Agenda item

(i)                 The Limes – care home for older people

(ii)               Blackburn Lodge, Sheerness

(iii)             Bowles Lodge, Hawkhurst

(iv)              Mobile Advertising Boards (“A” Frames) in Maidstone

(Note:- This item will begin immediately after the lunch interval, with the agenda being varied if required)

(In accordance with Council Procedure Rule 1.11, the Chairman proposed to vary the order of the agenda in order to take 15 (Petition Scheme debates) at this point. This was agreed)

(1)       The Chairman advised that the County Council had received four petitions that met the criteria for a debate at the County Council meeting, in accordance with the Petition Scheme adopted in July 2010. He explained that three of the petitions related to the proposed closure of The Limes, Blackburn Lodge and Bowles Lodge care homes for older persons and that there would be a combined debate on those three petitions. The fourth petition related to a highways matter in the Maidstone Borough area, which would be dealt with as a separate debate.

Proposed closure of The Limes, Blackburn Lodge and Bowles Lodge care homes for older people

(2)       The following individuals addressed the County Council on the various petitions:

1.      Ms Karen Baldwin from the Limes Focus Group and Mr David Lloyd from Unison – in relation to The Limes Petition

2.      Ms Penny Cole – the local Member for The Limes petition

3.      Ms Joan Tuck from Unison in relation to the Blackburn Lodge petition

4.      Mr Ken Pugh – the local Member for the Blackburn Lodge petition

5.      Mr David Lloyd from Unison – in relation to the Bowles Lodge petition

6.      Mr Roger Manning – the local Member for the Bowles Lodge petition

(3)       The Chairman then opened up the debate to the floor and a number of other Members spoke on the petitions.

(4)       Mr Christie moved, Mr Koowaree seconded that the Cabinet Member for Adult Social Services gives full weight to the results of the consultation exercise when coming to his decision.

(5)       The Chairman then invited the Cabinet Member for Adult Social Services to respond to the debate and describe how he intended to take the petitioners’ concerns forward. Mr Gibbens began by thanking all of the petitioners and speakers for attending the meeting and giving their views. He said that he was also grateful to Unison for co-ordinating the responses to the various consultations. He stressed that the various proposals were not about money and that, even if all 11 decisions proceeded as proposed, the savings that would accrue to Kent County Council would only amount to approximately £2m out of a total budget for Adult Social Services of approximately £450m. The reason for the consultation exercise was that KCC needed to respond to the needs of older people now and into the future. Mr Gibbens stated that people were living longer: in 20-30 years’ time, the number of people aged 85 years or more would have doubled and the number of people suffering from dementia would also increase significantly, so the proposals were designed to protect and enhance services now and into the future. He also stressed that no changes would be made at any of the sites until alternative provision was in place. Mr Gibbens acknowledged how difficult and stressful the consultation process had been on residents, their families and friends, and on the staff concerned. With regard to the Limes, Mr Gibbens stated that respite care was very important and that the focus of working with the voluntary sector would continue. He also acknowledged that he would take into account the closure of A&E services at Queen Mary’s Sidcup should the proposals for The Limes proceed. With regard to Blackburn Lodge, he stressed that this facility was not proposed for closure, but to transfer under a partnership arrangement and provide modernised services. With regard to Bowles Lodge, Mr Gibbens stressed again that no changes would be made until alternative provision was in place and that he also hoped over the longer term to ensure that there was much more day care provision in place so that residents didn’t have to travel long distances for day care. He undertook to examine all of the consultation responses received and take notice of everything said today as he moved forward to take decisions. Finally, he stated that the Officers’ reports would be published on KCC’s website on 30 December; that the reports would be considered by Cabinet on 10 January; by the Adult Social Services Policy Overview and Scrutiny Committee on 12 January and he also expected his decisions to be considered at the meeting of the Cabinet Scrutiny Committee on 19 January.

(6)       The Chairman then put Mr Christie’s motion to the vote

Resolved: that the Cabinet Member for Adult Social Services gives full weight to the results of the consultation exercise when coming to his decision.

Mobile Advertising Boards (“A” Frames) in Maidstone

(7)       The following individuals addressed the County Council on the above petition.

1.      Mr N Butteriss – the lead petitioner for the “A” Frames Petition

2.      Mr I Chittenden – the local Member

(8)       Mr Chittenden moved, Mr Daley seconded that the Cabinet Member for Environment, Highways and Waste gives an undertaking to commence an immediate review of the policy, including full and effective external consultation with all relevant external bodies.

(9)       The Chairman then opened up the debate to the floor and a number of other Members spoke on the petition.

(10)     The Chairman then invited the Cabinet Member for Environment, Highways and Waste to respond to the debate and describe how he intended to take the petitioner’s concerns forward. Mr Chard began by saying that the policy had been under consideration for some 18 months and that he had first-hand experience of how difficult the problem was for parents pushing a pushchair down the High Street in Sevenoaks. He accepted that there had been a proliferation of “A” Boards on pavements and that the pavements were often not wide enough to accommodate both “A” Boards and give proper access for pedestrians. He echoed the comments of Mr Butteriss and the elected Members who spoke about the effect on people with sight impairments and physical disabilities. Mr Chard stated that he had consulted the Department of Transport, the Federation of Small Businesses and the Kent Reference Panel on “A” Boards. He stated that the Federation recognised that they had become a problem in some town centres and that there was a need to restrict both their size and location. Mr Chard stated that he was trying to find the right balance for pedestrians but also for businesses who wanted to advertise their products and services. Finally, he undertook to address the concerns of the lead petitioner and re-visit the policy and that he would provide a written response to Mr Butteriss.

(11)     The Chairman then put Mr Chittenden’s motion to the vote:

Resolved: that the Cabinet Member for Environment, Highways and Waste gives an undertaking to commence an immediate review of the policy, including full and effective external consultation with all relevant external bodies.