures in place to prevent fraud. The self-assessment was based on guidance provided by the Home Office and the results were largely positive. A number of actions had been identified to enhance the protections already in place.

In response to a question about how the service was raising its profile, the Head of Internal Audit and Counter Fraud stated that the service offered monthly counter fraud awareness training and also team specific training. The service also carried out annual surveys on the work of the teams, with the Internal Audit surveys aimed at Service Managers and Assistant Directors who had the most contact with the team and the Counter Fraud survey was for all staff. Once agreed, the Counter Fraud strategy would to be sent to all staff via Meta compliance to raise awareness of the issue. The Member commented that the team provided an excellent service and encouraged Members to take an active part in such surveys.

The Committee discussed the proactive Counter Fraud work currently undertaken by the service. This included investigation of misuse of Blue Badges with Civil Enforcement Officers. Fieldwork undertaken earlier in the year had found 25% of badges had been misused, which compared with 20% nationally. Education had been provided to Civil Enforcement  ...  view the full minutes text for item 402.

The One Medway Council Plan (OMCP) 2024/28 sets out the Council’s priorities and the performance indicators used to monitor performance. This report and appendices summarise how we performed in Quarter 1 (Q1) 2025/26 on the delivery of these priorities. This report also presents the Q1 2025/26 review of strategic risks which fall under the remit of this committee.

Discussion:

The Chief Information Officer introduced the report which summarised performance of those Council Plan items which were under the remit of the Committee and the Strategic Risk Register. There were four indicators under the remit of the Committee and performance continued to improve towards the four-year target.

The Chief Information Officer added that format of the report would move toward a new system based on SharePoint and Power BI technology to improve readability. This would be complete for the next financial year, however improvements in relation to the Risk Register report would be made throughout the year.

The following issues were discussed:

Readability – Members expressed concern that it was difficult to review performance effectively. The Chief Information Officer acknowledged this and stated that changes were being made to presentation of the information. The direction of travel was positive, and the Council was on course to meet targets by the end of year four so was considered green.

A Member commented that it was difficult to scrutinise the information in the report due a lack of data, the Chief Information Officer stated that the data was available in the narrative of the report, however he acknowledged that it was difficult to read effectively.

Decision:

a)              The Committee considered the Q12025/26 progress of the performance indicators used to monitor progress of the Council’s priorities, as set out in Appendix 1 to the report.

b)              The Committee noted the Strategic Risk Summary as set out in Appendix 2 to 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 Democratic Services Officer introduced the report, he highlighted the proposed change to the work programme and updated the Committee that membership of the next Task Group Medway 2.0 had been agreed.

The following issues were discussed:

Workloads – a Member commented that agendas for Overview and Scrutiny Committee meetings were becoming larger, and he was concerned that the number and length of items placed additional strain undertaking effective scrutiny for both officers and Members.

It was requested that some work be completed how other unitary authorities had dealt with this challenge. The Democratic Services Officer undertook to review and provide a briefing note to the Committee.

The Chief Information Officer suggested that Members could be offered a session on the use of technology to reduce their workload related to meetings and this was agreed.

Members discussed ways in which workloads could be reduced such as avoiding duplication of being considered by more than one Committee and issuing some agenda reports for information only.

There was agreement that the issue was one of concern, the Democratic Service Officer undertook to consider with colleagues, options how this could be reviewed further by Members either through the current forums available to Members or via a working group.

Decision:

a)                     The Committee agreed the provisional work programme at Appendix 1 to the report.

b)                     The Committee noted the work programmes of the other Overview and Scrutiny Committees at Appendix 2 to the report.

c)                     The Committee noted the progress made in the establishment of the Medway 2.0 Task Group.

d)                     The Chief Information Officer to provide a training session for Members on the effective use of technology in the preparation of meetings.