Agenda and minutes

In the absence of the Chairman, the Vice-Chairman, Mr Scholes assumed the Chair for the meeting. 

RESOLVED that the minutes of the meeting held on 19 April 2016 were an accurate record and that they be signed by the Chairman.

(1) The Scrutiny Committee received ‘bids’ for three Select Committee topics to be completed by March 2017.

Emergency Financial Assistance

(2) Mr Vye presented Emergency Financial Assistance and explained that the emphasis of his proposal was not on the Kent Support and Assistance Service but rather prompted by the Joseph Rowntree Foundation report on the extent and causes of destitution in the UK, which showed that destitution was increasing.  The definition of destitution, as used in the Joseph Rowntree report, was:

If they or their children lacked two or more of these six essentials over the past month because they could not afford them; shelter, food, heating, lighting, clothing and footwear or basic toiletries or their income was so extremely low they were unable to purchase these essentials for themselves.

(3) The report concluded that at a point during 2015, 1.25million people were in a state of destitution.  Destitution had an effect on services provided by KCC; it was a major contributor to domestic violence, poor educational attainment and poor mental health.  Mr Vye cited some of the causes of destitution: lack of affordable housing, lack of support for vulnerable people, poor debt management options, low wages and poor quality/intermittent employment.  Mr Vye was proposing a Select Committee to look at the following:

• The scale and causes of destitution in Kent,
• The nature and extent of other emergency assistance including counselling, to people who find themselves in destitution,
• Whether better co-ordination of this assistance is desirable and achievable,
• And whether KCC can take a lead in this co-ordination

(4) It was not suggested that KCC should become a major provider of financial assistance; however, KCC had a role as a facilitator and a leader and had strong relationships with the voluntary sector.   Mr Vye referred to the December 2014 report to the Adult Social Care and Health Cabinet Committee, which found that there were gaps and overlap in the assistance available. 

(5) Mr Gibbens confirmed that he appreciated the concern expressed by Mr Vye; however the issues raised had been and continued to be given considerable focus.  Supporting vulnerable people was the top priority of the Cabinet Member.  The Cabinet Committee had undertaken work in the area and in addition the Policy and Resources Cabinet Committee had also discussed issues around welfare reform.  There was a strong focus on ensuring that the voluntary sector was properly supported and the Council had a strong record in this.  It was not considered to be the appropriate time to conduct this Select Committee. 

(6) Mr Ireland expressed concerns about ‘mission creep’   away from core business; many of the issues were not the direct responsibility of the County Council as a provider and commissioner of services.  Reservations were expressed about expectations of such a review, which was looking into areas that, in the main, were the responsibility of other agencies.  Mrs Anthony confirmed that there were a range of services in Kent; KCC was working with over 500 organisations in Kent to support  ...  view the full minutes text for item 104.

(1) Mr Harrison introduced his report, which set out clear and concise coverage of the committee’s work over the past year.  Previous comments from the Scrutiny Committee about not including the minutes of the Flood Risk Management Committee had been taken on board.

(2) Mr Tant explained that one of the key themes addressed by the committee related to sustainable drainage, its provision in new development and the ongoing issue of its adoption and maintenance.  The committee had noted the government’s recent changes relating to the provision of subsidised draining and the government’s new role in providing oversight for technical input to planning applications.  There was disappointment that there was no formal adoption and maintenance mechanism and the committee continued to monitor the progress. 

(3) Mr Harwood explained that the Kent Flood Risk Management Committee had not only provided an oversight role but had brought together key partners from KCC, the District Councils, Environment Agency, Kent Association of Local Councils and Kent and Medway Fire and Rescue Service.  Some 70,000 households were on the Environment Agency flood alert system in Kent and a Flood Warden training event was due to be held on 23 July at Lenham Village Hall.  Kent Resilience Forum had agreed to deliver a wide area coastal flooding exercise, as originally proposed by KCC, which would be held between 27-29 September.  An all-Member briefing was being held, on 27 July, with speakers from the Environment Agency and KCC which will cover Elected Member roles and responsibilities within the forthcoming coastal flooding exercise. 

(4) Mr Tait confirmed that the Committee wrote to the Government Minister about sustainable drainage and the next meeting on 18 July would be held in Yalding Village Hall as guests of Yalding Parish Council.  Southern Water had been invited to attend, and the deterioration of pumping stations would be discussed amongst other relevant issues.    The Committee was also due to tour the previously flooded area.

(5) Mr Harrison expressed disappointment that not all 12 District Councils sent a representative to the Flood Risk Management Committee.  Members commented that it was encouraging to see the improvements year on year in the work of the Flood Risk Management Committee.  It was suggested that twin hatted Members be approached to improve attendance from the districts at the Committee. 

RESOLVED that the Scrutiny Committee note the report of the Kent Flood Risk Management Committee with thanks.

(1) Mr Balfour introduced the report and explained that the proposal was to form a sub-committee of Scrutiny to improve the perceived disconnect between the development industry and the utility businesses.  The County Council had no authority to summon the utility companies to a meeting, but there was opportunity to assist and work together.    KCC did have the authority to ‘call to account’ the regulators.  The sub-committee would work in partnership with the utilities and development industry to bring forward ways of doing things better to enable a more efficient use of resources and money within the county.   

(2) There were concerns about the sub-committee and its Membership being drawn from the main Scrutiny Committee and why the utilities companies would attend a sub-committee rather than the main Scrutiny Committee.  It was suggested that the appropriate Cabinet Committee might be a better place to discharge this function.

(3) A Member asked whether the Cabinet Member had had a dialogue with the utilities companies confirming that they would engage with a sub-committee.  It was also considered that an annual report be made to the County Council.  It was suggested that the role be discharged by the Scrutiny Committee, reporting to County Council and being reviewed in 12 months’ time to consider whether the role should be discharged differently. 

(4) Mr Balfour responded by agreeing that it was not easy to gain confidence with the utilities companies so that they would engage and discuss.  It was important to support the fragile relationships which had been built up so far and not put off any discussions with the utility companies further up the chain.   It was not suggested that members of the sub-committee be limited to the main Scrutiny Committee, although they could be, but to draw membership from the whole council to gain expertise.  The sub-committee would then report back to the main committee.  A Member asked for clarification on the membership of the sub-committee and it was confirmed that the sub-committee would be drawn from the whole council.

(5) A Member asked whether relationships were being developed with regulators as well as developers, discussions were being held with the developers to determine where there were difficulties and once this information was available relationships with the regulators would be built on.  Contacts through the districts and the developers group were currently being mapped. 

(6) Members queried why the group was being set up and the Cabinet Member confirmed that there was a demand for a group to be formed in a way which did not mar the good relationships which had been built up already. Mrs Stewart confirmed that work had been undertaken with Kent Developers Group and the districts to identify whether there were barriers and it had shown that there were often difficulties in the investment planning stage or the connection stage there was often a mismatch of timings.  The sub-committee would be extremely helpful in identifying where there were barriers to enable this information to be put to the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 106.