Members may ask questions on the Leader’s Statement.  (Leader’s Statement added 23 September 2015).

The Leader presented his Statement to Members which gave updates on the Migrant Situation, Police Reform, Medway NHS Foundation Trust and the Local Plan.

Migrant Update

The Leader advised that he had attended a meeting that afternoon and the situation was being constantly updated.  He invited Members to ask questions.

The Leader of the UKIP Group raised an issue about the help being given to genuine Yazidi refugees, and asked for his concerns to be raised to the Prime Minster.  The Leader agreed that it was Yazadi refugees that had the greatest need, and highlighted migrants moving from one EU area to another.  He also spoke of the major issues with unaccompanied minors and those economic migrants from outside of the EU.

The Leader of the Independent Group asked that when the issue was raised with Ministers, the focus should be on Christian refugees not in camps, and asked for the Leader’s views on the numbers of refugees being offered housing?  The Leader agreed and advised that the Government would be concentrating on those authorities with housing stock to assist. To house 100 individuals (30/40 households) equated to three or four per Borough. He advised that since there were approximately 12 million residents at risk in Syria, it would not be logistically possible to move them all, and so assistance should be given to restore order and make lives sustainable in Syria.  Many refugees were unaccompanied young males who would be needed to rebuild their own countries.

The Cabinet Member for Housing suggested that correct resources should be put in place to support those that had suffered from their traumatic experience.

A Member raised the issue that the Government was only taking 20,000 refugees, much less than other countries. The Leader advised that the situation was constantly changing and that the UK had given more in overseas aid than any other nation.

A Member advised that Kent already had approximately 1,100 young people that needed to be housed, and who would need to be looked after until they were 25, so emphasised that Kent were already assisting.  The Leader confirmed Councillor Harrison’s statement that there were 1,141 young people, 741 below the age of 18 and the remainder between 18 to 25.  He also spoke of the extra pressure put on services, such as social workers visiting the children that were placed outside of Kent.

A Member agreed that the best solution was to keep potential refugees in their own country, but also highlighted that equal consideration should be given to all refugees from around the world, not just those currently in the media.  The Leader agreed that he would relay this concern back to Government Ministers.

The Cabinet Member for Regeneration spoke of historical refugee situations, how the United Kingdom had always been open to refugees,  and how the Government’s response should be humane and sustainable.  The Leader agreed.

Police Reform

The Leader’s Statement updated Members on the latest Police reform which proposed refining their Local Policing Model to pair Swale with Canterbury instead of Maidstone.

A Member commented that the proposed changes might work for the Faversham area but not for Sheppey because of the limited transport links.  The Leader advised that the changes were based on travel patterns of Police Officers and maps of crime. The Police would be giving a briefing to Members in the future. 

A Member spoke of the levels of policing on Sheppey and sought reassurance from the Leader that no demonstrable harm would be impacted on the Isle of Sheppey from the proposed changes.  The Leader advised that as a result of the comprehensive spending review due on 25November 2015 in which the worse case scenario would be a 40% reduction in funding, he had sought and received reassurance that Police Officers would be maintained on the front line.

A Member asked if the impact of the loss of Sittingbourne Magistrates Court had lead to a decrease in the recording of crime and delays to hearings now that cases were heard in Maidstone and Sevenoaks?   The Leader advised that although the extra travel by any accused and witnesses could be an issue, he had no evidence to support the Member’s question but would be happy to listen to any evidence. 

The Cabinet Member for Planning asked that equal consideration of policing levels be given to the rural area west of the A249 that was given to the Isle of Sheppey.  The Leader spoke of the importance of  community rural policing and advised that the Police and Crime Panel would be held to account.

Medway NHS Foundation Trust Update

The Leader’s Statement set out the contingency plans implemented to relieve the pressure on Medway Maritime Hospital.

The Leader of the Labour Group discussed the issues, including  the discharge of patients from hospital to adult care and the problem of bed blocking.  He also spoke of the importance of using Sheppey Hospital. The Leader also referred to the ongoing  financial challenges for social services.

A Member added that the Memorial Hospital in Sittingbourne was  just as important as the Sheppey Hospital, and also spoke of the District Nurse service and how important that service was in Swale.

A Member asked how long the second ward that had recently opened temporarily at Sheppey Hospital would be open for and how it was funded?  The Leader advised it would be open until it was not needed.  The Cabinet Member for Health advised that the ward had been opened to alleviate bed blocking at Maidstone Hospital and had been staffed by rapid response (via KCHT from Kent Science Park) and the ward remained active.  He felt it was the logical solution to relieve pressure on Accident and Emergency.

A Member stated that the Medway Hospital had been built for 45,000 patients but actually served in excess of 100,000 patients.  She felt the Hospital should improve processes and procedures to free beds, and that a lack of communication caused further problems.

Local Plan Update

The Leader’s Statement updated Members on the Local Plan Inspector’s concerns regarding the housing target set within the Plan, and at the Inspector’s suggestion officers had been reassessing the figures.

The Leader of the UKIP Group asked if 40% more housing was required, what was planned? He also commented that Sittingbourne and Sheppey had more housing allocated in the Plan than Faversham and asked if a nil requirement for affordable housing in Sheppey was justified?  The Leader advised that nobody had stated that 40% more housing would be required, and the information had been provided to the Planning Inspectorate as requested.

The Leader of the Independent Group raised concerns over the housing target and pointed out that it had already been raised by 236 houses per annum and that other potential sites had been omitted.

The Leader advised that any site could be developed but those sites had been rejected for good reason, and the Planning Inspectorate’s request had to be complied with.

The Leader of  the UKIP Group asked if the target of 540 dwellings per annum would be defended? The Leader confirmed that officers would defend the 540 dwellings at the Local Plan examination.