Authorised Lay Minister, Stephanie Wolfe, said Prayers.

The Chairman will advise the meeting of the evacuation procedures to follow in the event of an emergency. This is particularly important for visitors and members of the public who will be unfamiliar with the building and procedures.

The Chairman will inform the meeting whether there is a planned evacuation drill due to take place, what the alarm sounds like (i.e. ringing bells), where the closest emergency exit route is, and where the second closest emergency exit route is, in the event that the closest exit or route is blocked.

The Chairman will inform the meeting that:

(a) in the event of the alarm sounding, everybody must leave the building via the nearest safe available exit and gather at the Assembly points at the far side of the Car Park.  Nobody must leave the assembly point until everybody can be accounted for and nobody must return to the building until the Chairman has informed them that it is safe to do so; and

(b) the lifts must not be used in the event of an evacuation.

Any officers present at the meeting will aid with the evacuation.

It is important that the Chairman is informed of any person attending who is disabled or unable to use the stairs, so that suitable arrangements may be made in the event of an emergency.

The Mayor outlined the emergency evacuation procedure.

To approve the Minutes of the Meeting held on 24 January 2018 (Minute Nos. 446 - 456) as a correct record.

The Minutes of the Meeting held on 24 January 2018 (Minute Nos. 446 - 456) were taken as read, approved and signed by the Mayor as a correct record.

Councillors should not act or take decisions in order to gain financial or other material benefits for themselves or their spouse, civil partner or person with whom they are living with as a spouse or civil partner.  They must declare and resolve any interests and relationships.

The Chairman will ask Members if they have any interests to declare in respect of items on this agenda, under the following headings:

(a)          Disclosable Pecuniary Interests (DPI) under the Localism Act 2011.  The nature as well as the existence of any such interest must be declared.  After declaring a DPI, the Member must leave the meeting and not take part in the discussion or vote.  This applies even if there is provision for public speaking.

(b)          Disclosable Non Pecuniary (DNPI) under the Code of Conduct adopted by the Council in May 2012.  The nature as well as the existence of any such interest must be declared.  After declaring a DNPI interest, the Member may stay, speak and vote on the matter.

(c)          Where it is possible that a fair-minded and informed observer, having considered the facts would conclude that there was a real possibility that the Member might be predetermined or biased the Member should declare their predetermination or bias and then leave the room while that item is considered.

Advice to Members:  If any Councillor has any doubt about the existence or nature of any DPI or DNPI which he/she may have in any item on this agenda, he/she should seek advice from the Monitoring Officer, the Head of Legal or from other Solicitors in Legal Services as early as possible, and in advance of the Meeting.

The following members declared Disclosable Non Pecuniary Interests in respect of being Members of the following:

·        Councillor Mike Henderson – Faversham Swimming Pools and Oare Gunpowder Works

·        Councillor Monique Bonney – Faversham Swimming Pools

·        Councillor Nicholas Hampshire – Citizen’s Advice Bureau

·        Councillor Ted Wilcox – Citizen’s Advice Bureau

·        Councillor Derek Conway – Citizen’s Advice Bureau

·        Councillor Anita Walker – Faversham Swimming Pools

The Mayor drew attention to the tabled paper, which advised that he had attended 18 engagements since the last full Council meeting.  This had included seeing Swale’s own Paralympian Steve Brown being installed as patron of Swale Youth Development Forum; Visiting Swale Hospital Radio; and the pantomime at the Avenue Theatre.

The Mayor advised that no more tickets were available for his Ball.

To consider any questions submitted by the public.  (The deadline for questions is 4.30 pm the Friday before the meeting – please contact Democratic Services by e-mailing democraticservices@swale.gov.uk or call 01795 417330). (Questions added 16.2.18)(Responses added 20.2.18)

The Mayor advised that four questions had been submitted by members of the public, the answers to which have been provided, can be viewed on the Council’s website and are attached as Appendix I to these minutes. The Mayor invited the members of the public who were present to ask a supplementary question.

In respect of Question Three, Mr Eddie Thomas handed in a petition regarding Ospringe Street Car Park, Faversham, to the Mayor.  He referred to correspondence from Parking Services and asked the Cabinet Member if he would consider prohibiting long wheel-based vehicles from using the car park, which would enable more spaces to be marked out?  The Cabinet Member for Safer Families and Communities gave his initial view on the suggestion, but advised that he was happy to look at this and would provide a written answer.

There were no further supplementary questions.

