Resolved:  That all items on the agenda be web-cast.

There were no substitute Members.

There were no visiting Members.

a)  Disclosures of interest.

b)  Disclosures of lobbying.

c)  Disclosures of whipping.

There were no disclosures.

Resolved:  That all items be taken in public as proposed.

Resolved:  That the minutes of the meeting held on 7 April 2009 be agreed as a correct record and signed by the Chairman.

The Chairman proposed that Agenda Item 8, ‘Leader of the Council – Plans and Priorities’ be taken after Agenda Item 9, ‘Cabinet Member for Corporate Services – Plans and Priorities’.  The Committee agreed to this amendment.

Resolved:  That Agenda Item 8 be taken after Agenda Item 9.

Interview with the Cabinet Member for Corporate Services, Councillor Richard Ash.

The Chairman welcomed the Cabinet Member for Corporate Services, Councillor Richard Ash, to the meeting.  Councillor Ash informed the Committee that his health was slowly improving but that he would re-consider his position as Cabinet Member if his poor health continued.  He explained that his plans and priorities for 2009/10 were short term in light of this.

Benefits

The Committee was informed that the benefit service was currently strained as a consequence of increased uptake and that this was causing delays in the time between residents claiming and receiving the assistance they were entitled to.  The Cabinet had therefore agreed to employ 2 further staff members to assist in processing claims to prevent delays.  Councillor Ash advised that recent reports had asserted that benefits were nationally under-claimed by 25-40% and he was therefore focusing on improving benefit uptake by those entitled in Maidstone.  He felt that this was particularly important in light of the current economic situation and was considering the ‘Quids for Kids’ initiative that promoted benefit uptake amongst parents.  The Committee requested that the Cabinet Member provide an update on this at its meeting in September.

Enhancing Local Democracy

Enhancing local democracy was identified as a further priority.  Councillor Ash noted that the 2009 Kent County Council election turnout for Maidstone divisions had been good but more could be done to further engage the public.  He planned to promote the work of the Council, particularly to young people, noting that local government was a major employer in Maidstone which was able to attract graduates but that people often knew little of the Council’s range of services.  The Committee requested an update on the progress of enhancing local democracy.

The Gateway

Councillor Ash highlighted the overall success of the Gateway but noted a few areas requiring improvements, including waiting times.  Members of the Committee noted that there were periods of the day with long waiting times in the Gateway and requested that this be reviewed.  In response to a question Councillor Ash advised the Committee that planning and benefit enquiries generally took the longest.  A number of Members highlighted that they had heard negative feedback regarding waiting times for planning enquiries and agreed that staffing for this service should also be reviewed.

Councillor Ash informed Members that a further priority included a review of devolved budgets; this would include consideration of devolved budget audit trails and why money had not been spent. 

In response to a question, Councillor Ash advised the Committee that he had not been informed of changes to the staffing structure of civic officers.  He advised the Committee that he would actively involve himself in staffing structures in the future.  The Committee agreed that the General Purposes Group should also review whether a protocol existed and was functioning effectively to ensure Cabinet Members were aware of changes to staffing structures.

Resolved:  That

a)  Staffing of the Gateway with regard to planning enquiries and periods of demands be reviewed;

b)  The Cabinet Member for Corporate Services  ...  view the full minutes text for item 16.

Interview with the Leader of the Council, Councillor Chris Garland.

The Chairman welcomed the Leader of the Council, Councillor Chris Garland, to the meeting.  Councillor Garland highlighted that the Council had secured two £2 million grants for improvements to the Museum and Mote Park and these were therefore projects that would continue to be pursued.  He also outlined the following priorities for the 2009/10 municipal year:

High Street Regeneration

The High Street Regeneration would be carried out over a three year period to prevent increased costs.  Councillor Garland considered that regeneration of the High Street would add to the economic viability of the town.  The Committee was informed that the lower end of the High Street was chosen for regeneration because it was a focal point of the town centre, in addition to its juxtaposition to the river and the desire to make more use of the river.  A number of Members queried the measurable benefit of the project and were advised that regeneration would enhance Maidstone’s magnetism, presenting the Borough as a town to invest in and consequently economic activity in the lower end of the High Street would increase.  The regeneration scheme would benefit residents of the whole Borough, as Maidstone would grow to be a major centre for skills, tourism, education, jobs and business.  The Committee agreed that a cost benefit analysis should be conducted to justify the regeneration scheme to residents.

