Agenda item

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

Question 10A – Councillor Spalding, asked thePortfolio Holder for Climate Change and Strategic Regeneration, Councillor Curry, the following:

 

“On 8 July 2024, the new Labour Chancellor, Rachel Reeves, in her first speech promised 300 additional planning officers across the country.

 

Chatting about this to the new MP for Rochester and Strood, I was advised that in Medway’s case this did not have to be a planner but could be a much needed Planning Enforcement Officer.

 

Could the Portfolio Holder confirm Medway has received the funds to recruit and pay for an additional officer and when the person is likely to be in post or was this simply another case of the Labour Party making a promise and not keeping it?”

 

In response, Councillor Curry said that it was great news that the Chancellor had recognised the need to properly resource planning departments with the officers and skills necessary to make sure all local authorities had a Local Plan in place as soon as possible. It was also good that the need had been recognised for there to be staff within the development management team of sufficient experience and with the skills to properly process within the necessary timescales, the significant number of applications for sustainable development that would be needed to deliver the homes Medway and the country needed, in the right places, with the right infrastructure.

 

The Government had specifically set aside a £46m package of investment to recruit and train 300 graduate and apprentice planners. The Council would be looking at the relevant criteria and submitting a bid shortly.

 

There was also £14.8m set aside to support Local Authorities with Local Plan delivery and Green Belt review, subject to meeting all the necessary criteria. While Medway did not meet the criteria of Local Plan delivery, nor on its own, the criteria for Green Belt review, as part of cross border working with Gravesham, Medway would be submitting a bid for funding to support the green belt review.

 

The Government was also funding the not-for-profit Public Practice, whose aim was to assist local authorities to recruit mid and senior level professionals by matching candidates to vacancies. While Medway did not have such vacancies at present, having recently undergone a successful recruitment campaign following a re-structure of the planning service in 2024, it would, if necessary, utilise public practice in the future. That recruitment campaign had included filling the important Derelict and Empty Properties officer post within the planning enforcement team.

 

The Council has been successful in securing £750k of funding to support advancements in digital planning, for which Medway was now one of the leading councils in the country. Officers were currently rolling out a series of training evenings for Members on digital planning to show how it could assist ward Councillors in helping their constituents. This would be the way forward for planning authorities and would help free up professional staff from more mundane tasks so that they could focus on their areas of professional expertise.

 

In this respect of the use of digital, the introduction of how to report a breach of planning permission had already reduced the number of invalid complaints, such as schemes that already had planning permission or did not need planning, by over 30%. This meant that Planning Enforcement staff, rather than having to spend significant time checking whether a complaint was valid, only to find there was no breach, could then focus their considerable expertise on actually investigating the acknowledged breaches and resolving them.

 

Question 10B – Councillor Pearce, asked theLeader of the Council, Councillor Maple, the following:

 

“In October 2022, Councillor Maple said (to the Medway Messenger): “What makes the latest proposals more galling is that it’s Medway Council’s own development company now proposing to rip off residents.” and “It cannot be right that developers proceed with building in Medway without making the right contributions to our infrastructure.”

 

A planning application to build 195 flats on the former Strood Civic Centre site was approved last month by the Planning Committee, without any Section 106 contributions proposed by the applicant - the Council’s own development company.  According to the viability assessment, Medway Development Company is expected to make several million in profit from the development.  Can the Leader of the Council explain why the Medway Development Company is still ripping off residents?”

 

In response, Councillor Maple said that Medway Development Company was not ripping off residents and he referred to the response he had given to question 7L for the wider context of the site.

 

Question 10C – Councillor Mandaracas, asked thePortfolio Holder for Education, Councillor Coombs,the following:

 

“Could you please tell me how many parents have contacted Medway Council requesting a school place for their child following the announcement, and introduction, of the removal of VAT exemption from private schools?”

 

In response, Councillor Coombs said that despite claims that state schools would be overwhelmed by applications for places for children attending private schools, following the removal of the VAT exemption, she could confirm that there had been fewer than 10 enquiries from parents of pupils in private schools. Many of these enquiries had been of a general nature rather than requesting a school place for their children and there had not been a notable number of children actually moving school.

 

Question 10D – Councillor Tejan, asked thePortfolio Holder for Business Management, Councillor Van Dyke, the following:

 

“Can the Portfolio Holder tell the Council what proportion of the Council’s revenue spend is spent on staff salaries for 2022/2023, 2023/2024 and 2024/2025? In giving her answer can she split this between gross pay, pension contributions, additional allowances, and sick pay?”

