Agenda and minutes

County Council - Thursday, 7th November, 2024 10.00 am

Venue: Council Chamber, Sessions House, County Hall, Maidstone. View directions

Contact: Joel Cook - Democratic Services Manager  03000 416892

Media

Items
No. Item

259.

Apologies for Absence

Additional documents:

Minutes:

The Democratic Services Manager reported apologies from Mr Barrington-King, Mr Beaney, Mr Bond, Mrs Bruneau, Mr Cannon, Mrs Game, Ms Hawkins, Mr Hill, Mrs Hudson, Mrs Prendergast, Mr Ridgers, Mr Simkins and Mr Webb.

260.

Declarations of Disclosable Pecuniary Interests or Other Significant Interests in items on the agenda

Additional documents:

Minutes:

Mr Jeffrey declared an interest later in the meeting, under Item 11 (Motion for Time Limited Debate 1), that he was a member of the Kent Local Government Pension Scheme and would not take part in the debate or vote.

261.

Minutes of the meeting held on 12 September 2024 and, if in order, to be approved as a correct record pdf icon PDF 119 KB

Additional documents:

Minutes:

RESOLVED that the minutes of the Council meeting held on 12 September 2024 be approved as a correct record.

 

262.

Chairman's Announcements

Additional documents:

Minutes:

1)        As agreed at the County Council meeting in September, the Chairman had written to the Kent Paralympians on behalf of the Council to congratulate them on competing in Paris. A response was received from Mr Matthew Robertson, a Paralympian on the GB Cycling team who won a bronze medal in the men’s C2 3,000m individual pursuit, thanking Members and Officers for taking the time to write. 

 

2)        The Chairman thanked the Democratic Services Manager for his dedicated support to Full Council.

 

3)        The Chairman explained that Item 10 on the agenda - Petition Debate Seashells Commissioned Family Hub - would be taken immediately after Item 6 - Report by the Leader of the Council.

 

263.

Questions pdf icon PDF 96 KB

Additional documents:

Minutes:

In accordance with Sections 14.15 to 14.22 of the Constitution, 8 questions were submitted by the deadline and 8 questions were put to the Executive. 8 questions were asked and replies given. A record of all questions put and answers given at the meeting is available online with the papers for this meeting.

 

264.

Report by Leader of the Council

Additional documents:

Minutes:

1)      The Leader updated Members on events since the last meeting and said he would not refer to the Entry/Exit System in his report as it was a later item on the agenda. 

 

2)      Regarding devolution Mr Gough said an expression of interest, in partnership with Medway Council, had been submitted to government accompanied by a letter signed by the Council, Medway Council and all 12 districts. He highlighted the importance of working together and emphasised there was unanimity across the Kent local authorities that the area should cover all of Kent and Medway.  Mr Gough explained that Mr Jim McMahon MP had set out a comprehensive view of government’s plans for devolution at the recent Local Government Association conference and the English Devolution White Paper was anticipated by the end of 2024.

 

3)      Mr Gough turned to the recent Autumn Budget and said he would focus on areas that directly affected the Council and local government. He welcomed the overall amount of £1.3billion additional support to the sector, which included £600million for social care, along with funding for SEND and a further renewal of the Household Support Fund. He noted, however the offsetting impacts of the changes to the national living wage and employers' national insurance; their precise effects, and those of the funding distribution formulas, remained to be seen. He referred to three areas of pressure the Council faced and questioned how government would address them, including adult social care, special educational needs and disability (SEND), and children's services.

 

4)      The Leader spoke about the decision in relation to the Lower Thames Crossing which had been delayed to May 2025 and about which the Council continued to engage.

 

5)      Regarding the government’s decision to remove the winter fuel allowance, the Council had been working alongside district and borough colleagues to promote the take-up of pension credit and funding had been allocated from the Household Support Fund to support those who sat just above the level to claim. Mr Gough said these measures aimed to support those on very modest incomes who would be suffering severe pressures over the winter.

 

6)      Mr Gough spoke about bus transport and referred to the Government’s announcement regarding £650 million for local transport and the fare cap increase from £2 to £3. He said the Council remained focussed on sustaining the bus network and where possible achieving enhancements.

