Agenda item

The Leader of the Council will attend the meeting in order to be held to account for matters within the remit of this committee.

Discussion:

The Leader of the Council (Councillor Rodney Chambers), in his role as Portfolio Holder of inward investment, strategic tourism promotion and regeneration, gave a presentation to the committee which included:

Inward investment

·        inward investment through the private sector would be vital if the council wished to proceed with the regeneration programme, as there would be very limited money from central government

·        the council had helped to secure 600 new jobs and was seeking to unlock up to 17,000 jobs to 2026

·        more than 50 companies now used the Innovations Centre which was 85% occupied

·        promotion to encourage businesses to locate in Medway was a priority and £50,000 had been put aside in the 2012/2013 budget for this purpose

·        a new lower Dartford crossing would also help investment into the area with the increased accessibility to Medway.

Tourism

·        tourism was now worth £290 million to Medway’s economy

·        whilst Medway’s bid for City Status was unsuccessful, it helped to raise the profile of the area and generated positive coverage

·        a new Tourism Strategy was being developed.

Regeneration

·        discussions continued with Tesco on the regeneration of the eastern end of Chatham High Street

·        construction had begun on Rochester Riverside with £4.4 million made available by central government for highway investment in the site

·        work was on-going on the western gateway to Medway Park with
£11 million spent on regeneration of this area from Gillingham High Street. The re-development of Gillingham railway station was also nearly completed

·        planning consent had been given to continue the next phase of development at Victory Pier

·        proposals for development at Kingsnorth and Lodge Hill continued and plans would be submitted to the council shortly

·        a priority was to develop hotel accommodation to give people the ability to stay in Medway whilst visiting its many attractions.

The committee asked a variety of questions, including:

·        what changes did the Leader foresee for Medway over the next 20 years?

The Leader responded that his vision was to create a ‘whole community’, which meant that residents were happy to live, work and play within the area they lived in. He also wished to bring more employment to the area, in particular keeping residents within Medway for their work, rather than them commuting to London.

·        how was infrastructure to be funded in the future?

The committee was advised that the only option would be to work with private investors.

·        how could the council better use its assets, such as Rochester and Upnor castles?

In response, Members were informed that Medway’s historic assets would be part of the marketing campaign mentioned in the introduction. A Tourism Strategy was also being developed.

·        what was gained from the £13,000 spent on the city status campaign and did the council lose the city status bid because it referred to itself as a city prior to the decision being made?

The Leader advised that the submission from the council was very strong but the government had decided to choose a submission from each part of the country, rather than on the strength of individual submissions. However, it had raised the profile of Medway and £13,000 would not have brought a fraction of a similar high-profile marketing campaign. With regard to the marketing of Medway as a city, Councillor Chambers advised that it had shown Medway’s aspiration and also, one of the successful bids had called itself a city council for a number of years prior to their bid.
 

·        what was the current situation on the World Heritage status bid?

The committee was advised that as Medway was the only bid ready for submission, the UK organisation had decided not to make any bids during 2012. However, Medway remained the first tentative bid for next year.

·        clarity was requested with regard to the £4.4 million fund made available from the government.

The Leader responded that this money was in the form of a loan from the government but following dialogue with the government, in co-ordination with other Local Authority colleagues, he was confident that the loan would be interest-free.

·        what was the breakdown of the 600 jobs created, for example full-time, part-time or temporary employment? Were these created by existing companies in Medway or by new companies locating here?

The Leader undertook to provide this information to the committee.

·        what was the council’s position with regard to the relocation of Gillingham Football Club?

Councillor Chambers clarified that he had always wished to see the club remain in Medway. The council could, and had previously, facilitated negotiations over possible new sites. The council had also paid towards two feasibility studies, which showed its commitment to help relocate the football club. He added that it would be wrong of the council to disregard defined planning policies in order to relocate the new ground. However, in the future, there could be reasons for an exception to be made depending on the particular circumstances. He undertook to provide Members with further information on this matter.

·        what small to medium enterprise schemes had the council recently applied for, such as the Regional Growth Fund and the Mary Portas High Street innovation fund, as other Local Authorities in Kent had recently secured this type of enterprise funding?

Councillor Chambers responded that both the Medway City Estate and Gillingham Business Park had been developed as Enterprise Zones. There was only one senior tier authority allocation within an area and due to the closure of Pfizers pharmaceuticals in Thanet, the grant had been part of infrastructure proposals to that site, as it had an influence on the greater of economy of Kent. The government would shortly announce another initiative and Medway might be part of a North Kent Gateway application.

·        why was the Christmas market not taking place in Rochester in 2012? 

The committee was informed that this was a private venture that had not been commercially successful, despite the record number of visitors. The council would not consider taking on such a financial burden.

·        did the Leader agree with the adoption of a new road to be created by Aldi in Strood to allow a better flow of traffic?

Councillor Chambers responded that if a private developer wanted to build a road which would help with traffic congestion, he would be willing to work with them and adopt the road as part of the public highway.

·        when the Leader had been held to account last year, he had given a lot of praise to the Medway Renaissance team (which was to be disbanded on 31 March 2011) and gave assurance that remaining regeneration projects were on time and on budget. Since then, it had emerged that this was mis-leading information, as the programmes had run over-time and over budget. What reflection did the Leader have on this situation?

Members were advised that at the time Councillor Chambers had no reason to disbelieve what officers told him. The legacy document produced by the Renaissance team contained this data and at a Members presentation, everyone was told that the projects were on time and on budget.

·        Airport capacity in the UK and the consultation about a possible new airport in the south east.

The Leader advised that the consultation about a new airport in the south east had been delayed until after May 2012. He assured Members that the council would make a submission strongly opposing this, as it had done previously in 2002/2003 when there was a proposal for an airport at Cliffe. He understood that the future consultation would not be site specific. He also advised that the Local Enterprise Partnership had embarked on a consultation exercise outlining the case for expansion of airport capacity in the south east but this would not include proposals for an airport at Grain or in the estuary but would include Stansted, Gatwick, Northolt, Manston and Southend. This document would be available next week.

·        What was the future of various empty buildings in Chatham, including Victory House, Mountbatten House and the Colonial Buildings (also known as the ‘Big Blue’)?

The committee was informed that these buildings would be included in the future marketing of Medway, mentioned previously, and should be a particular selling feature for companies with their Head Offices currently in London. He suggested that there may need to be dialogue with the owners about the leases and rents expected on these properties and whether, in the current economic climate, these should be reviewed.

Decision:

The Leader of the Council was thanked for his presentation.