 

In response, Councillor Van Dyke noted the efforts of Council officers during the recent water outage in Strood North and welcomed the proposed 5% pay increase for staff. Whilst the Council might always need some locum staff, there had been reliance on a number of expensive locums to maintain services, creating significant financial pressures.

 

This figures provided in response to the question were based upon payroll data recorded in the Council's financial management system for general fund services, it excluded information relating to schools and the Housing Revenue Account.

 

The 2024/25 forecast figures were based on an extrapolation of actual spend in the year up to December 2024, shown as a proportion of the total budget for the year, in order to make the comparison to prior years meaningful.

 

Note: the table below was circulated to Councillors during the meeting.

 

Table 1 – Payroll spend as % of Outturn/Forecast Outturn

	22/23 % of Outturn	23/24 % of Outturn	24/25 % of Forecast outturn
Gross Pay	16.0	16.7	16.8
Pension	2.9	3.0	3.2
National insurance	1.7	1.7	1.7
Sick Pay	0.5	0.5	0.6
Additional Allowances	0.1	0.1	0.1
Apprenticeship Levy	0.1	0.1	0.1
% of Outturn/Forecast Outturn	21.2	22.1	22.5

 

Table 2 – Payroll spend total split by type

	22/23 total (£)	23/24 totals (£)	24/25 totals (£)
Gross Pay	62,611,623	66,679,899	74,954,340
Pension	11,337,898	12,122,545	14,416,428
National insurance	6,536,688	6,758,074	7,761,813
Sick Pay	1,779,472	2,081,258	2,464,451
Additional Allowances	462,646	570,960	612,674
Apprenticeship Levy	322,756	344,965	386,861
Grand Total	83,051,084	88,557,702	100,596,567

 

Budget Outturn/Forecast Outturn

£391,932,000

£399,815,000

£447,460,000

 

Question 10E – Councillor Lawrence, asked thePortfolio Holder for Economic and Social Regeneration and Inward Investment, Councillor Mahil, the following:

 

“The Labour Budget on the 31st of October 2024 delivered the largest tax increases since World War II and have had a dramatic impact on growth, employment and investment.  When the Labour Government came to power it inherited the fastest growing economy in the G7. Post budget Britain is highly likely to be facing nil growth in the short/medium term.

 

Can the Portfolio Holder set out his own analysis of the Budget's likely impact on the Medway economy with particular reference to private sector employment and investment?”

 

In response, Councillor Mahil said that the claim that the Labour Government had inherited the fastest growing economy in the G7 was not true and that the when the Conservative Party had been asked by an independent fact checker what they had based this on, they had not responded.

 

Councillor Mahil said that if an economy was crashed and brought to a standstill, it would then grow quickly. Two key points that businesses were raising were that they did not like surprises and wanted stability and investment. Two days before the Council meeting, the Telegraph Newspaper had reported that the UK had just toppled Germany as the number one investment spot in Europe. This included a growth forecast and the claim that the UK would be the fastest growing major European economy over the next two years, with the International Monetary Fund (IMF) saying that growth was now expected to accelerate to 1.6% in 2025 and 1.5% in 2026, outstripping fellow European economies in Germany, France and Italy.

 

The second thing that businesses mentioned was that they wanted a workforce that was skilled and healthy. The number of long-term sick in the economy had reached far too high a level. There was a lack of skills and work that was needed straight after COVID was not done.

 

Councillor Mahil was pleased to see the Government looking at the workforce, the industrial strategy and healthcare, as one connected whole. Businesses understood that a healthy workforce would see multi-fold returns in productivity and improvement in the vitality of business.

 

A major employer in Medway that had been critical of the October 2024 budget, was the supermarket Morrisons. They claimed that the additional £75million that they would have to pay in national insurance contributions would lead to job losses and higher prices. Councillor Mahil said that the private equity firm that had bought the firm, CDNR, should have considered the margins that they had when buying a critical piece of infrastructure in the UK. The company had been loaded with debt to reduce the corporation tax but at the same time the businesses still relied on publicly maintained roads and a workforce that was kept healthy and educated by the public purse.

 

Question 10F – Councillor Spring, asked thePortfolio Holder for Community Safety, Highways and Enforcement, Councillor Paterson, the following:

 

“Gillingham and Rainham is amongst the “top five most dangerous towns in Kent”. For the whole of England, Wales and Northern Ireland as a whole, this area is the “32nd most dangerous major town”. Of those, the most common crimes which are those actually recorded are violence and sexual offences.

