Agenda item

Motion 1

Motion for Time Limited Debate – Devolved Government for Kent

Proposer:  Mike Baldock

Seconder:  Antony Hook

Background information provided by the Green & Independent Group

The recent Levelling Up White Paper has formalised the Government’s purported desire to devolve more power and responsibility to local authorities, recognising that local communities need to be empowered to deliver substantive and sustainable change based on local democratic priorities.

The Welsh Parliament, Scottish Parliament, London Assembly and Northern Ireland Assembly have produced substantial change in their areas by devolving legislative powers to the people through their elected representatives.

Kent has a strong distinctive identity, sense of place and set of opportunities and challenges that warrant constitutional recognition and greater autonomy.

The creation of a Kent Assembly, with legislative powers, will increase local control and ensure that directly elected representatives have more power to deliver policies that reflect the needs of Kent residents.

Motion

The County Council resolves;

to establish a cross-party working group to oversee a feasibility study into devolved government for Kent, based on an elected assembly with legislative powers similar to the powers of other devolved parliaments and assemblies.

Motion 2

Motion for Time Limited Debate – Play Streets

Proposed by: Kelly Grehan

Seconded by: ­­­­Alister Brady

Introduction:

In 2016, the World Health Organisation published a report on ‘Ending Childhood Obesity’.[1] It stressed how childhood experience can have an important influence on life-long physical activity habits. In short, what we experience as a child will impact – positively or negatively – on how active we are for the rest of our lives. NHS guidelines state that children aged 5-18 need an hour each day of what they call ‘moderate to vigorous physical activity’ to remain healthy and well.[2] However, evidence shows that a staggering 80% of UK children[3] are not getting the required level of exercise, and that this is fuelling all kinds of growing health problems in children, including clinical obesity and mental ill-health - and this is before we even begin to consider the impacts of the pandemic on activity levels.

Background information provided by the Labour Group:

·         A child’s right to play is enshrined in Article 31 of the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child.[4]

·         Research shows that play is fundamental to children’s physical, social, mental and emotional development, as well as to their immediate happiness and wellbeing.[5]

·         A great way of encouraging children and young people to play outdoors is to create a ‘play street’. A play street is an event where a road is closed off to traffic for a few hours on a regular basis so that children have a safe space to play freely.

·         Legislation such as the 1874 Town Police Clauses Act and the 1984 Road Traffic Regulation Act can reasonably be used as a basis for implementing play streets.

·         With council permission and general consensus from neighbours, residents legally close the road to through-traffic, using ‘Road Closed’ signs and cones (in this respect, the model is not too dissimilar from the way in which the Jubilee street parties were organised). Residents still have vehicle access and can leave their cars parked on the road. Volunteer stewards (usually residents) stand at each end of the street and walk in front of any moving vehicles to keep it safe.

·         The minimum cost of implementation is the administrative duty of processing the temporary road closure applications, and the setting up of the scheme. Additional costs may be incurred for the provision of road signs and cones. Costs are generally kept to a minimum by encouraging residents to sign a reasonable indemnity clause rather than insisting on public liability insurance.[6] Indeed, it is important to note that the risk of liability remains low – according to ‘Playing Out’, the community group which kickstarted the original idea, no liability claims have been made as a result of a playing out session, with over 1,200 streets having played out across the UK (as of winter 2021).[7]

·         The Local Authority itself is not responsible for the event, although it should be noted that neither public liability insurance nor an indemnity clause would indemnify the Local Authority from anything that it may be negligent of, such as faulty pavements.[8]

·         Nonetheless, 91 councils are now actively supporting the playing out model and many have specific street play policies in place.[9]

·         Research undertaken by the University of Bristol has shown that at play street sessions children are three to five times more active than they would be on a ‘normal’ day after school.[10]

·         Playing out in the street allows children to make new friends of different ages and backgrounds, while also allowing them to get to know some of the adults in their street.

·         Research has also shown that play street sessions lead to increased community connection and belonging. This has made a real difference to residents, both during and after Covid.

Motion:

The County Council resolves:

·         To undertake a feasibility study to assess the benefits and risks of implementing play schemes across the county;

·         To assess whether or not the implementation of such a scheme could be cost-neutral, possibly through sponsorship by local businesses or through Member Grant funding; and

·         On the proviso that the above conditions are met, the Executive should roll out a pilot scheme within the next 12 months.

Motion for Time Limited Debate 1 – Devolved Government cross party working group

(1)       Mr Baldock proposed and Mr Hook seconded the following motion for time-limited debate:

“Kent County Council agrees to establish a cross-party working group to oversee a feasibility study into devolved government for Kent, based on an elected assembly with legislative powers similar to the powers of other devolved parliaments and assemblies.”

(2)       Following the debate, the Chairman put the substantive motion set out in paragraph 1 to the vote. The voting was as follows:

For (11)

Mr M Baldock, Mr D Beaney, Mr I Chittenden, Mr P M Harman, Mr M Hood, Mr A Hook, Rich Lehmann, Mr T L Shonk, Mr M J Sole, Mr P Stepto, Mr R G Streatfeild, MBE

Against (27)

Mr N Baker, Mrs C Bell, Mrs R Binks, Mr T Bond, Mr D Brazier, Mr C Broadley, Mrs S Chandler, Mr D Crow-Brown, Mr M Dance, Mr M Dendor, Mr R W Gough, Mr P M Hill, OBE, Mr D Jeffrey, Mr J Kite, Mr J P McInroy, Mr D Murphy, Mr P J Oakford, Mrs L Parfitt-Reid, Mrs S Prendergast, Mr O Richardson, Mr D Robey, Mr D Ross, Mr A Sandhu, MBE, Mr B J Sweetland, Mr R J Thomas, Mr A Weatherhead, Mr S Webb

Abstain (7)

Mr A Brady, Ms M Dawkins, Ms K Grehan, Mr A R Hills, Mr S Holden, Mr A Kennedy, Dr L Sullivan

Motion lost.

Motion for Time Limited Debate 2 – Play Streets

(1)       Ms Grehan proposed, and Mr Brady seconded the following motion for time-limited debate:

“The County Council resolves:

·       To undertake a feasibility study to assess the benefits and risks of implementing play schemes across the county;

·       To assess whether or not the implementation of such a scheme could be cost-neutral, possibly through sponsorship by local businesses or through Member Grant funding; and

·       On the proviso that the above conditions are met, the Executive should roll out a pilot scheme within the next 12 months.”

(2)       The Cabinet Member for Highways and Transport said he would be happy to work with the opposition groups and Highways Officers outside of the meeting to discuss the Play Streets proposal.  This would require additional information and any scheme would need to be cost neutral.    

(3)       RESOLVED that the motion be withdrawn following commitment from the Cabinet Member that further discussion would be had with a view to progressing this proposal.