Agenda item

Question A - Vivienne Parker of Chatham asked the Deputy Leader and Portfolio Holder for Housing and Community Services, Councillor Doe, the following:

 

“Given there are a lot of Medway people who are living in fuel poverty and cannot afford to heat their homes, what is the Council doing to increase the pitifully low number of Medway families who will benefit from Council grants to improve the fuel efficiency of their homes?”

 

Councillor Doe thanked Ms Parker for her question. He said that the Council was engaged with a number of Government schemes to assist households with grants. The rollout of these had been slower in 2022/23, mainly due to a national strain on resources to undertake specialist assessments, but it was expected to accelerate as assessors moved from previous programmes to the Sustainable Warmth programme.

 

Medway had an allocation of £2.9m for this programme, although Medway Council did not hold the funding or administer the grant, this was done on a regional level by a third party, Warmworks. The Council did signpost residents for assessment and, where eligible, for works.

 

Councillor Doe was pleased to confirm that the Council had recently appointed a Senior Sustainable Warmth Officer, who had responsibility for promoting this grant opportunity. Medway would also be working to maximise knowledge of available funding and promote other available grants and schemes to residents.

 

Medway Council was responsible for administering the Government’s energy rebates through the Council Tax system. To date, it had made £150 payments to more than 80,000 households and continued to work to distribute this funding to all eligible households. Medway would shortly be launching a discretionary scheme to support those households who were not eligible for the main scheme but needed support. 

 

Councillor Doe concluded that the Council continued to provide support to vulnerable households through the Government’s Household Support Fund, including helping with energy costs, water and food and home essentials. £321,000 had been distributed so far through this fund and a further £750,000 had been allocated for pensioners on low incomes and in receipt of Pension Credit, Housing Benefit or Council Tax Reduction. Residents who may need support were encouraged to make an application online or via one of the Council’s Community Hubs.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Question B – Alan Wells of Chatham submitted the following to the Portfolio Holder for Front Line Services, Councillor Filmer:

 

“In recent months there has been a number of fly tipping incidents in Strood Rural.

 

The sites targeted that I know of are:

 

Off Berwick Way approaching Medway City Estate (now cleared). In particular, the land between Hasted Road and Islingham Farm Road approaching the Wainscott Bypass, as well as other sites in the Frindsbury, Wainscott, and Upnor area.

 

I have seen for myself huge mounds of construction and commercial waste illegally dumped on an industrial scale in the area, which is affecting the immediate environment. Fly-tipping has a detrimental effect on the look and feel of our area and the dumpers, must have made multiple visits, to these sites. Rural paths and views are blocked by lorry loads of commercial and industrial waste.

 

As reported on KM Online, Medway has the highest amount of fly tipping in Kent, with 5,141 reported incidents, 2019/20, https://www.kentonline.co.uk/kent/news/revealed-the-fly-tipping-capital-of-kent-247392/, with residents and landowners forced to deal with the potential health and environmental hazards the rubbish represents. Environmental crime should not be tolerated, and our green spaces should be there to be enjoyed by the whole community.

 

The Council could install CCTV at the fly-tipping hotspots and introduce a 'Caught on Camera' campaign across Medway to deter and identify fly-tippers, and act to reduce incidents of fly-tipping. This type of approach has proven successful elsewhere, with a 'Wall of Shame' campaign, where video and images of fly-tipping are published on the Council's website, asking residents to help identify the perpetrators. The locations of the cameras based on fly-tipping complaints are monitored to understand reduction in fly-tipping at the sites with CCTV, but also to see if there are any adverse impacts such as fly-tipping increasing elsewhere.

 

What actions are the Council going to undertake to ensure compliance with environmental legislation, and to crack down on fly tipping?”

 

Question C - Stuart Bourne of Rainham asked the Deputy Leader and Portfolio Holder for Housing and Community Services, Councillor Doe, the following:

 

“In 2021 Medway Council helped plant 13,842 new tree whips using funds from the Forestry Commission’s Urban tree challenge fund. Since then, Medway Council and its councillors have repeatedly used this as an example to the public of what the Council has achieved to offset our carbon and fight against the climate emergency. Even now, nearly two years later, this large figure of 13,842 new trees is used on the Council’s website, in your press releases and across your social media.

 

My question is simple. How many of those 13,842 trees are still alive?”

 

Councillor Doe thanked Mr Bourne for his question. He said that for any mass woodland planting, a level of natural failure would always be anticipated. For standard woodland planting, more trees were planted closer together than were required to grow to maturity and through a process of natural selection and selective thinning, the woodland was managed properly as it grew.

 

An assessment would be made during the second growing season of all the planted areas and action would be taken to address any issues identified. There had been some minor vandalism to some of the planted areas that was being addressed. Work would also include the removal of tree guards and stakes where they were no longer needed and the new trees had established themselves.