 

7)      The Leader explained that the link between work and health was an important focus for the Council through two partnership groups - the Kent and Medway Economic Partnership and the Integrated Care Partnership. A strategic partnership for health and the economy would be developed and an All Member Briefing would take place in January 2025. The Leader also referred to the scheme previously known as Universal Support which the Council would be the accountable body for and which was a vital initiative likely to be launched in April 2025.

 

8)      Mr Gough concluded by referring to the Poppy Appeal launch and the memorandum of  ...  view the full minutes text for item 264.

265.

Entry and Exit System (EES) Update pdf icon PDF 137 KB

Additional documents:

Minutes:

1)      Mr Gough proposed, and Mr Baker seconded the motion that

 

“The County Council to consider the following proposal to:

 

1.      Note the national and local preparations for the introduction of EES border checks; and

2.      Endorse Kent County Council’s priorities for urgent Government action to resolve the outstanding issues as highlighted in this report.”

 

2)      Mr Love proposed the following amendment to the motion set out in paragraph 1:

 

“The County Council to consider the following proposal to:

 

1.      Note the national and local preparations for the introduction of EES border checks; and

2.      Endorse Kent County Council’s priorities for urgent Government action to resolve the outstanding issues as highlighted in this report, subject to the seeking of a permanent solution ‘at pace’ to Operation Brock to resolve lorry parking on the M20, in line with HM Government commitments made in 2016, being added to the list of outstanding issues in section 7 of this Report.

 

3)      The Chairman put the amendment set out in paragraph 2 to the vote and it was agreed unanimously.

Amendment carried.

 

4)      Mr Hook proposed and Mr Passmore seconded the following amendment to the motion set out in paragraph 2:

 

“The County Council to consider the following proposal to:

 

1.      Note the national and local preparations for the introduction of EES border checks; and

2.      Endorse Kent County Council’s priorities for urgent Government action to resolve the outstanding issues as highlighted in this report; subject to the seeking of a permanent solution ‘at pace’ to Operation Brock to resolve lorry parking on the M20, in line with HM Government commitments made in 2016, being added to the list of outstanding issues in section 7 of this Report.

3.      Council asks the government to explore ways to prevent EES coming into effect at all on the UK/France border including by objectively studying the costs and benefits and viability of the UK joining with other non-EU states (Norway, Switzerland, Iceland and Lichtenstein) who are already in a common travel area with the EU, building on the common travel area that already exists between the UK and Ireland.

 

5)      Following the debate, the Chairman put the amendment set out in paragraph 4 to the vote and the voting was as follows:

 

For (10)

 

Mr S Campkin, Mr Chittenden, Mrs Dean, Mr Hood, Mr Hook, Mr R Lehmann, Mr Passmore, Mr Sole, Mr P Stepto, Mr Streatfeild

 

Against (41)

 

Mr Baker, Mr Bartlett, Mrs Bell, Mrs Binks, Mr Booth, Mr Brazier, Miss Carey, Mr Carter, Mrs Chandler, Mr Chard, Mr Cole, Mrs Cole, Mr Cooke, Mr Crow-Brown, Mr Dance, Mr Dendor, Mr Gough, Ms Hamilton, Mr Hills, Mrs Hohler, Mr Holden, Mr Jeffrey, Mr Kennedy, Mr Kite, Mr Love, Mr Marsh, Mrs McArthur, Mr McInroy, Mr Meade, Mr Oakford, Ms Parfitt, Mr Rayner, Mr Richardson, Mr Robey, Mr Sandhu, Mr Shonk, Mr Thomas, Mr Watkins, Mr Whiting, Mr Wright, Ms Wright

 

Abstain (5)

 

Mr A Brady, Ms K Constantine, Ms M Dawkins, Mr B Lewis, Ms  ...  view the full minutes text for item 265.

266.

Spending the Council's Money pdf icon PDF 110 KB

Additional documents:

Minutes:

1)      The Chairman proposed, and Mr Booth seconded, that Council resolve to extend the meeting beyond 5pm with business to conclude no later than 5.30pm and it was agreed unanimously.

