Agenda item

This report sets out Members’ questions received for this meeting. 

Question A – Councillor Johnson asked the Portfolio Holder for Education and Schools, Councillor Potter, the following:

 

“Given the government’s derisory increase of 7p to the funding for Universal Infant Free School Meals and the consequent threat to the quality of meals for Medway’s young people and the risk to school meals providers’ long-term viability and willingness to continue contracts, what action has he taken to ensure that Medway’s young people have a healthy daily school meal in September?”

 

Responding on behalf of Councillor Potter, Councillor Mrs Josie Iles thanked Councillor Johnson for his question. She said that the Council was working with school catering contractors to ensure that children and young people were getting, healthy, nutritious meals and were working within the Food Plan and Government guidelines. 

 

All catering contractors provided food for life silver menus as they were all part of the Soil Association. Contractors were governed by the conditions set by the Soils Association regarding ingredient quality.

 

Contractors had been permitted to uplift the meal price from September and they were working with schools to pass the increased funding onto providers to help cover the additional costs, enabling the continued provision of a healthy meal. 

 

Question B – Councillor Edwards asked the Leader of the Council, Councillor Jarrett, the following:

 

“Fair taxation is vital to making sure that local government can run decent and well-funded public services. Yet research commissioned by the Fair Tax Foundation showed that between 2014 and 2019, UK public procurement contracts worth £37.5bn were won by businesses with connections to a tax haven. If they choose to, progressive councils can help tackle this by promoting responsible tax conduct through their own procurement processes.

 

Will Medway Council join the 20+ councils across the UK that have so far signed the Fair Tax Foundation’s Councils for Fair Tax declaration?

 

Signing the declaration would involve Medway Council leading by example in its own tax conduct, demanding greater transparency from suppliers, and joining calls for more meaningful powers to tackle tax avoidance amongst suppliers when buying goods and services. Doing so would no doubt be popular with Medway residents, with polls showing that almost two-thirds of the public agree that the government and local councils should consider a company’s ethics and how they pay their taxes, as well as value for money and quality of service, when undertaking procurement. We are in the middle of a cost-of-living crisis and need every pound of tax possible to support local people and local services. I hope that Medway Council will commit to being part of the solution.”

 

Councillor Jarrett thanked Councillor Edwards for her question. He said that

the Council’s Selection Questionnaire had been used on all tenders since 2017 that were valued at £100,000 or greater. Sections relating to discretionary and mandatory exclusion inclusive of tax requirements set out how due diligence was currently conducted.

 

The questionnaire set out reasons for exclusion from the procurement process. This included evidence of convictions related to specific criminal offences, including, but not limited to bribery, corruption, conspiracy, terrorism, fraud and money laundering or having been the subject of a binding legal decision which found a breach of a legal obligations to pay tax or social security obligations.

 

Councillor Jarrett said that these factors were already considered during the procurement process, that a strict no tolerance policy was exercised and that this was set out within the procurement process.

 

Question C – Councillor Khan asked the Portfolio Holder for Education and Schools, Councillor Potter, the following:

 

“Given the extreme financial pressures facing the Early Years Sector, what discussions has the Portfolio Holder held with local providers to ensure the long-term viability of local services?”

 

Responding on behalf of Councillor Potter, Councillor Mrs Josie Iles thanked Councillor Khan for her question. She said that Medway’s Early Years Sufficiency team had an overview of places for the youngest children. Their focus was on ensuring sufficiency across the local area, maintaining communication with a range of childcare providers and passporting funding to these eligible bodies.

 

Local Authority officers within the Sufficiency team convened a regular Early Years Leaders’ Forum. This provided an opportunity for a range of operational matters to be discussed, including effective financial management and how to access funding to support the long-term viability of providers.

 

The Sufficiency team also managed the Medway Online Family Information Directory. This supported families by providing information about available Early Years provision and a range of signposting to services.

 

Councillor Iles was pleased to report that there continued to be a sufficiency of places available for the youngest children in Medway. There had been a small increase recently following the introduction of five new providers.

 

Question D – Councillor Maple asked the Portfolio Holder for Children’s Services – Lead Member, Councillor Mrs Josie Iles, the following:

 

“Medway Labour and Cooperative Group supports the work of Council staff to continue to ensure that Medway’s Children’s Services improve rapidly and sustainably. We welcome the positive steps that the service has taken. However, as the most recent Ofsted Monitoring Visit Letter establishes, too many staff supporting the improvement are temporary because funding for them is temporary. Why is this?”