 

The figures for 2023 had 5,114 offences or to put it another way just over 14 a day in Gillingham an Rainham alone. I turn to my ward where month on month we appear to be having more crimes reported. It is beyond acceptable. In the past three months alone (August, September and October), Rainham North has had 254 serious crimes reported or 2.8 per day in those 92 days; that is nearly three serious crimes reported every day. Your predecessor made bold claims that you were stamping down on this. I would not say stamping down more lightly dabbing a toe, if that. You and your party locally and nationally are letting my constituents and the public down. Crime is rising in Rainham North, and they are amongst the worst in the whole of Kent and the country. More needs to be done. 

 

What are you going to do to stop or prevent these violent and sexual offences and other serious crimes from increasing in my ward?”

 

In response, Councillor Paterson said that it was disappointing to be asked for comment on another Councillor’s ward rather than his own. He commented that if Councillor Spring felt let down by what had not been fixed in seven months under a new Government, then his own disappointment regarding the 14 years of the previous Government was significant.

 

Medway Council approached the broad issue of crime through the Community Safety Partnership, which brought together the key agencies involved in crime prevention and community safety work, namely; Medway Council, Kent Police, the Probation Service, Kent Fire and Rescue and the Kent and Medway Integrated Care Board.

 

Each year an annual Community Safety Strategic Assessment was undertaken to collate and analyse data and crime patterns, the most recent one having been carried out in Autumn 2024. Following last year’s 4% decrease in recorded crime, there had been a further decrease of 9% between April 2023 and 2024. In addition, cases of Anti-Social Behaviour had declined in the 2023-2024 period, falling by 3%.

 

The Neighbourhood Model established by Kent Police had continued to develop, with there being beat officers for every ward in Medway, as well as a Child Centred Policing and Neighbourhood Task Force Team. This had seen greater partnership links, with beat officers able to establish effective relationships with key stakeholders in their area, improving communication and the sharing of intelligence. The issue of violence against women and girls had been highlighted as a priority in the 2024 assessment and the partners had undertaken a number of important projects in this area.

 

On the broader issue of violent crime, Kent and Medway Violence Reduction Unit reported reductions in public place serious violence, including involving those under 25, across the County, which had been sustained since 2021. The reduction that had been seen in Medway was around 15%, which was very positive.

 

The issue of violent and sexual offences was an area of concern both nationally and locally, and Councillor Paterson reassured Councillor Spring that it would remain an important priority for the partners in the Community Safety Partnership.

 

Question 10G – Councillor Wildey, asked the Deputy Leader of the Council, Councillor Murray, the following:

 

“Can the Deputy Leader update the Council on the outcomes of the Care Quality Commission’s (CQC) assessment of Medway Council’s Adult Social Care Service and in doing so, what actions will be put in place to drive improvements within the service?”

 

In response, Councillor Murray thanked Councillor Wildey for the positive comments he had given to the media when the result of the Care Quality Commission’s Assurance inspection had been announced in the previous week. The rating received had been ‘requires improvement’, but at 59%, this was only 4 percentage points away from a Good rating. In the nine areas of the judgment, six were rated requires improvement and three were rated as Good. The inspection had started in March 2024 with on-site visits in August 2024 and Councillor Murray was grateful to the Adult Social Care team, partners in the health and care family, the providers commissioned by the Council as well as those being cared for and their family carers who had participated in the process.

 

Councillor Murray said that when Labour had won control of the Council in 2023, senior officers had made it clear that Adult Social Care was operating at Inadequate. Self-assessment and outcomes had indicated this was so, with the division being woefully under resourced, having endured cuts in a reorganisation in 2017. This had left it short staffed and unable to meet legal obligations on waiting lists and assessments at a time when demand was rising and continued to do so.

 

Councillor Murray had gained support from Cabinet colleagues for additional investment of £2.5m and had worked with senior officers to plan a restructuring to improve management accountability, put better financial controls in place, restore vital back office support and recruit 80 new staff. This would go live at the beginning of March 2025 and Councillor Murray was very proud of the way staff had responded so positively to new challenges. Their pride in their work was specifically noted by the CQC and in just over a year they had already lifted the service to get close to a good rating.

 

These were the actions in place to drive improvement before the CQC inspection was announced and together with ongoing support from the LGA’s Partners in Care, Medway’s own Improvement Board and Oversight Board, as well as continuing to introduce new assistive technologies to help maintain people’s independence for as long as possible, the Council would continue through a much strengthened self-assessment process and improvement plan to ensure that residents in Medway would have the very best services possible.