 

2)      Mr Gough proposed, and Mrs Binks seconded the motion that

 

“County Council is asked to approve the substantive changes proposed to Spending the Council’s Money, detailed in Sections 2 to 8 and available in full in the appended documents and as recommended by the Governance and Audit Committee on 9 October 2024.”

 

3)      Following the debate, the Chairman put the motion set out in paragraph 2 to the vote.

 

4)      RESOLVED that the County Council approves the substantive changes proposed to Spending the Council’s Money, detailed in Sections 2 to 8 and available in full in the appended documents and as recommended by the Governance and Audit Committee on 9 October 2024.

267.

Member Remuneration Panel Appointment pdf icon PDF 60 KB

Additional documents:

Minutes:

1)      Mr Gough proposed, and Mr Jeffrey seconded the motion that

 

“County Council is asked to agree the appointment of Malvern Chirume, Karen Price, and Roisin Reynolds to the Member Remuneration Panel for a four-year term commencing 7 November 2024.”

 

2)      Following a comment made by a Member, the Democratic Services Manager explained that the management of the Member Scheme Allowance was outside the scope of this item.

 

3)      Following the debate, the Chairman put the motion set out in paragraph 1 to the vote.

 

4)      RESOLVED that the County Council agrees the appointment of Malvern Chirume, Karen Price, and Roisin Reynolds to the Member Remuneration Panel for a four-year term commencing 7 November 2024.

268.

Petition Debate - Seashells Commissioned Family Hub pdf icon PDF 86 KB

Additional documents:

Minutes:

This item was taken after Item 6 and before Item 7.

 

1)      The Petitioners, Ms Kate Townsend-Brazier and Ms Amy Watkins, provided a verbal statement.

 

2)      The Chairman invited Members to debate the petition.

 

3)      The Cabinet Member for Integrated Children’s Services responded to the petition and the debate.

 

4)         Mr Whiting proposed and Rich Lehmann seconded the motion that

 

“This Council resolves;

1.      to thank the petitioners for raising this important issue.

2.      to recommend to the Cabinet Member that she puts on hold her decision;

a.      until she has explored with Seashells a possible reduction in the contract value,

b.      until she has clarity over the government’s extension of its Family Hub Continuity Funding,

c.       until after Cabinet has considered the total cross-departmental cost to the County Council accruing from any decision to cancel the commissioned service at Seashells.”

 

5)      Following the debate, the Chairman put the motion set out in paragraph 4 to the vote and the voting was as follows:

 

For (18)

 

Mr Brady, Mr S Campkin, Mr Chittenden, Ms Constantine, Ms Dawkins, Mrs Dean, Mr Hood, Mr Hook, Mr R Lehmann, Mr Lewis, Ms Meade, Mr Passmore, Mr Sole, Mr P Stepto, Mr Streatfeild, Dr Sullivan, Mr Whiting, Mr Wright

 

Against (41)

 

Mr Baker, Mr Bartlett, Mrs Bell, Mrs Binks, Mr Booth, Mr Brazier, Miss Carey, Mrs Chandler, Mr Chard, Mr Cole, Mrs Cole, Mr Cooke, Mr Crow-Brown, Mr Dance, Mr Dendor, Mr Gough, Ms Hamilton, Mr Hills, Mrs Hohler, Mr Holden, Mr Jeffrey, Mr Kennedy, Mr Kite, Mr Love, Mr Manion, Mr Marsh, Mrs McArthur, Mr McInroy, Mr Meade, Mr Murphy, Mr Oakford, Mr Ozog, Ms Parfitt, Mr Rayner, Mr Richardson, Mr Robey, Mr Sandhu, Mr Shonk, Mr Thomas, Mr Watkins, Ms Wright

 

Abstain (1)

 

Mr Carter

Motion lost.

 

6)      Mr Jeffrey proposed and Mr Booth seconded the motion that

 

“Council recognises that this petition represents significant local opinion regarding the proposed decision to not recommission Family Hub Services at Seashells and asks the Cabinet Member to take that into consideration in addition to the consultation report before taking the decision.”

