Agenda item

This report sets out the public questions received for this meeting.

Question A – Councillor Hamilton asked thePortfolio Holder for Community Safety, Highways and Enforcement, Councillor Paterson, the following:

 

“Given the roll out of the new measures to enforce Saturday traffic restrictions on Rochester High Street, will he consider extending the restrictions to Sundays as well? 

 

Despite Sundays being just as busy along the High Street for pedestrians with as many people walking in the road, not having standardised restrictions across the weekend seems like an obvious omission which the new Labour administration should address.”

 

Councillor Paterson said that the Saturday traffic restriction on Rochester High Street had been in place for many years and continued to provide a safe environment for pedestrians using the high street.

 

Sundays on Rochester High Street had become increasingly vibrant, with visitors and residents enjoying the many shops and restaurants that chose to open and take advantage of the additional footfall.

 

Councillor Paterson agreed that a consistent approach to traffic restrictions all weekend would be better for pedestrians, traders and motorists. Officers were currently assessing a proposal to extend the Saturday restriction to Sundays and public holidays and a plan for seeking the views of residents, businesses and other key stakeholders was being prepared. Ward Councillors would be included in this discussion and should a decision be taken to proceed, an appropriate timeline would be established for taking the proposal through the required statutory process.

 

Question B – Councillor Perfect asked the Leader of the Council, Councillor Maple, the following:

 

“Under the last Government, then Conservative led Medway Council secured a record £14.4m funding through the Department for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities Levelling Up Fund. This will deliver/has delivered The Docking Station, the restoration of the Brook Theatre, and the Fitted Rigging House (South).

 

Please can the Leader of the Council update the Council on how he intends to lobby and work with the new government to secure future capital funding for our towns and villages?”

 

Councillor Maple said that the new Deputy Prime Minister, who now had statutory responsibility for local government had added local government back into the name of the government department and had also made it clear that, the ‘Hunger Games’ style of approach to funding would end.

 

Councillor Maple did not want to see an elected Mayor of Kent and Medway but he did want additional resources, both capital and revenue, for the community and he would work with whoever he needed to, to try to secure that. It had been made clear that unlocking this would not require there to be an elected Mayor.

 

Councillor Maple looked forward to the prospect of working with councillors across Kent to secure funding for the community here in Medway and said that he would not be abstaining in writing letters to fight for resources from the new Government.

 

Question C – Councillor Hackwell asked the Portfolio Holder for Community Safety, Highways and Enforcement, Councillor Paterson, the following:

 

“The Leader of the Council has stated in this chamber that if he had more money, then he would fill more potholes, and indeed along with Councillor Curry, wrote to Guy Opperman, then Minister for Roads and Local Transport, to request more funds.

 

Despite having a highways budget of £13.6m last year, this budget was underspent by nearly £2m, why wasn’t this money spent repairing the dreadful state of the roads in Medway?”

 

Councillor Paterson said that Highways was a frontline service that had experienced many years of underfunding. That underfunding, and the rapid deterioration of the highway network had been a legacy of the previous Government.

 

The underspend referred to was in respect of the 2023/24 revenue budget. The Council’s financial position had been forecast to be significantly overspent, which had led to the introduction of management action including the cessation of all non-essential spend and reviewing spend on non-statutory services. The underspend of £1.9million had been a result of this process and was a combination of funding expenditure through earmarked reserves, charging eligible expenditure to the Capital programme, savings on electricity for street lighting and vacancy savings. This had been without any detriment to the Council’s statutory duties to maintain the highway and assets upon it.

 

The total budget for Highways expenditure in 2023/24 was £19.3m, which was made up from the £13.6million Revenue budget and the Highways Capital budget for 2023/24 of £5.7million, which included £565,000 one-off pothole funding and £401,000 additional funding from the DfT, made possible through diverted HS2 funds.

 

In line with the Highway Asset Management Strategy to adopt a whole asset approach to maintenance, a proportion of this money had also been used to inspect and maintain bridges and structures, drainage, crash barriers and street lighting.

