To consider any questions submitted by the public.  (The deadline for questions is 4.30 pm on the Wednesday 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 submitted by a member of the public. 

Question 1

Is the Leader aware that, for some Parish Councils, street lights account for up to 50% of their budget and therefore if the Council reduces, and then removes altogether, the footway lighting grant, as is proposed, this would put those PCs under considerable financial pressure - at a time when electricity costs, including unregulated standing charges, are rocketing?  These grants represent just 0.02% of the Council's total budget - so whilst this would be an inconsequential saving to the Council, it would have a disproportionate impact on the Parish Councils affected.

Response

I would like to thank the Councillor for his question.  

As a parish councillor myself I am fully aware of the implications of footway lighting costs to Parishes, but I am also aware of the financial constraints that Borough Councils are facing in light of the financial pressures that he mentions, and the fact that whilst Borough Councils face a cap of 3% which is well under the current inflation rate, Parish Councils are not restricted in the same way.

As you will see from the papers for tonight’s meeting, like most councils, Swale Borough Council has significant budget pressures. We have had to take some very difficult decisions to ensure we are able to provide vital council services.  

Whilst I agree that the figure itself seems small in the context of Swale’s overall budget, if we look at all the items we are having to reduce or cut, in isolation they are a small percentage of the budget, but taken as a whole they add up to the savings we have to make this year and which enable us to balance the budget. 

I opposed this measure last year as there had been no prior notification to Parish Councils that this was being considered, and no time to amend budgets accordingly. However, another year has passed and the 50% reduction proposed tonight has been widely anticipated. 

It is for Parish Councils to decide whether they wish to provide services that either the Borough or, in this case as Streetlighting is a KCC issue, Kent County Council do not provide. Indeed, Parish Councils have many powers available to them should they wish to use them, and I would urge them to start looking at those powers so they can demonstrate to unparished areas just why having a Parish Council is such a good thing.  

Supplementary question

Could the Leader explain why 16 Parish Councils in Swale had to pay lighting costs whilst the remaining Parish Councils had their costs paid in full by Kent County Council (KCC) or SBC?  Parishioners are double taxed by contributing to the rural lighting costs via the Parish Council precept as well as urban lighting costs through Council Tax payments.

Response

The Leader said that the issue of why some Parish Councils paid and others were funded had been looked at previously but the answer was not known and a discussion with KCC was needed to take this forward. The Leader said SBC did not provide street lighting and that rather than Parish Councils being double taxed, unparished areas subsidised Parished areas for street lighting they did not have.  He said that Parish Councils should continue to provide services for parishioners.