 

Responding on behalf of Councillor Potter, Councillor Mrs Josie Iles thanked Councillor Maple for his question. She said that the most recent Ofsted Monitoring Visit letter for Children’s Services referred to improved workforce stability and capacity in the 16 Plus service, but that several posts remained temporary.

 

The reason for the temporary posts within the 16 Plus service was due to the need for further analysis to determine what capacity was needed in the service. This followed the extension of its remit following the inspection in 2019. Since the inspection, additional Council funding had supported additional posts to enable manageable caseloads while the diagnostic work was carried out. This work had now concluded and work was underway to outline the proposals for ensuring a correct service size going forward. This included support for earlier transition planning, as promoted by Ofsted in their recent Monitoring Visit letter. 

 

Question E – Councillor Curry asked the Portfolio Holder for Inward Investment, Strategic Regeneration and Partnerships, Councillor Rodney Chambers OBE, the following:

 

“The delivery date for projects under the Housing Infrastructure Fund was originally 2024, this has now been extended to 2025. If the Portfolio Holder can no longer be confident that the 2025 date is achievable what will be the consequences of missing this target?”

 

Councillor Chambers said that the Housing Infrastructure Fund team continued to keep the programme under regular review, with formal reviews undertaken each quarter. Design Freeze had been achieved, enabling the impacts of the schemes to be assessed and mitigated. The second major consultation had now concluded, with the results due to be shared shortly. The next two environmental schemes were now being consulted on and the programme continued to make good progress. Any major programme delays which could not be contained within the overall timeframe would need to be negotiated with Homes England.

 

Question F – Councillor Adeoye asked the Deputy Leader and Portfolio Holder for Housing and Community Services, Councillor Doe, the following:

 

“The Horsted Valley is one of the most important areas of Medway for both landscape and biodiversity. As well as supporting a rich and diverse range of habitats and important wildlife species, it has stunning views and beautiful walks.

 

Would the Council be prepared to apply to have this area designated as a Local Nature Reserve under Section 21 of the National Parks and Access to the Countryside Act?”

 

Councillor Doe thanked Councillor Adeoye for her question. He said that an application for such a designation was under consideration. This would build upon the work that had been completed over the last few years at what was an important site for nature and people’s enjoyment of nature. The work had included improvements to paths, new interpretation panels celebrating the natural and built heritage of the area and an extensive programme of tree planting.

 

The establishment of a new Friends Group had been supported and the site’s designation as a Local Nature Reserve would be explored over the coming year. Those who had not yet visited the area were encouraged to do so.

 

Question G – Councillor Osborne asked the Portfolio Holder for Front Line Services, Councillor Filmer, the following:

 

“Can the Council confirm the annual revenue and capital itemised spend on the Medway Tunnel since 2010/11 in a table by year; and the total sum over that period that was not funded through government grant?”

 

Responding on behalf of Councillor Filmer, Councillor Hackwell thanked Councillor Osborne for his question. He said that since 2010/11, the total revenue spend had been £7.4million and the total capital spend, £6.85million. This was a total spend of £14.2m.

 

In February 2020, the Council had received a £5million Government grant from the Department for Transport in relation to its successful Challenge Fund bid, the A289 Medway Tunnel Project. In 2020/21 and 2021/2022 the spend on this project had been £784,000. This brought the total not funded via Government grant to £13.4million.

 

[The table shown below was distributed at the meeting.]

 

Medway Tunnel Expenditure
Year	Revenue Expenditure	Capital Expenditure
2010/2011	£861,000	£831,766
2011/2012	£766,754	£1,463,932
2012/2013	£641,405	£127,538
2013/2014	£451,586	£317,082
2014/2015	£479,350	£292,317
2015/2016	£499,659	£418,580
2016/2017	£501,734	£476,511
2017/2018	£360,457	£371,090
2018/2019	£554,091	£537,121
2019/2020	£424,520	£648,614
2020/2021	£926,494	£1,069,350
2021/2022	£942,615	£296,852
Totals	£7,409,665	£6,850,753
REV + CAP	£14,260,418
Government Grant Spend (Challenge Fund)	£784,334
Total Not Funded via Government Grant	£13,476,084

 

Question H – Councillor Chrissy Stamp asked thePortfolio Holder for Education and Schools, Councillor Potter, the following:

 

“In view of rising costs on schools, which include extremely high and quickly-rising energy costs, and the constrained budgets which they have faced over the period of Conservative government, the Portfolio Holder should be monitoring school budgets, informing local MPs of the need for increased funding and mitigating the potentially adverse impact on educational opportunity. What action has he taken in these regards?”

