Councillor Gerry Lewin 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 29 June 2016 (Minute Nos. 743 - 755) as a correct record, subject to an amendment to Question Five of Minute No. 749 so that the last sentence reads: ‘The Cabinet Member advised that, through the hard work of the Safeguarding Team, the levels of referrals were on an upward trend from 58 in the last quarter of 2015, to 69 in the current quarter’.

The Minutes of the Meeting held on 29 June 2016 (Minute Nos. 743 – 755) were taken as read, approved, and signed by the Chairman as a correct record, subject to an amendment to Question Five of Minute No. 749 so that the last sentence reads:

“The Cabinet Member advised that, through the hard work of the Safeguarding Team, the levels of referrals were on an upward trend from 58 in the last quarter of 2015, to 69 in the current quarter.”

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 Director of Corporate Services as Monitoring Officer, the Head of Legal or from other Solicitors in Legal Services as early as possible, and in advance of the Meeting.

No interests were declared.

The Mayor advised that she had attended the Somme 100 commemorative event on Friday 1 July 2016 at Sittingbourne War Memorial, which had been very moving. On 11 July 2016 she had had the great honour in presenting the French Legion d’Honneur medal to Royal British Legion member Larry Smithers, for his bravery during the D-Day Normandy landings.

The Mayor also drew attention to the cheque presentation made by former Mayor, Councillor Anita Walker, and her Mayoress, Sylvia Lawrence, on 7 July 2016.  Cheques to the value of £5,095.81 had been presented to the four carnival organisations in Swale, which Members applauded.

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).

The Mayor advised that one question had been received from a member of the public.  As Mr Greenhill was not present at the meeting, the Mayor drew attention to the question and answer that had been circulated.  This is attached as Appendix I to the Minutes.

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).

The Mayor advised that three questions had been submitted by Members, the answers to which had been provided and attached as Appendix II. The Mayor reminded Members that there was a three minute time limit for supplementary questions and their answers, and invited relevant Members to ask a supplementary question.

Question One

Councillor Roger Truelove asked what progress was being made, and asked for more communication with the public?

The Cabinet Member responded by saying that the policy had been to not say anything unless there was something active to say.  However, from discussions with local people he considered that perhaps there should be more communication, referring to several planning applications that were currently in the pre-application stage, due to be submitted, or soon to be considered by the Planning Committee. 

Question Two

Councillor Ghlin Whelan acknowledged that the market did need to move, and asked if the Cabinet would show real commitment to the market and the High Street by providing free parking on market days, even if for a trial period?

The Cabinet Member advised that as this was not within his portfolio, he would take this request back to the Cabinet to consider, and a full answer would be provided by the end of August.

Question Three

Councillor Roger Truelove referred to statements made in the press that the long term sickness of the Regeneration Director had “made no difference”, and so asked if the post was necessary?

The Leader advised that the post was a Strategic Director, who made up a third of the Council’s Strategic Management Team, and had several areas of responsibility, not just regeneration.  Steps had been taken to cover the position as it was not sensible to recruit in August, and time would be taken to consider options.  This would involve appropriate consultation with Group Leaders.

Members may ask questions on the Leader’s Statement.  (Statement added 26.7.16).

The Leader presented his Statement, which focused on Brexit implications, and new Central Government Changes; the Local Growth Fund (LGF) bidding process; the Director of Regeneration; and Swale Stars.

Brexit implications and new Central Government Changes

The Leader of the UKIP Group asked the Leader if he could make sure that any new schemes were more responsive to local demands, without a convoluted bidding process?  He suggested it would be better if an idea was given of the amount of money available, so that schemes could be constructed around that level before being submitted.  The Leader advised that this point would be made.

The Leader of the Labour Group suggested that it was possible that income for local government would reduce following the Brexit decision, as London would no longer be the financial centre of the European market.  He asked how will local government fare, given the approach in recent years?  The Leader responded by saying this would depend on the ability of local government to negotiate.  Whilst funding for local government was not ring-fenced, there would be a larger pot of money available for spending on Britain’s priorities rather than in Europe.

The Leader of the Independent Group asked for the Leader to take up the issue of planning with the Local Government Association, and asked him to fight for the greatest possible independence so that decisions around development in the Borough were taken at a local level, not by the Planning Inspectorate or Central Government.  The Leader agreed that decisions on planning should be taken by the Council, and advised that he was pleased that the new Planning Minister of State, Mr Gavin Barwell, was an ex-councillor.

In response to a question as to whether it was realistic to think that there would be additional funding available as a result of the Brexit decision, the Leader advised that more money was sent by Britain to the EU than Britain received back.

LGF bidding process

The Leader of the UKIP Group asked whether there was a realistic figure on how much the scheme to improve the junction between Barton Hill Drive and the Lower Road, Minster would cost, and how much would come from developer contributions and where the contributions would come from?  The Leader advised that the latest figure was in the update, but he would keep a close watch. 

The Leader of the Labour Group welcomed the project, but considered it did not go far enough and should include the expansion of the Lower Road, Minster.  He asked the Leader how that could be funded? The Leader considered it was important to take the first step in the right direction.

Questions were asked by other Members, in terms of what could be done now to stop the traffic queues which crippled the Island’s economy, and what Kent County Council (KCC) were doing about this; and whether the traffic lights at the junction could be switched off, as it appeared to improve traffic flow.  The Leader responded  ...  view the full minutes text for item 815.

The Leader advised that the Corporate Equalities Scheme had been out to consultation, details of which were set out in the report, and thanked the Policy and Performance Officer for his work on this. He proposed, and the Deputy Leader seconded, that the Corporate Equalities Scheme 2016 – 2020 be approved. 

Resolved:

(1) That the Corporate Equalities Scheme 2016 – 2020 be approved.

The Leader referred to the need to recruit one more person to the Council’s Independent Remuneration Panel, and advised that provisional arrangements had been made for the Panel to meet in September as a full review was due.  He proposed and the Deputy Leader seconded the recommendations within the report.   There was no discussion on the exempt appendix.  The Leader of the Independent Group asked for mileage rates to be looked at by the Panel.

Resolved:

(1) That the appointment of Mr Lionel Robbins as the Local Independent Member for Swale to the Joint Independent Remuneration Panel for a three year term be agreed.

(2) That Independent Members on the Joint Independent Remuneration Panel be restricted to two consecutive three year terms of office to maintain their independence.

Council is asked to note the recommendations from the Cabinet meeting held on 29 June 2016 regarding the Corporate Equalities Scheme 2016 – 2020.

Council was asked to note the recommendation from the Cabinet Meeting held on 13 July 2016 (Minute No. 784) which had been the subject of a report already considered and agreed by the Council that evening.

Resolved:

(1) That the recommendation in Minute No. 784 be noted.