Regeneration Strategy

The possibility of producing a 20-year Regeneration Strategy was being explored.  This document would compliment the Local Development Framework by setting out the Council’s view of what was needed to be done to drive businesses into Maidstone.

Local Development Framework

The extent of work undertaken regarding the Kent International Gateway (KIG) had led to delays in the production of the Local Development Framework, and Maidstone was now behind the rest of Kent.  Work was now being undertaken to allocate land.  Councillor Garland considered it vital that the whole Council was engaged in the process.

Housing

Officers were exploring delivering housing through joint working between Developers and Registered Social Landlords, as had been conducted in three districts including Tunbridge Wells.

Best Value Review

A Best Value Review of the Waste and Recycling Service had commenced.  Councillor Garland noted the success of the roll out of the new recycling scheme but considered that more improvements could be made to provide a better service at a lower cost.

Budget

Councillor Garland highlighted the continued need to make savings and considered that the Mid Kent Improvement Partnership was vital to achieving required savings.  He was concerned that central Government would cut subsidies for housing and council tax benefit and therefore considered that the Council had no choice but to pursue shared services.

The Chairman thanked Councillor Garland for an informative presentation.

Resolved:  That a cost benefit analysis of the High Street Regeneration be conducted.

The Overview and Scrutiny Officer highlighted the work programme suggestions that had been generated from the work programming workshopThe Committee agreed to concentrate on one major review and several one off reviews.

Overview and Scrutiny Function

Members of the Committee felt that it was opportune to review the Overview and Scrutiny function as it had been in place for eight years.  A number of Members raised concern that enthusiasm for overview and scrutiny amongst Members was diminishing and felt it was therefore important to reinvigorate the process to ensure it remained an effective tool.  Suggested aspects of the Overview and Scrutiny Function that could be reviewed included financing, the partnership with Tunbridge Wells Borough Council, aims of scrutiny and scrutiny of the Cabinet.  The Committee agreed to conduct this as its major review and was keen to invite external witnesses to assist in its review.

The Recession

The Committee acknowledged that much of the scope of a potential recession review would fall under the remits of the External and Regeneration and Sustainable Communities Overview and Scrutiny Committees.  Members also noted that they had requested a Benefits update from the Cabinet Member for Corporate Services.

Public Engagement

Members considered that this was an area that the Council could always improve on, however Members felt the topic of Overview and Scrutiny took precedence as a major review.

Sustainable Communities Act

The Committee agreed that progress was being made with regard to work on the Sustainable Communities Act but felt that it was too soon to be reviewed.  A number of Members highlighted the requirement for a citizen panel for consultation and agreed that this could be reviewed as part of a consultation review.

Consultation

Members felt it was important to review consultation to ensure it was conducted appropriately and effectively.  Members agreed that this should be reviewed over one to two months and that it should incorporate aspects of the Sustainable Communities Act.

Members’ Expenses

The Committee did not feel that there was an issue with Members’ expenses, but agreed that if a review was required it would be more appropriate for an independent body to carry this out.

Devolved Budget

The Committee considered that in order to review devolved budgets, the following questions should be asked:

·  Why are they not being used?

·  Is there a robust audit trail?

·  Where is the money going that is not spent?

·  Was there an urban/rural disparity in money being spent?

·  Was it right for devolved money to be put into another budget?

Members agreed to review devolved budgets and requested that a report on all devolved budgets over a three year period be produced which depicted how much was spent and what on.

Resolved:  That

a)  The Committee review the Overview and Scrutiny function as its major review; and

b)  The Committee review Consultation and Devolved Budgets as one-off reviews.

The Overview and Scrutiny Officer informed the Committee that the Best Value Performance Plan was scheduled to be considered at its meeting on 7 July 2009.  The Committee agreed to also commence the Overview and Scrutiny Function Review at its meeting in July.

Members noted that they had previously requested an update on the progress of the plotting of unused land using the Geographical Information System (GIS) and agreed to receive this at the meeting of the Committee on 4 August 2009.  Members requested an update on the progress of the Asset Management Register.  Members felt it would be useful to receive a report on the income, value and costs of managing a cross section of major holdings of unused land.

Resolved:  That

a)  The Overview and Scrutiny Function Review be commenced on 7 July 2009;

b)  An update on the progress of the Asset Management Register be provided on 4 August 2009;

c)  The income, value and costs of a cross section of major holdings of unused land be generated; and

d)  The forward plan and future work programme be noted.

6.30 p.m. to 8.50 p.m.