To consider any questions submitted by Members.  (The deadline for questions is 4.30 pm the Wednesday before the meeting – please contact Democratic Services by e-mailing democraticservices@swale.gov.uk or call 01795 417330).  (Questions added 15.2.18) (Responses added 19.2.18)

The Mayor advised that seven questions had been submitted by Members, the answers to which have been provided, can be viewed on the Council’s website and are attached as Appendix II to these minutes. The Mayor invited Members present to ask a supplementary question.  There were no supplementary questions for Questions One and Two as Councillor Harrison arrived after this item had been considered.

Question Three

Councillor Roger Truelove asked the Cabinet Member for Planning if 1054 dwellings per annum was a sound number, or should it be challenged as part of the consultation response?

The Cabinet Member responded by saying that they needed to be prepared for all eventualities and the figure had been challenged in a letter to the Minister.

Question Four

Councillor Ghlin Whelan said it would be interesting to know how much remained in the budget, even if some of it would be carried forward.  The Cabinet Member accepted this and agreed to provide this information.

Question Five

Councillor Mike Henderson asked the Leader if he was aware of the disastrous 60% drop in apprenticeship starts which had been caused by a levy scheme for large employers and the awarding bodies delaying programme approvals?  He asked the Leader if he would consider a small working group to work with training organisations and businesses to stimulate new apprenticeship starts?

The Leader advised that he was happy to consider this request although he was not sure a working group would be the best approach.

Question Six

Councillor Roger Truelove asked the Cabinet Member for Housing and Wellbeing how long it would be before Clinical Commissioning Groups (CCGs) were replaced by Commissioners with the power to contract out to the private sector?  The Cabinet Member responded by saying that this was supposition, and that he should contact the CCG direct.

Question Seven

Councillor Ghlin Whelan asked the Cabinet Member for Housing and Wellbeing what would be done now it was confirmed the plan to adapt the Sheerness Military Hospital for homeless accommodation was a non-starter, and what else would be done other than to increase the budget for homelessness?

The Cabinet Member advised that the Military Hospital was not viable, and they were constantly looking at all options available.  He encouraged Members to come forward with ideas.

Members may ask questions on the Leader’s Statement.  (To follow).  (Statement added 19.2.18)

The Leader presented his Statement, which gave updates on HGV Parking; Local Development Framework (LDF) Consultants report; Mayor of London’s Consultation; and Rural Crime. The Leader invited Members to ask questions.

HGV Parking

In response to questions, the Leader advised that when a response to the letter was received it would be shared with Members; and he hoped that a lorry park could be found in Swale, if suitable space was found.

LDF Consultant’s report

The Leader of the UKIP Group asked the Leader if he agreed that the report for the area around Rodmersham/Kent Science Park, Sittingbourne, had been drafted by Quinn Estates? 

The Leader of the Labour Group referred to views expressed previously by the Leader and commented on the way the report had been written to imply that there was ‘blue-water’ between the views in the report and the Leader’s view.

The Leader of the Independent Group advised they would have to wait and see what the Government figure was and hoped that it would not be considered at the June LDF meeting.

A Member asked whether lessons had been learnt from the online consultation last time to ensure that it was easy for the public to respond?

Another Member referred to the last LDF meeting held on 8 February 2018, and referred to an Freedom of Information (FOI) request that she had submitted.  She asked where the division was between this Council and a developer, and asked who was the Leader representing, who was he serving and what did he want to achieve?

The Leader advised that he did not want any more housing in the Borough, and still felt the figure in the current Local Plan was too high.  The Secretary of State had indicated he wished to increase the target for housing in the South East and so the Council had to look at the opportunities available.  He had always been a supporter of a link between the A2 and the M2 to relieve traffic and even more so now when considering air pollution.  He emphasised that the figure was from Central Government, and that whilst he did not want any more housing, if a figure was imposed then he would favour one, two or three large settlements rather than new housing all across the Borough.  It was important to consider what was the least detrimental/most advantageous, and to consider what was the ‘most good for most people’ in the Borough.  It would be wrong to ignore the situation and to not engage in preliminary discussions or investigations.  He agreed to speak with officers regarding the suggestion that the consultants had been referred to in an email as colleagues; and agreed it would not be appropriate for Quinn Estates to have written the first draft.

Mayor of London’s Consultation

A Member asked the Leader if there was a new Lower Thames Crossing, would he be supporting the widening of the M2 between Gillingham and Faversham to meet the increase in demand?

Another Member  ...  view the full minutes text for item 505.

