Interview with Councillor Chris Garland.

The Leader of the Council, Councillor Chris Garland was welcomed to the meeting and began with an update on the Mid Kent Improvement Partnership (MKIP).  He explained that Ashford had left the partnership but that Tunbridge Wells, Swale and Maidstone would continue working closely together.  Members were told that the IT issues with the Revenues and Benefit’s Partnership had been resolved and this was progressing well.  The Committee was informed that the Revenues and Benefits Partnership would provide some of the biggest savings over the next four years as part of the medium term financial strategy. The Leader emphasised that with stringent budget cuts it was vital that MKIP continued to move forward to help achieve these. In response to Members questions the Leader explained that the Licensing Partnership with Sevenoaks was also functioning well. With regards to Ashford no longer being part of MKIP; the Audit Partnership and anything that had already been established would continue.

The Leader moved on to discuss the partnership arrangements for Kent.  He explained that Kent comprised of two key groups: the Kent Partnership and the Leader and Chief Executives Group; a two body arrangement that was too top heavy and cumbersome and had now been streamlined. The Committee was told that Kent County Council were replacing the current partnership arrangements with the Kent Forum which would include all Leaders, Chief Executives and any other elected bodies, with ‘Ambition Boards’ sitting below this group, fulfilling the county’s priorities: the economy, environment and a decent place to live.  Under the Ambition Boards would come 12 Locality Boards comprised of District and County Councillors.  The 9 County Councillors for Maidstone would be matched with the same representation at a District level to ensure balance between the two tiers of government. Councillor Garland told the Committee that the ‘big public spenders’ should be included on Locality Boards in order to achieve change.  He referred to the resource mapping exercise that had been carried out by the Local Strategic Partnership which had shown that there was approximately £610 million in public money coming into Maidstone as identified in 13 organisation’s spend profiles.  Kent County Council, the Primary Care Trust, Maidstone Borough Council and Kent Police were listed as the biggest spenders with pronounced figures given to the Committee; these organisations therefore had the most impact on people’s lives from a public spending point of view.  It was the Leader’s view that the Locality Boards should consist of these organisations in order to fulfil KCC’s ambition of a single agency or body to govern all partnership working. With regard to the LSP, Councillor Garland explained that there was evidence to show they had not achieved substantial results over the past four years to continue in their current form and envisaged them becoming part of the Locality Boards.  Successful LSP projects that were highlighted were Park Wood and Age Concern (Community Hub).  He went on to explain that the LSP had had £295,000 to spend in the last year but there would be no future funding available to them. The Leader gave his personal view of the future Locality Boards which he said he was in support of if they included the right people, were based on trust and had a clear, strategic direction.  He said it was the most streamlined rationale of partnership working to come. The Committee was informed that by 2014 they would become decision making bodies with money to spend.  Their first function would be to cut out duplication of effort and the example was given of collaborative working in areas such as Community Safety.  The Sustainable Communities Strategy would be revised to reflect this new partnership structure with three focused objectives, particularly in view of the coalition government reducing the National Indicators it previously focused on. In response to Members questions the Leader confirmed that it could be GP consortiums that would join the Locality Boards rather than the PCTs and that other non-elected bodies who brought money into the borough such as the Army could be called upon for their input in relation to specific agenda items.  Councillor Garland clarified that the Kent Forum would be formed by elected Members and the Locality Boards could include the PCTs and non-elected bodies. He confirmed that Local Enterprise Partnerships would also have an input.

Councillor Garland moved on to the ‘Big Society’. He told Members that the voluntary sector had a large role to play in this as they were key to life in Maidstone but there was an irony that came with this in light of the spending cuts.  The Leader explained that it was yet to be decided what the Big Society meant for Maidstone but it would provide a new landscape.

Members queried the Health Issues in the borough, particularly the recent move of Maternity and Children’s Services from Maidstone to Pembury Hospital.  The Leader explained that KCC was not pursuing a judicial review of this decision which meant that the Secretary of State’s decision would likely stand however there may be an opportunity for influence as issues arose.

Members questioned the progress of the Local Development Framework and the provision of gypsy traveller sites.  The Leader informed the Committee that a political consensus on the spatial distribution of housing had been reached and there would be meetings to determine how to progress the LDF.  In May 2011 there would be a public consultation.  The issue that remained was employment land with 16 hectares to be found by 2016.  This decision would have to be signed off by the Secretary of State and would go to full Council next year.  The advent of Localism and a different planning system could change this.

The Chairman thanked the Leader for attending and for keeping the Committee updated on issues before they happened.