Contact your Parish Council

Proposer Name


Councillor English, supported by the Overview and Scrutiny Committee


Proposed Topic


Safety and Enforcement


Description and Reason for Review


Review into the Council’s provision of enforcement services and safety, to identify actions/policies for implementation to improve these services.


At its previous meeting the committee considered a suggestion to review enforcement and the aspects of safety relating to the town centre and the night-time economy. A suggestion to review enforcement was also put forward by the Executive, with the Lead Member for Environmental Services in attendance indicating Committee input into the resourcing of enforcement would be welcomed.


The types of enforcement mentioned included environmental crime, waste crime, noise prevention, parking and planning.


The Committee supported conducting a review into this topic.


The review would also increase Councillor knowledge and engagement on this topic, which is of public interest.


Link to Priorities:


Strategic Priorities:

Safe Clean and Green

A Thriving Place


Executive Priorities:

Maintaining a tough stance on crime and anti-social behaviour, working closely with the Police and utilising the Council’s own powers and resources.


Other: Aligns with Executive proposal to review enforcement alongside support expressed at the meeting by the Lead Member for Environmental Services.


Desired Outcome(s)


Identification of required actions and/or policies to improve the Council’s enforcement services and the safety of the local area.


Suggested Approach


This is a large topic for review and should be narrowed in scope to provide a focused remit. 


One option would be to conduct a primary review on enforcement resourcing followed by a secondary review into safety.


Enforcement Review (Primary Review)


Types of enforcement to be included in the review should be selected. Possibilities include: 


·         Parking

·         Planning

·         Environmental

·         Noise Crime

·         Waste Crime


Prior to the first meeting, produce an evidence pack containing:


·         Available information, such as existing policies, statistics and reports relating to enforcement.  


·         Any other information specifically requested by the committee that can be readily provided.


Meetings One & Two (Evidence Collection) 


Evidence collection (written/verbal) from Council Officers and Members.


Suggested participants could include:


·         Director of Regeneration and Place

·         Head of Planning and Development

·         Parking Services Manager

·         Waste Crime Manager

·         Mid Kent Environmental Health (Shared Service)


·         Lead Member for Environmental Services

·         Lead Member for Planning and Infrastructure

·         Lead Member for Communities and Engagement

·         Planning Committee Chairman and Vice-Chair


Request for written submissions from all Councillors, suggested questions include: 


·         What aspects of enforcement are carried out well?

·         What are the main areas for improvement?

·         How could these be improved?

·         Is there an additional resource need or are there other changes that could be made to benefit the service’s efficiency?

·         What would be required to make this improvement and support it in the long-term?




Meeting Three (Evidence Collection and Summary)


Evidence (written/verbal) collection to understand how enforcement works in other Local Authorities.


Committee to produce its recommendations. Report presented at next meeting.


Safety Review (Secondary Review)


This review could be carried out by a working group, as the Committee will have greater experience in carrying out reviews by this point and the Democratic Services Team will be able to provide the necessary resource.


To include safety in the town centre and the night-time economy; review of existing measures to identify any required changes:


Member Briefing (Informal)


Update on existing safety measures within the Town Centre and night-time economy.


Evidence pack produced to support review.


Meeting One (evidence collection – Town Centre Safety)


Interview Officers, Members and relevant partners (suggested):


·         Community and Strategic Partnerships  Manager

·         Relevant Kent County Council Officers

·         Kent Police

·         BID One Maidstone

·         Chairman of the CHE PAC

·         Lead Member for Communities and Engagement

·         (Possible) Community Survey


Meeting Two (evidence collection – Night-time economy)


·         Kent Police, including Licensing Officer

·         Community and Strategic Partnerships  Manager

·         Licensing Officers (MBC)

·         (Possible) Community Survey

·         Chairman and Vice-Chair of Licensing Committee

·         Other groups associated with night-time economy.


Review Timescale


Between six to seven meetings (depending on method of review)





Link to CfPS effective scrutiny principles


The following CfPS effective scrutiny principles would be met through conducting the review:


·         Provides a constructive ‘critical friend’ challenge

·         Amplifies public voices and concerns

·         Is Independently led by Councillors 

·         Drives Improvement in Public Services



Officers that contributed to the scope:

Democratic Services Officer

Head of Housing and Community Services


Member Section

In evaluating the above proposal’s scope, Members may find it helpful to fill in the below sections prior to the Committee Meeting.

Will the review add value to the service?








Is there any further information required and/or clarification needed to the subject’s scoping?



Is the proposed timeline suitable?









Should this subject be included in the work programme?