The Chairman will advise the meeting of the evacuation procedures to follow in the event of an emergency.

The Vice-Chairman in the Chair drew attention to the emergency evacuation procedure.

To approve the Minutes of the Meeting held on 13 January 2016 (Minute Nos. 419 - 425) as a correct record.

The Minutes of the Meeting held on 28 January 2016 (Minute Nos. 419 -  425) were taken as read, approved and signed by the Chairman as a correct record subject to the addition of a further question that had been asked at point 13 on page 500:  ‘What other action is being taken to achieve this?’. The Member that raised the question confirmed he had already had a response from the Cabinet Member for Housing.

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.

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 Director of Regeneration, the Economy and Community Services Manager and the Cabinet Member for Regeneration have been invited to attend for this item.

The Vice-Chairman in the Chair welcomed the Cabinet Member for Regeneration, the Director of Regeneration, Economy and Community Services Manager and Project Officer to the meeting. 

The Cabinet Member for Regeneration thanked the Committee for their invitation to attend and spoke of the importance of tourism in Swale.  He added that tourism was a non-statutory function, Swale did not have one significant attraction but many feature attractions and that the preservation and maintenance of tourist attractions along with planned facilities within the Sittingbourne Town Centre regeneration was vital for the future of Swale.  In response to a comment from a Member, the Cabinet Member for Regeneration agreed that Swale was ideally located for visitors to the continent, London and nearby attractions.

The Economy and Community Services Manager gave a presentation on Leisure and Tourism in Swale, setting out the issues faced by the service which included future priorities and financial pressures.  She highlighted Swale’s core attractions in its coastline, countryside, marshlands and events and spoke of the interaction with partners as detailed in the Core Budget on the presentation handout given to Members.

The key issues highlighted in the presentation included:

·         Use of apprentices and internal partnership working;

·         Investment in Swale and the support of local businesses;

·         Use of social media to encourage visitors;

·         Visit Swale website;

·         Performance monitoring of quality accommodation in Swale;

·         Partnership agreement with Visit England;

·         The Faversham Society as an events provider and sole accredited museum in the Borough;

·         Successful tourist projects in Swale;

·         Planned projects in the future.

The Economy and Community Services Manager added that other issues to consider in the future included greater technological advances and the provision of tourism facilities for an ageing and a more culturally diverse population.

A Member considered that the Council should preserve its historical assets and should take advantage of opportunities such as filming in Swale.  The same Member encouraged all Members to promote events and attractions on social media and suggested a District Tourism Plan be drawn up.  In response, the Cabinet Member for Regeneration welcomed ideas but warned of the small budget available.  The Economy and Community Services Manager added that the Council were working with the Kent Film Office but agreed to consider marketing and promotion after filming had taken place.  She further advised that a tourism plan was being considered.

A Member suggested that more visitor facilities could be provided for those locations that were already popular such as Minster Leas, Perry Woods and Conyer, to generate more income and possible employment.  He highlighted the success of Faversham Quay.  The Cabinet Member for Regeneration agreed that there should be more exploration of the coastline and highlighting of beaches with Blue Flags. The Economy and Community Services Manager agreed to consider more opportunities to create activities and facilities at sites within legislative constraints.

A Member congratulated the team on achieving so much with such a small budget and raised concerns that the service was a non-statutory function as he considered an increase in tourism  ...  view the full minutes text for item 484.

The Committee is asked to consider the Performance Monitoring Report. The Policy and Performance Manager, the Cabinet Member for Performance and the Cabinet Member for Environmental and Rural Affairs have been invited to attend for this item.

The Vice-Chairman in the Chair welcomed the Cabinet Member for Performance, the Cabinet Member for Environmental and Rural Affairs and the Policy and Performance Manager to the meeting.

The Policy and Performance Manager introduced the quarterly portfolio-based balanced scorecard performance reports for the second quarter (July – September 2015/16).  He provided an overview of the Corporate Health scorecard and highlighted the stable level of short-term sickness and slightly higher level of long-term sickness. Whilst there had been a 15% increase in the numbers of complaints received, the proportion of complaints responded to within 10 working days had increased to 91% which suggested that this was being managed more effectively.  The Policy and Performance Manager also highlighted that the performance indicators showed that 75% of targets were met.

In response to a question from a Member regarding residents’ complaints, the Policy and Performance Manager advised that the procedure to complain was now clearer which might explain the increase in the number of complaints.  A Member requested longer term information and the Policy and Performance Manager agreed to provide the full complaints report with a longer time frame to Scrutiny Committee Members.

A Member sought clarification on why there was a sharp increase in complaints in Housing and was advised by the Policy and Performance Manager that an increase in case loads as well as the inclusion of the Revenues and Benefits service now within Housing had caused the increase.