 

The cancellation of the HS2 project had enabled £8.3bn of funding to be allocated to local councils to maintain their road network over the next 10 years. For Medway, the total indicative funding allocation from 2023/24 to 2033/34 was £12,552,000. £401,000 had been received in 2023/24 and a further £401,000 in 2024/25. It was not yet known how the remaining indicative £11,750,000 would be paid.

Question D – Councillor Tejan asked the Portfolio Holder for Climate Change and Strategic Regeneration, Councillor Curry, the following:

 

“In April 2019, Medway Council declared a climate emergency and committed to several goals:

 

• Reduce its carbon footprint.
• Provide the local community with a clean, green future.
• Make Medway a place where people want to work and live, ensuring a sustainable future.

 

Under the last conservative administration, the Council set out 11 priority areas and started to deliver on those priorities including the installation of LED lighting across the borough and the planting of trees to name a few.

 

What specific actions has the portfolio holder taken since May 2023 to monitor CO2 emissions, including any specific monitoring methods of emissions, energy usage, and progress towards Medway’s net-zero carbon goal?”

 

Councillor Curry said that delivery against the Climate Change Action Plan’s eleven priority areas had continued since May 2023. This had been further supported by the Portfolio Holder’s request for two new groups to be established, the Climate Change Working Party and Community Climate Working Group, to specifically drive forward community climate action. Efforts were being made to spread word of this amongst community.

 

Specific actions taken to monitor carbon emissions and energy usage included:

·      Calculating and publishing the Council’s 2021/22 annual carbon emissions report.

• Collating Council energy use and vehicle fleet data to be used in the calculation of carbon emissions for 2022/23 and 2023/24.
• Monitoring monthly and annual energy reduction and carbon emissions savings resulting from the LED Street Lighting Programme.

 

Question E – Councillor Spring asked the Portfolio Holder for Community Safety, Highways and Enforcement, Councillor Paterson, the following:

 

“‘You asked me once,' said O'Brien, 'what was in Room 101. I told you that you knew the answer already. Everyone knows it. The thing that is in Room 101 is the worst thing in the world’’.

 

This reminds me of your administration. It reminds me that your administration is suffocating the life out of the town centre of Rainham. You seem completely blind to the destruction that you and your administration has created. You cannot blame the past; you created the present mess and the mire that will no doubt flow in the future with your budget and it is seriously flawed - as you were told. Increasing the parking charges by 85% and prohibiting the free parking Monday charges. It is these that my constituents and business owners have told me is a primary reason that footfall has seriously reduced in the town centre. You are destroying this once vibrant town centre.

 

Please can the Portfolio Holder update me on the engagement he has had with the business community around parking charges, ensuring charges don’t further cripple businesses in the 2025/26 budget?”

 

Councillor Paterson said that reports of the death of Rainham town centre had been greatly exaggerated. Officers had compared the number of transactions made at Council owned car parks in Rainham during March and April 2024 with those made in the same two months of 2023. The data indicated that the number of transactions over those two months had been higher in 2024.

 

This suggested that Medway car parks remained popular with those visiting Rainham for work, shopping and leisure activities. If there had been a drop in footfall, then it would appear it was not due to a lack of potential customers using Council owned car parks.

 

Members and Officers had met with businesses in Rainham in May to discuss and understand their views on parking and transport within the town. At this early stage of the financial year, there had been no discussion about parking charges for 2025/26. The potential impact of any future changes to parking charges would be given careful consideration and as much information as possible would be provided to Full Council when decisions on the Council’s budget would be made.

 

Question F – Councillor Lawrence asked the Deputy Leader of the Council, Councillor Murray, the following:

 

“As members of the Health and Wellbeing Board, I’m sure the Deputy Leader is as disappointed as I am that the Medway Women’s Health Hub was not selected by the Integrated Care Board for funding. Once again, Medway appears to be at the bottom of regional healthcare priorities. It must be made clear to the Integrated Care Board that this Council expects to see women front and centre in the creation and design of services that are at the end of the day for them.

 

Will the Deputy Leader undertake an investigation as to why the Medway Women’s Health Hub did not reach the threshold for funding?”

 

Councillor Murray said that this matter related to a detailed discussion that Councillor Lawrence had participated in at the last Health and Wellbeing being Board meeting. At this meeting, the Board had heard from Integrated Care Board professionals which had given Members an understanding of how the Hubs were developed.