 

Responding on behalf of Councillor Potter, Councillor Mrs Josie Iles thanked Councillor Chrissy Stamp for her question. She recognised that in view of the increase in energy costs, governors, trusts and accountable bodies were monitoring budgets carefully to ensure the priority continued to be providing an excellent quality of education so that all children and young people could achieve their potential in schools. 

 

In May 2022, the Department for Education (DfE) had asked schools to undertake a survey about gas and electricity charges and for information about contractual arrangements with energy companies. The aim of this was to consider what additional support may be provided. The survey had closed on 2 June 2022. This would be followed up by the Portfolio Holder.

 

The DfE currently provided guidance through a Sustainability Framework that provided tips for sustainability in schools, suggested practical ways for schools to become more sustainable, whilst also saving money.

 

Question I – Councillor Howcroft-Scott asked the Portfolio Holder for Adults’ Services, Councillor Brake, the following:

 

“The Government unveiled its long-awaited food strategy, which was a response to food adviser Henry Dimbleby’s independent review into our food system. With the cost-of-living crisis driving even more families into food poverty, we needed a comprehensive plan that would help tackle our country’s growing hunger problem.

 

The Government’s response ignored many of the independent review’s key recommendations, like expanding the eligibility of key food schemes like Free School Meals and Healthy Start.

 

If the Government's own food adviser says that the Government's response is "not a strategy", is "not radical enough" and "needs to be much bolder”, then questions must be asked about how seriously the Government is taking the hunger crisis that threatens to envelop even more families as inflation soars. In the context of rising childhood obesity and today’s challenging economic climate, what is Medway Council’s response to combat hunger?”

 

Councillor Brake thanked Councillor Howcroft-Scott for her question. He said that Medway had a long-established food programme that was focussed on supporting and sustaining its more disadvantaged communities. The aim of the Medway Food Partnership was to reduce food poverty, improve access to healthy food, promote healthier eating and provide the residents of Medway with the skills and education to help them live healthier lives. 

 

There were currently over 100 local stakeholders within the local Food Partnership. Members included the private and public sector as well as voluntary and charitable organisations. A dedicated subgroup within the Food Partnership specifically focussed on poverty, food security and the provision of emergency food. Areas had been mapped out across Medway where food provision and access were most challenging and a relationship with FareShare was well established. This organisation provided surplus and subsidised food collected from retailers. Work was currently being undertaken to establish a food hub within Medway.

 

In terms of specific support to vulnerable families, Councillor Brake said that Medway delivered the Holiday Activities and Food (HAF) programme. Thousands of children from low-income households were able to access free activities and nutritious food during holiday periods.

 

Addressing childhood obesity was a priority for Medway. Comprehensive plans were in place to address this difficult issue, with the Medway Can programme being a good example of direct action. Promotion of this campaign was encouraged. 

 

Question J – Councillor Opara asked the Portfolio Holder for Business Management, Councillor Hackwell, the following:

 

“Across Medway many well-meaning residents have taken the initiative to set up voluntary groups, such as the Lordswood and Walderslade Community Litter Group, in order to eliminate litter and present the streets of Medway clean, together with the never ending efforts of our own street scene team and community wardens. It is however frustrating to see that many times this good work is often tarnished by those who have little or no respect for the environment or the cleanliness of our streets. The Council could continue to do more to show that the efforts of our volunteers and employees are respected.

 

Considering that numerous assets, including vehicles and large media screens, are owned by Medway Council, I would like to know why are the fines for throwing litter and fly tipping not clearly advertised on these assets for all to see? This would not only act as a deterrent against the inconsiderate practice of littering and fly tipping but would also have a significant impact on keeping Medway clean and attractive for both residents and visitors, thereby rewarding those who give their time to keep Medway clean.”

 

Councillor Hackwell thanked Councillor Opara for her question. He said that the Council was fortunate to have established groups of volunteer litter pickers across Medway, whose achievements he considered to be remarkable. Their success was regularly acknowledged and celebrated through social media, via a monthly newsletter and in the Council magazine, Medway Matters. During the 2022 Spring clean, 507 bags or three tonnes of litter had been collected.

 

Consideration had been given to how the achievements of volunteers could be further celebrated. Ideas proposed included volunteer groups having the option of ‘thank you’ certificates to acknowledge the contribution made to the environment and community. In partnership with Medway Norse, groups and organisations that had participated in a litter pick would also be invited to an annual ‘thank you’ event in October/November. 

 

Since 2018, the Council had adopted the message “Love Medway, Hate Litter”, which had been displayed on litter bins, signage and 38 street cleansing vehicles operated by Medway Norse.

 

Councillor Hackwell advised that he had submitted a motion to this meeting to acknowledge the work of litter pickers and to propose that the Council committed to advertising littering and other related fines on Council assets. He called on Councillors to support this.