(Amendment proposed by the Independent Group added 20.2.18)

The Interim Deputy Head of Legal Partnership outlined the procedure for the discussion on the Budget.

The Cabinet Member for Finance and Performance presented the Budget, referring to work that had been undertaken in the last year on the priorities in the Corporate Plan and to prepare for the future.  A key aspect of this was financial sustainability to ensure that the Council could continue to provide services vital to residents.  Whilst austerity would continue over the medium term and the world economy was volatile, the Cabinet Member advised that the Council would continue to handle its finances in a prudent and professional manner, so that any impact could be cushioned. The Council would continue to play a key role in reviving the local economy and would continue to encourage new businesses and to support those already established in the Borough.  Major projects were designed to bring about improvements that would pay dividends over the long-term whilst also boosting the local jobs market.

The Cabinet Member acknowledged that difficult challenges were ahead as a result of Central Government cuts and these were significant for the Council.  He considered that the Council must ‘shout from the roof tops’ for local government to be put back on a sustainable financial footing, and he referred to the way in which Swale had made sure all the cuts in the past decade had been implemented in a way that shielded residents as much as possible.  Whilst the Government’s reduction in funding to the public sector would continue, the Council would become more resilient by becoming more self-financing.

In presenting a balanced budget for 2018/19, the Cabinet Member advised that they had dealt with a government funding reduction of almost £1.4m compared to the position in 2017/18.  He spoke of the increasing importance of business rates to the authority, referring to the Kent and Medway pilot area for the localisation of business rates, and that it was predicted that Swale would be the largest gainer of any of the lower tier councils, with a projected increase in funding of £700,00.  The actual figure would depend on the 2018/19 National Non-Domestic Rate return and it was prudent to assume some gain in revenue in the base, but the position would be much clearer for 2019/20.As a result of being in the pilot, the  Council would not receive the Revenue Support Grant in 2018/19, but that would be offset by an equivalent reduction in the tariff to be paid on business rates by the Council.

The Cabinet Member then referred to staff pay, and that whilst a 1.2% increase had been assumed in the report to Cabinet in December 2017, a 2% increase had been agreed nationally, which locally Unison had also agreed.  Pay increases had been kept at 1% for the last six years, however, given the higher level of inflation being experienced and the high level of commitment and contribution made by staff across the Council, the Cabinet Member considered that a 2% increase  ...  view the full minutes text for item 506.

The Cabinet Member for Finance and Performance outlined the approach in the Strategy, proposed the recommendation in the report, which was seconded by the Leader.

Resolved:

(1) That the Treasury Strategy 2018/19 and the Prudential and Treasury Management Indicators be approved.

The Leader proposed and the Deputy Leader seconded the recommendations in the report.  In response to comments regarding the dates suggested for Joint Transportation Board meetings, the Leader advised that the draft timetable had been circulated to Group Leaders for comments prior to the meeting.  Another Member clarified that Member Training would not take place on all three of the dates suggested in the timetable for September, and asked if consideration could be given to avoid holding Policy Development and Review Committee meetings during half-term.

Resolved:

(1) That the timetable of meetings as attached to the report be agreed.

If more than one nomination is received for either position a secret ballot will be taken at the start of the meeting and the Mayor will declare at this point in the meeting who has been elected Mayor and Deputy Mayor elect for 2018/19.

If one nomination is received for either position the Mayor will announce the nomination and Council will be asked to approve the appointment for Mayor and Deputy Mayor elect.

The Mayor advised that one nomination had been received for Mayor, namely Councillor Samuel Koffie-Williams, which had been proposed by Councillor Mike Dendor and seconded by Councillor Ken Pugh.

The Mayor advised that one nomination had been received for Deputy Mayor, namely Councillor Ken Ingleton, which had been proposed by Councillor Mike Whiting and seconded by Councillor Alan Horton.

Resolved:

(1) That the Mayor elect for the civic year 2018/19 is Councillor Samuel Koffie-Williams.

(2) That the Deputy Mayor elect for the civic year 2018/19 is Councillor Ken Ingleton.

Council is asked to note the recommendations from the Cabinet meeting on 7 February 2018.

The Council was asked to note the following recommendations, as separate reports on the items had been considered earlier in the meeting.

Resolved:

(1) That recommendations in Minute Nos. 472 and 473 of the Cabinet Meeting held on 7 February 2018 be noted.

The Mayor adjourned the meeting for ten minutes at 9.43pm, following consideration of the Budget.

At 10pm Members agreed to the suspension of Standing Orders so that the meeting could complete its business.