 

Women’s Health Hubs were intended to be places where core services were delivered in a women-centred way. There was no predefined model and areas were free to develop their own models of delivery; that could be hub and spoke, or virtual or a ‘one stop shop’.

 

The project team for the ICB had received a bid from one practice in Medway to deliver a Women’s Health Hub. The timeline for developing bids was very short and the proposal from Medway needed further development.

 

Dr Lall, who had submitted the proposal, was now working with the Public Health Programmes team, the Clinical Lead for Gynaecology at MFT, and other relevant partners to submit an amended proposal that would address multiple aspects of women’s health.

 

The team was confident that it would be able to develop a strong proposal that would offer a broader range of joined up services than if the proposal had been accepted for the first phase. This additional time was an opportunity to design a system to deliver the services women wanted in a way that would be accessible to them. The team was working to develop strong pathways and collaborative working between General Practice, Public Health and secondary health.

 

The emphasis would be on prevention, screening and ease of access when services were needed. The decision on this resubmitted proposal would lay with the ICB as it held the funding for the Women’s Health Hubs. Medway supported the proposal and pending ICB approval, it was anticipated that the Medway Women’s Health Hubs would be operational by the end of 2024.

 

Question G – Councillor Joy, asked the Portfolio Holder for Children’s Services, Councillor Coombs, the following:

 

“Ensuring our young people have timely access to Education, Health, and Care Plan (EHCP) assessments is vital.

 

Please can the Portfolio Holder update on progress around improving the assessment backlog?”

 

Councillor Coombs said that hard work was taking place to reduce the assessment waiting time against some considerable challenges that were  national issues, this included there being a shortage of educational psychologists.

 

In a report by the Department for Education in June, it had been stated that 88% of principal educational psychologists in local authorities were experiencing difficulty in recruiting and that this was related to an overall shortage of educational psychologists being trained.

 

Councillor Coombs said that with Councillor Price, she would be writing to David Johnson MP, Minister for Children, Families and Wellbeing, regarding the low number of educational psychology training places which the previous Government had funded. In the previous year this had amounted to just 204 for the whole of England.

The reduction of the backlog was a high priority for Medway. There was a dedicated assessment team, focused only on completing the assessment process. Sustained efforts had been made in the recruitment of educational psychologists with two Assistant Educational Psychologists and 1 Senior Educational Psychologist having already been secured. An ongoing advert was being run and a framework of private educational psychologists was also being used.

For the current year, Medway was accepting and reimbursing private educational psychology reports, commissioned by families where they had the required information and the Council was making sure that parents were aware of the information that was required for the Council to be able to accept these assessments. Schools were being allowed to use their traded educational psychologist time to carry out statutory assessments for which they were reimbursed.

 

Councillor Coombs said that these measures were starting to have an impact on the number of Educational Psychology assessments that were carried out each month. In May 2023, 27 assessments had been carried out, compared to 49 in May 2024.

 

Work would continue on reducing the backlog. In order to mitigate the considerable wait that there could be before support was provided, non-EHCP top-up funding had been reintroduced. This would enable schools to apply for financial support to meet a child’s needs without an EHCP or whilst they were waiting for an EHCP assessment to be carried out.

 

Note: The question had originally been submitted to Councillor Price but the response was provided by Councillor Coombs due to recent changes to Cabinet Portfolios.

 

Question H – Councillor Gilbourne submitted the following to the Portfolio Holder for Community Safety, Highways and Enforcement, Councilor Paterson:

 

“The Portfolio Holder may be aware of the Lazybones Boot Fair that operates on the edge of Hempstead Village 14 weeks a year.  Last year, the operation of the boot fair caused significant disruption to traffic at the junction of Hempstead Road, Lidsing Road and Capstone Road with some residents rightly complaining that they could not get off their drives, whilst through traffic was severely delayed.

 

Cllr Lawrence and I, as Members for Hempstead & Wigmore, made representation to officers requesting some action to manage the traffic, to ensure that those attending the boot fair could enjoy the day and residents were caused as little disruption as possible.

