Agenda item

Meradin Peachey, Director of Public Health and Mark Lemon, Policy Manager, Department of Public Health will be in attendance for this item.

(Meradin Peachey, Director of Public Health, and Mark Lemon, Policy Manager, KCC Department of Public Health were in attendance for this item)

(1)       Mr Gibbens introduced the latest draft of the Public Health Strategy for Kent, which had been circulated to key stakeholders for comment and discussion before being taken to a meeting of the full County Council on 24 July 2007.  Ms Peachey stated that she was pleased the Committee were looking at this. It was an opportunity for the PCTs and KCC to clarify what they meant by public health. The strategy set out six key outcomes for all partners to focus on.  Some of the targets were already part of the Local Area Agreement for Kent. Mr Lemon emphasised that the document was work in progress and, even when agreed, it would still be work in progress, as the strategy would continue to evolve and develop.  After the County Council meeting on 24 July 2007 the document would go out to public consultation.

(2)       Members made the following comments on the document:-

·              It would be helpful to have more discussion in the document on food – for example, the importance of adequate information being shown on food packaging, so that informed choices could be made; and also the need for information about how to find healthy, local food.

·              In relation to obesity, the “pleasure principle” was important: a healthy diet and lifestyle needed to be presented as enjoyable.

·              It was noted that KCC’s Environment and Regeneration Directorate had set a good example of encouraging staff to take exercise in an enjoyable way.

·              The Healthy Schools programme was acknowledged as another good example of promoting healthy lifestyles.

·              The Alcohol Abuse Select Committee’s recommendations would feed into the next version of the Strategy, which was due to be published in October 2008.

·              Members were pleased to see that mental health was included in the document.

·              It was noted that a lot of work had been done to reduce teenage conception rates.

·              Members who sat on Local Strategic Partnership Boards would find it helpful to have advice about how to challenge other organisations to ensure that they were working along the lines set out in the strategy.  It was noted that once the document had been agreed, there would be discussions with the Local Strategic Partnerships and district authorities.

·              The challenges around health inequalities were starkly illustrated by the different life-expectancy rates found in geographically adjacent wards in some parts of the county.

·              It would be useful to have a map of the county illustrating the different indices, so that the various aspects of health inequalities could be visually presented.

·              It was noted that Environmental Health, which was a district council function, was key to public health – but it was important to look at major public health issues where all local authorities could make a big difference to a large number of people.  One of the main issues that district councils wanted action on was air-quality improvement.

·              It was noted that the County Council was a major player in relation to public health and had the opportunity to have a very powerful lobbying voice but it was important to be very careful about which issues were selected for lobbying.

·              It was suggested that establishing “excellence in public health” awards for organisations could be considered.

(3)       An undertaking was given that as part of the consultation on this document, it would go to PPIFs.

(4)       RESOLVED that the latest draft of the Public Health Strategy for Kent, and comments made by Members of the Committee, be noted.