 

7)      Mr Lehmann proposed the following amendment to the motion set out at paragraph 6:

 

“Council recognises that this petition represents significant local opinion regarding the proposed decision to not recommission Family Hub Services at Seashells and asks the Cabinet Member to take that into consideration in addition to the consultation report, and detailed financial analysis, before taking the decision.”

 

8)      The Chairman put the amendment set out in paragraph 7 to the vote and it was agreed.

Amendment carried.

 

9)      Following the debate, the Chairman put the substantive motion set out at paragraph 7 to the vote and the voting was as follows:

 

For (56)

 

Mr Baker, Mr Bartlett, Mrs Bell, Mrs Binks, Mr Booth, Mr Brady, Mr Brazier, Mr Campkin, Miss Carey, Mr Carter, Mrs Chandler, Mr Chard, Mr Chittenden, Mr Cole, Ms Constantine, Mr Cooke, Mr Crow-Brown, Mr Dance, Ms Dawkins, Mrs Dean, Mr Dendor, Mr Gough, Ms Hamilton,  ...  view the full minutes text for item 268.

269.

Motions for Time Limited Debate pdf icon PDF 103 KB

Additional documents:

Minutes:

Motion for Time Limited Debate 1 – Pension Fund Investment in Affordable Housing

 

1)      Ms Dawkins proposed, and Mr Stepto seconded the motion that

 

          “The County Council resolves to:

 

·      Support the principle of Local Government Pension Scheme (LGPS) investment in affordable housing; and

·      Recommend that the Pension Fund Committee investigates the viability of committing to a project to invest LGPS funds in affordable housing.”

 

2)      Mr Jeffrey declared an interest that he was a member of the Kent Local Government Pension Scheme and would not take part in the debate or vote.

 

3)      Mr Chard proposed and Mr Oakford seconded the following amendment to the motion set out at paragraph 1:

 

The County Council resolves to:

·      Support the principle of the Kent Local Government Pension Scheme (LGPS) investment in affordable housing having investments in a range of assets that meet their agreed strategy; and

·      Recommend that the Pension Fund Committee ask its advisors, Mercers, to further investigates the viability of committing to a project to invest LGPS funds in affordable housing.

 

4)      Following the debate, the Chairman put the amendment set out in paragraph 3 to the vote and it was agreed.

Amendment carried.

 

 

5)      The Chairman put the substantive motion set out in paragraph 3 to the vote and it was agreed.

 

Substantive Motion carried.

 

6)         RESOLVED that the County Council:

 

·      Supports the principle of the Kent Local Government Pension Scheme (LGPS) having investments in a range of assets that meet their agreed strategy; and

·      Recommends that the Pension Fund Committee ask its advisors, Mercers, to further investigate the viability of a project to invest LGPS funds in affordable housing.

 

 

Motion for Time Limited Debate 2 – Reforming Council Tax in England

 

 

1)      Mr Lehmann proposed, and Mr Hood seconded the motion that

 

“County Council resolves:

 

1.      To agree that the current council tax system is regressive and requires significant reform; and

2.      To recommend that the Executive write to the relevant Ministers of State to request that, for the reasons stated above, the government introduces council tax reforms in England similar to those underway in Wales.”

 

2)      Mr Lehmann proposed the following amendment to the motion set out at paragraph 1:

 

“County Council resolves:

 

1.      To agree that the current council tax system is regressive and requires significant reform; and

2.      To recommend that the Executive write to the relevant Ministers of State to request that, for the reasons stated above, the government undertakes work to scrap Council Tax and replace it with a fairer tax more reflective of people’s ability to pay whilst also remaining aware of the significant funding pressures facing local authorities.” introduces council tax reforms in England similar to those underway in Wales.”

 

3)      The Chairman put the amendment set out in paragraph 2 to the vote and the voting was as follows:

 

For (19)

 

Mr Baker, Mr Brady, Mrs Binks, Mr Chittenden, Ms Constantine, Mr Crow-Brown, Ms Dawkins, Mrs Dean, Mr Dendor, Mr Hood, Mr Hook, Mr Kennedy, Mr Lehmann, Mr Lewis, Ms  ...  view the full minutes text for item 269.