 

Can the Portfolio Holder please attend a future boot fair with me to better understand the traffic issues faced by residents in Hempstead?”

Note: The Mayor stated that since the time allocation for Member questions had been exhausted, written responses would be provided to questions 10H to 10P.

Question I – Councillor Fearn submitted the following to the Portfolio Holder for Community Safety, Highways and Enforcement, Councillor Paterson:

 

“The Portfolio Holder will be aware that enforcement action taken by the Council has fallen to very low levels.  Under this Labour and Co-operative administration comparing 2021/2022 to 2023/2024 prosecutions and sanctions are down 45%, district enforcement is down 26%.

 

Can the Portfolio Holder explain why enforcement action has decreased since he became the Portfolio Holder when the complaints about littering/fly tipping etc remain a large part of Councillors’ inboxes, reaffirming that enforcement is an essential tool for dealing with maintaining the quality of life in Medway.”

 

Question J – Councillor Anang submitted the following to the Portfolio Holder for Education, Councillor Coombs:

 

“Education is the closest thing to a silver bullet in ensuring that all of Medway’s children and young people can secure well paid and secure jobs, allowing them to play a productive role in the economy.  The Portfolio Holder will be aware of the wide differences in Progress 8 scores across Medway’s secondary schools. 

 

Can the Portfolio Holder please inform the Council if she has challenged poor performing schools and in doing so what commitment has she been able to secure for future improvements?”

 

Question K – Councillor Cook submitted the following to the Portfolio Holder for Community Safety, Highways and Enforcement, Councillor Paterson:

 

“I was excited to see measures in the Labour Manifesto which would help tackle antisocial behaviour issues like that experienced by people in my ward. How will the Portfolio Holder work with Medway’s Labour MPs and the new government to tackle this issue?”

 

Question L – Councillor Field submitted the following to the Portfolio Holder for Climate Change and Strategic Regeneration, Councillor Curry:

 

“Does the Portfolio Holder believe that there is a great advantage for local authorities like Medway to use the powers that are proposed by the incoming Labour Government, which is supported by all 3 Medway MPs, to take back control over bus services rather than leave the planning, provision and operation of bus services to the private sector without local accountability?”

 

Question M – Councillor Mandaracas submitted the following to the Portfolio Holder for Children’s Services, Councillor Price:

 

“Given we now have a Labour government and 3 Labour MPs across Medway, how would you work with those MPs and government to ensure ‘children matter in Medway’?”

 

Question N – Councillor Spalding submitted the following to the Leader of the Council, Councillor Maple:

 

“In 2021 the ruling Conservative Cabinet and its leadership supported bringing a draft local plan to full Council.

 

Member after member gushed enthusiasm for this long awaited document.

 

A document which the Conservative group should be reminded included provisions leading to the closure of Chatham Docks and the loss of hundreds of jobs. 

 

A document which had reports missing and was littered with errors such as paragraph 1.1.10 which stated Medway’s population had grown to two hundred and eighty thousand in 2020 and would reach two hundred and eighty eight million in 2037.

 

Unsurprisingly said proposed plan was pulled at the last minute.

 

Can the Leader of the Council assure us that when the current local plan proposals are brought to Council it will not contain any of the above?”

 

Question O – Councillor Pearce submitted the following to the Leader of the Council, Councillor Maple:

 

“The One Medway Council Plan 2040 explains our local population is expected to grow by 3.9% between 2021 and 2040.  This figure suggests we only need to build around 8,500 new houses to meet this growth.  

 

Does the Leader of the Council agree with the new Government’s centrally imposed housing target of around 30,000 new houses by 2041?”

 

Question P – Councillor Jones submitted the following to the Portfolio Holder for Community Safety, Highways and Enforcement, Councillor Paterson:

 

“Good to see the turnout for Chatham Carnival on 6 July, both enjoyable to those attending and providing a focus for the spatial improvements being made to our City Centre.

 

Whilst visiting Chatham High Street, businesses have expressed concerns to me about increased parking charges and what effect this might be having, on trade.

 

Please can the Portfolio Holder set out the usage levels for Chatham Centre Council car parks, March, April, May 2024 against comparable months in 2023?”