 

Councillor Doe said that this full assessment work had not yet been completed. Therefore, an exact failure rate could not be given currently. The Council was always looking for available funding to be able to plant more trees.

 

Question D – Sean Carter of Gillingham submitted the following to the Deputy Leader and Portfolio Holder for Housing and Community Services, Councillor Doe:

 

“Why does Medway Council’s housing department not deal with housing repairs and housing issues, for example they are not available or hang up the phone?”

 

Question E - Alan Stockey of Rainham asked the Portfolio Holder for Front Line Services, Councillor Filmer,the following:

 

“From a recent survey of buses seen in Rainham during peak school transit hours, it is evident that bus companies supporting Rainham and the MySchool Bus Service (Arriva and ASD) are deploying a significant number of older vehicles (18-22 year old EURO III) and ASD’s buses were exclusively EURO III; as well as regularly leaving buses idling in AQMAs and outside school premises.

 

The Medway Bus Improvement Plan (2021-2026) includes reference to reduction of smoky and higher polluting buses through Medway's AQMAs as well as progressive introduction of less polluting vehicles (EURO V and above).

 

Can the Portfolio Holder confirm whether bus companies have committed to Medway Council that the measures in the plan will be met, including what is Medway Council's position on including minimum emission requirements in future contract negotiations, such that cleaner air corridors can be created for children walking and cycling to school at peak times?”

 

Responding on behalf of Councillor Filmer, Councillor Hackwell thanked Mr Stockey for his question. He said that Medway Council aimed to continue investing in the bus network and to work with operators to facilitate newer Euro V and VI buses as and when there was more industry stability and further funding opportunities became available.

 

Arriva had advised that newer vehicles would be rolled out on the 145 route later in 2022. This would contribute positively towards Medway’s Bus Service Improvement Plan, alongside the National Bus Strategy.

 

Councillor Hackwell said that due to the current pressures on the bus industry and the gradual recovery following the pandemic, it was unlikely that there would be large scale investment in new buses soon.

 

Bus operator licencing guidelines required that all buses were subject to an annual MOT. Vehicles over 12 years old were also subject to a 6-week inspection, including servicing requirements, to ensure that all buses operating on Medway’s roads were legally compliant with emissions standards.

 

Question F - Paul O’Neill of Chatham submitted the following to the Portfolio Holder for Planning, Economic Growth and Regulation, Councillor Chitty:

 

“New proposed laws will introduce a new criminal offence where a person resides or intends to reside on any public or private land without permission. Currently Medway does not provide adequate temporary traveller sites which leads to inappropriate areas being used by travellers. 

 

The Council could acquire land for this purpose, for example, it could use compulsory purchase powers to acquire the site on Gillingham Business Park behind Aldi.

 

How does the Council intend to fulfil its requirements to the traveller community in the local plan?”

 

Question G - Mark Jones, on behalf of Medway Trades Union Council, asked the Portfolio Holder for Adults' Services, Councillor Brake,the following:

 

“We understand NHS Commissioners are undertaking a review of the proposed reconfiguration of stroke services, locally, as determined by the former Secretary of State (Sajid Javid), which could mean twelve months delay in implementing stroke services reorganisation. We believe that under the current proposal, Medway Maritime Hospital wouldn’t provide urgent care, but will offer rehabilitation services.

 

Will the Portfolio Holder assure us that Medway Council are actively pressing, during the latest review and beyond, for - at minimum - the adoption/ retention of those stroke services which it had been determined, would be based locally?”

 

Councillor Brake thanked Mr Jones for his question. He said that as soon as the Council had become aware of proposals to reduce the number of acute hospitals providing stroke treatment and care across Kent and Medway, from six to three, it had supported action to retain acute stroke services at Medway Hospital. This action had included legal challenges that went all the way to the High Court. However, on 4 November 2021, the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care had determined that the proposed reconfiguration of stroke services across Kent and Medway could take place. This decision meant that Medway hospital would not become one of the three specialist stroke hospitals in Kent and Medway. 

 

Councillor Brake said that an Integrated Stroke Delivery Network was overseeing the transformation of stroke care within Kent and Medway. This body had an implementation plan, which included a detailed risk log. It was now working through the current process of reorganisation of all aspects of stroke treatment and care across Kent and Medway. Medway Council was fully represented within the Integrated Stroke Delivery Networks’ various workstreams. The Director of Public Health and other officers were members of this network. This demonstrated that Medway Council was advocating for the needs of the Medway population. Additional NHS investment in therapy and stroke rehabilitation services were earmarked for Medway and the Council continued to press for these services to be delivered promptly. 

 

Note: As Mr Wells, Mr Carter and Mr O’Neill were not present at the meeting, the Mayor stated that they would receive written responses to their questions, 7B, 7D and 7F respectively, in accordance with Council Rule 8.6.