 

Question K - Councillor Cooper submitted the following to the Portfolio Holder for Children’s Services – Lead Member, Councillor Mrs Josie Iles:

 

“It is estimated that 700,000 people in the United Kingdom are on the autism spectrum, which is more than 1 in 100. If we include their immediate families, autism is a part of the daily lives of around 2.8 million people in Britain.

 

Young people with autism face very specific problems when it comes to going to school, and it is vital that we as a local government do all we can to help them. We have had information in the most recent agenda items at both Children and Young People’s and Health and Adult Social Care Overview and Scrutiny Committees that Autism has been highlighted as the most prevalent cause for Children and Young People transitioning from Children to Adult Services.

 

Medway Council has taken steps to assign the role of ‘care leavers champion’ or ‘education champions’ to people involved in the Council set up. Given the prevalence of autism in society, would the Portfolio Holder agree with me that it is time that we have an Autism Champion at Medway Council who could be the focal point of work we do in the community related to autism?”

 

Question L - Councillor Van Dyke submitted the following to the Leader of the Council, Councillor Jarrett:

 

“The government has just appointed a national ambassador for Womens’ health following a call for evidence that shows there is gender bias within NHS services, which means that women’s health issues are taken less seriously and frequently deprioritised. Is the Leader of the Council prepared to appoint a Women’s health ambassador for Medway to show our support for ensuring that women in our community receive the high quality health services they deserve?”

 

Question M - Councillor Murray submitted the following to the Portfolio Holder for Children’s Services – Lead Member, Councillor Mrs Josie Iles:

 

“A recent survey presented to Health and Adult Social Care Overview and Scrutiny Committee in an item about the transition process for young people with mental health problems contained the shocking news that 82% of children and young people in Medway have experienced difficulty with their mental health and wellbeing and over a third of young people are currently receiving treatment and support for mental health issues. Furthermore, schools report the highest ever level of mental health problems amongst their pupils.

 

Does the Portfolio Holder agree that this undermines Medway’s ambition to be a child friendly city, while explaining what she intends to do to ensure that the new strategy being rolled out to tackle these issues will be properly funded?”

 

Question N - Councillor Hubbard submitted the following to the Portfolio Holder for Education and Schools, Councillor Potter:

 

“Maritime Academy should have been located on Strood Riverside. That town centre site has great access for those walking, cycling, or using public transport. The school’s site on Frindsbury Hill, expected to open in 2024, will just add to the levels of traffic congestion and pollution.

 

I am dismayed at the ongoing changes for students starting at the Academy this September. Temporary arrangements were in place to use the vacant Stoke Primary site. Money was spent. Financial costs incurred. Proposed bussing arrangements, delivering and collecting some 200 students a day, were in place. The last-minute intervention by the Government’s Department of Education (DfE) stopping the use of Stoke has resulted in a scrabble to get the alternate site at Twydall Primary, ready in time.

 

The Government’s lead on this project is simply not good enough. Council staff have done their best and I am confident that the Academy’s staff will deliver their educational best. Do you believe that the DfE should have been on top of matters much earlier, rather than letting matters fester, that in turn led to the disruption of plans at a very late stage?”

 

Question O – Councillor Mahil submitted the following to the Portfolio Holder for Front Line Services, Councillor Filmer:

 

“As in previous years Kent County Council is offering a free bus service for under 16s. The benefits of such a scheme are clear in relation to the environment, but even more so in relation to the health and wellbeing of the children and young people, our local communities and Medway’s economy.

 

Can the Portfolio Holder please explain why Medway Council is, once again, not part of this scheme?”

 

Question P - Councillor Browne submitted the following to the Leader of the Council, Councillor Jarrett:

 

“The risk of another pandemic has been removed from Medway’s risk register on the grounds that there is now sufficient resilience and expertise within the Council to tackle another pandemic should one arise.

 

Notwithstanding the good work that has been done and the skills that staff have gained from their experiences does the Leader agree with me that while there is still so much to learn about the development of Covid and its long-term effects that removing risk of a pandemic from the register diminishes awareness of the dangers of another pandemic and leaves the Council and our residents in a needlessly vulnerable position?”

 

Question Q – Councillor Price submitted the following to the Portfolio Holder for Children’s Services – Lead Member, Councillor Mrs Josie Iles:

 

“What action has the Portfolio Holder taken to ensure that the administration of SEND funding for the Medway Early Years Sector is efficient and effective?”

 

Note: The Mayor stated that since the time allocation for Member questions

had been exhausted, written responses would be provided to questions 10K –

10Q.