Motion 1: Mr G Cowan will propose, Mr W Scobie will second that:
This Council recognises that reform of the Crown Post Office Network is necessary and long overdue. This Council also welcomes progress being made to this end, with losses reduced by up to £14m, to around £37m, in the past three years.
Nevertheless, proposed reforms have the potential to disproportionately impact on Kent people – as part of a plan to close or franchise 76 Crown Post Offices nationwide – two are located in Kent: Margate and Whitstable Crown Offices.
Despite only representing 3% of the postal network, Crown Post Offices employ 4000 people and are responsible for 20% of all Post Office business. Crown Post Offices also process 40% of financial services mail and are therefore a crucial component of Kent’s economy.
Post Offices not only provide essential services to the public that are not available anywhere else, but they are also central to the local economies in which they are located. This Council is concerned at the potential adverse impacts on Post Office accessibility for Kent’s population and the business community.
This Council therefore calls on the Leader of Council to:
· write to the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State with responsibility for Post Offices, informing them of the concerns raised by the Council about the franchising of the two of Kent’s Crown Post Offices; Margate & Whitstable (if they were both to go to a franchise, neither would be able to provide all the current services and the nearest Crown Post Office available would be either Ashford or Faversham. This would not be in the best interest of our communities);
· request that Under-Secretary undertake to conduct a broader social and economic assessment of the proposed franchising, focussing on the impact on customers; and
· seek assurances from the Under-Secretary that successful franchisees for Crown Post Offices will be strongly encouraged to pay their staff the current rate for the job and guarantee the community would be able to receive all services provided by the Crown Post Office.
Motion 2: Mrs T Dean will propose, Mr M Vye will second that:
This Council agrees to issue guidelines to make it clear that council meetings are public and may be filmed, tweeted about or blogged with the exception of exempt agenda items.
Minutes:
Motion for Time Limited Debate 1
(1) Mr G Cowan proposed, Mr W Scobie seconded the following Motion for Time Limited Debate:
This Council recognises that reform of the Crown Post Office Network is necessary and long overdue. This Council also welcomes progress being made to this end, with losses reduced by up to £14m, to around £37m, in the past three years.
Nevertheless, proposed reforms have the potential to disproportionately impact on Kent people – as part of a plan to close or franchise 76 Crown Post Offices nationwide – two are located in Kent: Margate and Whitstable Crown Offices.
Despite only representing 3% of the postal network, Crown Post Offices employ 4000 people and are responsible for 20% of all Post Office business. Crown Post Offices also process 40% of financial services mail and are therefore a crucial component of Kent’s economy.
Post Offices not only provide essential services to the public that are not available anywhere else, but they are also central to the local economies in which they are located. This Council is concerned at the potential adverse impacts on Post Office accessibility for Kent’s population and the business community.
This Council therefore calls on the Leader of Council to:
· write to the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State with responsibility for Post Offices, informing them of the concerns raised by the Council about the franchising of the two of Kent’s Crown Post Offices; Margate & Whitstable (if they were both to go to a franchise, neither would be able to provide all the current services and the nearest Crown Post Office available would be either Ashford or Faversham. This would not be in the best interest of our communities);
· request that Under-Secretary undertake to conduct a broader social and economic assessment of the proposed franchising, focussing on the impact on customers; and
· seek assurances from the Under-Secretary that successful franchisees for Crown Post Offices will be strongly encouraged to pay their staff the current rate for the job and guarantee the community would be able to receive all services provided by the Crown Post Office.
(2) Following a debate, the Chairman put to the vote the motion as set out above, when the voting was as follows:
For (34)
Mr D Baker, Mr M Baldock, Mr R Bird, Mr H Birkby, Mr N Bond, Mrs P Brivio, Mr L Burgess, Mr C Caller, Mr I Chittenden, Mr G Cowan, Ms J Cribbon, Mr D Daley, Mrs T Dean, Dr M Eddy, Ms A Harrison, Mr M Heale, Mr C Hoare, Ms S Howes, Mr G Koowaree, Mr R Latchford, Mr B MacDowall, Mr T Maddison, Mr F McKenna, Mr B Neaves, Mrs E Rowbotham, Mr W Scobie, Mr T Shonk, Mr D Smyth, Mr A Terry, Mr N Thandi, Mr R Truelove, Mr M Vye, Mr M Whybrow, Mrs Z Wiltshire
Abstain (2)
Miss S Carey, Mr B Clark
Against (43)
Mrs A Allen, Mr M Angell, Mr M Balfour, Mr D Brazier, Mr R Brookbank, Mr P Carter, Mrs P Cole, Mr G Cooke, Mrs M Crabtree, Mr A Crowther, Mrs V Dagger, Mr M Dance, Mr J Davies, Mr J Elenor, Mrs M Elenor, Mr G Gibbens, Mr R Gough, Mr M Harrison, Mr M Hill, Mrs S Hohler, Mr S Holden, Mr P Homewood, Mr E Hotson, Mr A King, Mr J Kite, Mr R Long, Mr G Lymer, Mr S Manion, Mr A Marsh, Mr M Northey, Mr P Oakford, Mr J Ozog, Mr C Pearman, Mr L Ridings, Mr J Scholes, Mr C Simkins, Mr J Simmonds, Mr C Smith, Mrs P Stockell, Mr B Sweetland, Mr J Wedgbury, Mrs J Whittle, Mr A Wickham
Lost
Motion for Time Limited Debate 2
(3) Mrs T Dean proposed, Mr M Vye seconded the following Motion for Time Limited Debate:
This Council agrees to issue guidelines to make it clear that council meetings are public and may be filmed, tweeted about or blogged with the exception of exempt agenda items.
(4) Mr G Cooke proposed, Mr P Carter seconded the following amendment to the motion that this Council:
i) acknowledges and notes that work has already been undertaken in relation to the issuance of policy guidelines covering the filming of public meetings in line with the guidance document; “Your Council’s Cabinet – going to its meetings, seeing how it works”, issued by the Department for Communities and Local Government (DCLG) in June 2013; and
ii) that a report setting out how Kent County Council will provide reasonable facilities for members of the public attending public meetings, together with provision for the filming of councillors and officers at public meetings, with the exception of exempt agenda items, in a way that is neither obtrusive or disruptive, will be presented to the next meeting of the Selection and Member Services Committee in September for consideration.
(5) Following debate the Chairman then asked if Members agreed the amendment to the original motion and it was agreed.
(6) RESOLVED that the substantive motion set out in paragraph (4) i) and ii) above be agreed as amended.