Agenda and draft minutes

Apologies were received from Dr Sturley, for whom Mrs Lawes was substituting and the Church and Parent Governor representatives.

Mr Moreland was present virtually.

There were no declarations of interest.

RESOLVED that the minutes of the meetings held on 3 March and 1 April 2026 were a correct record and they be signed by the Chairman.

1.    The item was introduced by Diane Morton, Cabinet Member for Adult Social Care, who highlighted the importance of scrutinising winter preparedness and system reliance across health and social care. She also relayed encouraging progress in reducing corridor care through collaborative working across partners and thanked Adult Social Care staff for their contributions to improvements. 

2.    In response to questions and comments from Members, discussion covered the following: 

a)    Members praised the report for its level of detail and clarity and expressed their appreciation to officers for their work in its preparation. 

b)    Sarah Hammond, Interim Corporate Director for Adult Social Care and Health, advised that staff vacancies were being addressed through national and local recruitment initiatives, and that approval had been given to recruit to all identified frontline roles; however, attracting sufficient applicants remained the key challenge. Michael Thomas- Sam, Director of Operations (Short- Term Support), added that the strategy intended to focus on staff retention, support and career development, alongside recruitment. The importance of the enablement function in managing demand, particularly during winter, was emphasised, and vacancy rates across the sector continued to be monitored. 

c)    Dr Anjan Ghosh, Director of Public Health, acknowledged that flu vaccination uptake in schools remained low, reflecting national challenges such as vaccine hesitancy and operational issues. He also outlined that work was ongoing with partners to improve uptake, although delivery sat with NHS organisations. 

d)    Dr Ghosh agreed to explore future reporting including comparisons showing vaccination uptake alongside flu incidence rates, to better understand correlation. However, he advised that while population- level data may be available demonstrating that vaccination was generally effective, its impact varied from year to year. It was explained that flu vaccination uptake was continuously monitored and supported through ongoing campaigns and targeted engagement with underrepresented groups. Catch-up arrangements were also in place, particularly within schools, although coverage in wider populations relied on continued promotion and access. It was also advised that vulnerable individuals at risk of isolation were identified and supported through joint working between NHS and Adult Social Care services. 

e)    Mr Thomas- Sam outlined that the Technology- Enhanced Life (TEL) programme was delivering positive outcomes by supporting monitoring and early intervention. It was highlighted as a key part of the prevention agenda, with further work required to expand uptake, including increased awareness and use across care settings. Ms Hammond further highlighted ongoing engagement work to increase acceptance of the technology, alongside plans to pilot its use with care providers to support vulnerable residents and reduce the risk of falls. Miss Morton added that a digital patient monitoring system in nursing homes across the county had delivered positive outcomes in supporting residents to remain at home. She confirmed that funding had been secured to continue and expand the programme into the future.

f)     Ms Hammond explained that reducing reliance on residential care pathways would require more flexible, community- based services, combining social care with elements of health support. She highlighted that while the enablement service had been  ...  view the full minutes text for item 48.

Michael Payne, representative of mill managers and volunteer groups, David Denman, Meopham Windmill Trust representative and Paul Allen, Chillenden Windmill Manager, were present for this item.  

1.    The Chairman invited Sarah Hudson, one of the call- in members to provide reasons for the call- in. Mrs Hudson spoke in support of preserving the eight windmills owned by the Council, highlighting their historic, cultural, educational and economic value. She argued that the windmills represented an important part of Kent’s heritage and identity, and that their loss would be irreversible. Mrs Hudson also highlighted that the costs of maintaining the windmills were modest in comparison to their wider public value. Finally, she emphasised the benefits of preservation, including support for tourism, community engagement and education, and argued that further work should be undertaken to explore the creation of a trust to secure their long- term future.  

2.    Claudine Russell, another call-in member, expressed concern that the option of establishing a trust for the windmills had not been fully explored or appropriately assessed against value for money, deliverability and strategic outcomes. Ms Russell further questioned whether the decision aligned with the Council’s strategic objective of delivering sustainable outcomes and best value for residents. She highlighted the collective value of windmills, the significant contribution of volunteers in their upkeep, and the relatively low and controlled maintenance costs. Ms Russell urged the Committee to recommend the decision be reconsidered with a view to exploring the potential for a trust to secure the windmills’ long-term future. 

3.    Another call- in Member, Mark Hood, highlighted the significance of the windmills as valued community assets and expressed concern regarding the decision to depart from a previous Cabinet Committee recommendation. Mr Hood requested clarity on the rationale for this decision and whether it was supported by sufficient analysis in line with constitutional requirements. The importance of the windmills in terms of heritage, education and community identity was also emphasised by Mr Hood, and it was requested that a clear explanation of the benefits of not pursuing a trust be provided. 

4.    Michael Payne, addressing the Committee on behalf of mill managers and volunteers, also raised concerns about the decision- making process and whether sufficient analysis had been undertaken in departing from the previous recommendation to explore a trust. He reiterated the heritage significance of the windmills, the long- standing contribution of volunteer groups, and concerns regarding transparency of maintenance costs and current management arrangements. Mr Payne also questioned the lack of consideration of alternative options, including a heritage trust or community asset transfer, and cautioned against progressing with disposal without further examination of these options.  

5.    Jamie Henderson, Cabinet Member for Environment, Coastal Regeneration, and Public Health, explained that the decision to divest the Council of its eight windmills had been taken under a previous administration following a full assessment of options, and clarified that the current item related to amendments to the Heritage Conservation Strategy to reflect that decision. He also outlined that the updated strategy presented to  ...  view the full minutes text for item 49.

1.    The item was introduced by John Moreland, Chairman of the Water Supply Short Focused Inquiry (SFI), who highlighted the cross- party collaboration and input from officers and community stakeholders in shaping the recommendations, including actions for KCC and wider considerations for other relevant organisations.  

2.    In response to questions and comments from Members, discussion covered the following: 

a)    The SFI was praised as a strong example of cross- party collaboration, highlighting the significant work undertaken by the Chairman, officers and relevant stakeholders. Various Members commended the report as clear, concise, and containing recommendations that would benefit the people of Kent. 

b)    It was clarified that the term ‘regulatory legal instruments’ referred to standard regulatory requirements applying to treatment works, rather than special measures. 

c)    It was indicated that updates to the water disruption plan were expected within two months, reflecting the SFI’s recommendation for prompt action. 

d)    It was confirmed that upon the Committee’s formal noting of the report, the recommendations would be sent to the administration, with a response expected within two months. 

e)    A Member highlighted that various wider issues such as funding and infrastructure recognised during the SFI may have fallen outside of KCC’s control and therefore may require future lobbying at a national level. 

3.    The Chairman proposed the Committee note the Short- Focused Inquiry Report into Water Supply, and confirm that it be submitted to the Leader and relevant Cabinet Members along with a request for a formal response to the recommendations within two months. This was agreed by the Committee. 

4.    RESOLVED that the Scrutiny Committee note the Short- Focused Inquiry Report into Water Supply, and confirm that it be submitted to the Leader and relevant Cabinet Members along with a request for a formal response to the recommendations within two months. 

RESOLVED to note the Work Programme.