In relation to Regeneration, a Member highlighted the sharp increase in the number of complaints and the Policy and Performance Manager explained that more complaints had been received by the Environmental Response Team due to the trial fixed penalty notice scheme.  Another Member drew attention to the drop in shopping facilities in the graph at the top right on page 17 of the report and was advised by the Cabinet Member for Performance that shopping was considered less important by those surveyed.

Resolved:

(i)            That the information in the balanced scorecards Quarter 2 be noted.

The Committee is asked to consider the results of the 2015 Local Area Perception Survey.  The Policy and Performance Manager and the Cabinet Member for Performance have been invited to attend for this item.

The Cabinet Member for Performance introduced the report which considered the results of the 2015 Local Area Perception Survey (LAPS).  He advised that due to the low response to the survey (only 984 completed responses were received), Members should interrogate the data carefully.  The Policy and Performance Manager added that the survey gave a genuine representative sample and gave a good summary of actual views.

A Member considered that the increase in score in the level of traffic congestion indicated that more attention was required when considering planning applications and other decisions.  The same Member highlighted the high score in road/pavement repairs which indicated that Kent County Council were not doing a sufficient job and referred to the drop in levels of satisfaction on graphs LAPS 18 and 19 on page 28 of the report as a concern.  The Cabinet Member for Performance advised that the survey was perception data and it was likely the whole country’s levels of satisfaction had dropped.  The Policy and Performance Manager added that overall satisfaction ratings for Councils generally were not high, and Swale’s figure was relatively good, especially in view of its demographics.

When asked by a Member if the figures in the survey were ever considered, particularly in relation to the traffic congestion, the Policy and Performance Manager advised that the facts were publicised and partners on the Public Services Board did take notice.

A Member drew attention to Table 1 on page 21 of the report which showed 86% of those surveyed considered there had been an improvement in overall perception of the Council.

Resolved:

(i)            That the report be noted.

The Committee is asked to review the updated log of recommendations (attached).

The Policy and Performance Officer introduced the report.

Resolved:

(i)            That the report be noted.

The Committee is asked to consider updates on other reviews.

Due to the absence of several Members of the Scrutiny Committee, the Vice-Chairman in the Chair resolved to defer the Development Management Review update to the next Scrutiny Committee meeting on 17 March 2016.

Resolved:

(i)            That the Development Management Review update be deferred to the next Scrutiny Committee meeting on 17 March 2016.

The Committee is asked to consider the Forward Plan with a view to identifying possible items for pre-decision scrutiny (attached).

The Policy and Performance Officer gave an update on the Forward Plan and advised that the item on page 35 of the Agenda, CCTV Shared Service – Alternative Delivery Model and the item on page 36, Payment Collection Services Contract had been deferred but no new date for consideration at Cabinet had yet been advised.

A Member asked if the item on Dolphin Barge Museum on page 33 of the report included Periwinkle Mill and how long after the award of the contract for Newington Car Park on page 33 would the works commence?  The Senior Democratic Services Officer agreed to provide the Member with the information.

Resolved:

(i)            That the Forward Plan be noted.

The Committee is asked to consider any requests from Committee Members to commence a review.

The Vice Chairman in the Chair referred to the issues on the A249 and advised that Kent County Council were not planning to review the matter at their Scrutiny Committee.  He proposed to ask the Chairman of the Scrutiny Committee to discuss the issues with the Chairman of the Swale Joint Transportation Board.

A Member asked for the impact of flooding at the rugby pitch as well as the A249 to be raised as he considered this was a contributory cause.  The Vice-Chairman in the Chair advised that all issues that had been raised on the subject at Full Council on 27 January 2016 would be included.

Resolved:

(i)            That the Chairman of the Scrutiny Committee discusses the issues with the Chairman of the Swale Joint Transportation Board to agree the best approach and plan of recommendations on the issues raised at Full Council on 27 January 2016 as a result of the A249 sink hole.

The Committee is asked to review and discuss the Committee’s Work Programme (attached) for the remainder of the year.

The Vice Chairman in the Chair referred to the discussion earlier in the meeting on Leisure and Tourism and a Member highlighted the lack of representation from the Isle of Sheppey.  Another Member suggested inviting the Cabinet Member for Environmental and Rural Affairs to a future meeting on the review.

Members made the following comments:

·         More information was required on the range and number of leisure parks;

·         Where were the Bed & Breakfasts (B & B) located and where were their visitors from?;

·         Statistics required for income from Tourism since 2012.

A Member sought clarification and more detail on the figures referred to in the Value of Tourism 2012 in the presentation; how the figures had been reached and requested a breakdown of the figures in areas of Faversham, Isle of Sheppey and Sittingbourne.  The Senior Democratic Services Officer agreed to report this information back.

Various suggestions were made on how to progress the review, including establishing a Task and Finish Group and the Vice Chairman in the Chair agreed to discuss the suggestions with the Chairman of the Scrutiny Committee.