 

Question 10H – Councillor Anang, asked the Portfolio Holder for Economic and Social Regeneration and Inward Investment, Councillor Mahil, the following:

 

“Gravesham Borough Council has recently secured UK Government funding and are currently offering grants of up to £1000, to new existing tourism and hospitality businesses in the Borough. The Medway Labour and Co-Operative Group being the “darling group” of the Prime Minister and being a champion of Small and Medium Business (SMB), I would like to find out from the Portfolio Holder if they have plans of securing such funding from Government to support the tourism and hospitality businesses in Medway?”

 

In response, Councillor Mahil said that it was good to see Gravesham Borough Council offering business grants. Medway already offered several grants open to tourism, hospitality and other businesses and organisations. For example:

 

• Partners for Growth and Partners for Green Growth schemes offered up to £2,500 for businesses to start up, grow and reduce their carbon footprint.
• The UK Shared Prosperity Fund Grant, which in 2024 enabled the biggest Chinese New Year Parade in the UK outside of London, with a footfall due to it counted at over 4,000 people. It also enabled a £500 grant scheme for businesses in the High Street Heritage Action Zone (HSHAZ) following on from the HSHAZ revitalise and repair grant scheme granting up to 80% of costs towards improving hospitality business shopfronts and helping towards the opening of a new café and bakery.
• Medway Heritage Place grant funding programme funded 24 heritage projects a total of £110,000 in 2024 supporting initiatives with a strong development focus, including new visitor economy experiences and interpretation to support tourist visits. The majority of this was available from funding which the Council had successfully lobbied the Government for, that had been successfully leveraged against in further rounds to spend on Medway and tourism in Medway specifically.
• Medway had various group workshops for businesses, start-up business space and the Medway Business and Skills Showcase, which compared favourably with the offer of district councils.

 

Question 10I – Councillor Hyne, asked theDeputy Leader of the Council, Councillor Murray, the following:

 

“The Kent and Medway Integrated Care Board (ICB) commenced operations on the 1st of July 2022. In the ICB’s latest report for 2023/2024, the organisation spent £2,196,726 on redundancy payments for just 28 staff. Three staff received £160K each and six staff received £132K each. In the same period, the Chair’s salary increased from £55K-£60K to £70K-£75K and the Chief Executive’s salary increased from £175K-£180K to £245K-£250K. 

 

In light of the on-going financial pressures in the ICB and the Kent and Medway Integrated Care System is this good use of public funds?”

 

In response, Councillor Murray said that she did not intend to comment on the redundancy settlement, as those who had lost jobs would have benefited from local agreements which were individually offered and settled through an agreed process.

 

ICBs had been set up in 2022 under the last Conservative government and the salaries of senior ICB staff were determined by a local Remuneration Committee, with the views of the Secretary of State to be sought if the salaries of senior executives exceed £250,000. Salaries of senior executives were intended to reflect the size and health complexity of the population each ICB served.

 

Councillor Murray considered that in view of the impact of austerity under the previous Government and the resulting cost of living crisis, these very high salaries did compare unfavourably with those of frontline NHS staff and in Councillor Murray’s view, there was room for greater democratic accountability on executive salary spend. Going forward, greater consideration should be given to value for money for performance at ward level.

 

Question 10J – Councillor Field, submitted the following to thePortfolio Holder for Climate Change and Strategic Regeneration, Councillor Curry:

 

“Could the Portfolio Holder for Climate Change and Strategic Regeneration please update the Council on waste collection for the recent Christmas period?”

 

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

 

Question 10K – Councillor Jones, submitted the following to thePortfolio Holder for Children’s Services (including statutory responsibility), Councillor Price:

 

“The Labour Government announced its plan for a new National Youth Strategy, in November 2024, designed to put young people at the centre of decision-making on policies affecting them.

 

What more does Medway Council need to do, in collaboration with our partners, to better tailor and target resources, to meet the objectives of the Strategy? Such as creating the means to achieve greater benefit to young people’s lives outside the school gates, as well as continued learning, volunteering, or earning opportunities (as appropriate) and to ensure our neighbourhoods are safer for all residents?”

 

Question 10L – Councillor Mark Prenter, submitted the following to theLeader of the Council, Councillor Maple:

 

“Does the Leader of the Council agree with recently promoted material being posted through Medway doors by the Conservative Party that Council staff should receive a real terms pay cut?”

 

Question 10M – Councillor Mrs Turpin, submitted the following to theLeader of the Council, Councillor Maple:

 

“Following the planning inquiry that took place regarding 250 homes in Cliffe in May 2023, the Leader of the Council agreed to a post inquiry meeting to learn from the process and discuss a lot of concerns Committee Members had had throughout. To date this meeting has not happened. Please can the Leader of the Council reach out to the Cliffe and Cliffe Woods Residents Development Group and arrange a time to meet with them?”