Resolved:

That all items on the agenda be web-cast.

Apologies were received from Councillor Mrs Gibson.

It was noted that Councillor Butler was substituting for Councillor Mrs Gibson.

It was noted that Councillor Warner was present as a visiting Member.

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.

With regard to the minutes of the meeting held on 14 July 2009, it was requested that the word ‘the’ be removed from the end of the sixth paragraph of minute ? 28 so that it would read ‘…did not receive consideration’.  The Committee agreed to add the word ‘an’ into the last sentence of the fifth paragraph of minute ? 29, so that it would read ‘…were undertaking a user survey in an attempt to demonstrate this’.  Finally, it was requested that the word ‘routes’ in the second paragraph of minute ? 30, be replaced with the word ‘triggers’.

A Councillor referred to the discussion of the Sustainable Communities Act which took place at the last Committee meeting, and presented to the Committee a list of all proposals that were made under the Act by the July deadline (Appendix A).  In particular, the Committee’s attention was drawn to a request by the Borough of Poole for the delegation of greater powers to Local Authorities to control and direct the nature of local transport.  Herefordshire Borough Council also made a number of requests with regard to transport infrastructure, including the extension of the commuter train network, the creation of a public transport governing body, and that all settlements should be able to access a public transport service.  In addition, Wiltshire Borough Council requested that the Sustainable Communities Act consultation process should not just be a one off but be ongoing or at least be held once a year.

Resolved:

That the minutes of the meeting held on 14 July 2009 be agreed and duly signed by the Chairman, subject to the following amendments:

1)  that the word ‘the’ be removed from the end of the sixth paragraph of minute ? 28 so that it would read ‘…did not receive consideration’;

2)  to add the word ‘an’ into the last sentence of the fifth paragraph of minute ? 29, so that it would read ‘…were undertaking a user survey in an attempt to demonstrate this’; and

3)  that the word ‘routes’ in the second paragraph of minute ? 30, be replaced with the word ‘triggers’.

Interview with Brian Morgan, the Assistant Director of Development and Community Strategy; and Clive Cheeseman, the Public Transport Officer.

The Assistant Director of Development and Community Strategy, Mr Brian Morgan, reminded the Committee that the Council and Kent County Council (KCC) had both formally responded to Network Rail with regard to the proposed changes to rail services outlined within the Kent Rail Utilisation Strategy (RUS).  He identified that there were three key issues to consider with regard to rail services for the Borough; the 2010 timetable, the future provision of services in Maidstone, and the Medway Valley line. 

The Committee was informed that the Council had raised concern with regard to rail services during 2005.  In particular it was considered that there was a need for a fast link from Maidstone into Central London, along with improved services from rural areas into Maidstone; that the rail operator at the time lacked knowledge of the necessity of services; and the operator did not possess accurate usage records or consider the issue of latent demand fully.  Latent demand was suggested by the number of people catching trains from Staplehurst, Headcorn and Sevenoaks instead of Maidstone.  Since this time, the South East Plan had identified Maidstone as a transport hub within Kent, and awarded the area growth point status.  This required the creation of 11, 080 new dwellings and 5 – 10,000 new jobs between 2006 and 2026.

A Member noted that Members of Parliament (MPs) had visited the Minister for Transport to lobby against the cuts in services between Maidstone and Cannon Street, and asked what ongoing involvement the MPs would have with the issue.  Mr Morgan stated that there were no immediate plans to continue to involve MPs, though this would take place if required.  The Committee agreed that the Leader of the Council should lobby the Members of Parliament for Maidstone with regard to improving the rail services within Maidstone.

A Councillor questioned how the South East Plan, the South East Transport Plan and the Kent Transport Plan linked together, and how this impacted on rail services provided.  Mr Morgan explained that the South East Transport Plan identified that Maidstone, as the County Town, acted as the transport hub for the local and the wider area.  The South East Plan considered land use within the borough and identified certain types of development that should take place with regard to transport infrastructure, and more generally within Maidstone.  The KCC transport plan would set out how transport should be provided within Kent.  As the Government outlined what it was that each rail franchise should provide, the Council must aim to influence the decisions of the Government.  Furthermore, in response to a question, the Committee was informed that Network Rail had made no comment with regard to Maidstone’s status as a growth point or a transport hub.  It was requested that a member of Network Rail who had been involved with the development of the RUS be invited to speak to the Committee.

A Councillor asked about how public transport was integrated and Mr Morgan responded that the Integrated Transport Strategy addressed  ...  view the full minutes text for item 43.

Interview with Councillor Robertson, the Council’s Railway Champion.

The Council’s Railway Champion, Councillor Malcolm Robertson informed the Committee that he was of the opinion that the train operating companies (TOCs) operating in Maidstone had always failed to consider appropriately the issue of latent demand.  He informed the Committee that at the time that the service had been franchised to Connex, the Council, Tonbridge and Malling Borough Council, KCC and Ashford Borough Council all lobbied for the inclusion of a fast service into Cannon Street as part of the minimum service requirement of the franchise.  The Local Authorities failed to secure this as a minimum requirement, however until these latest proposals, the TOCs had maintained the service.  Councillor Robertson suggested that this was an example of the franchisee manipulating a monopoly situation contrary to the public interest.  The removal of this service would result in significant overhead savings, and the majority of customers would use an alternative service run by the same company.  Therefore the franchisee would lose little revenue generated by fares.

A Member questioned whether there was any realistic possibility that the fast service from Maidstone to Cannon Street would be maintained.  Councillor Robertson identified that Mike Gibson, of Southeastern Railways, had confirmed that the company had recently been asked by the Department for Transport (DfT) “to put an option to them to operate a limited peak/shoulder peak service via Maidstone East to London Canon Street and Charing Cross along the lines of what is operated today”. A decision on this matter was expected to be given within two weeks. 

It was highlighted to the Committee that although the Kent RUS made some beneficial tentative proposals for the future, it did not provide a sustainable service in the short term to replace that being withdrawn by the TOC.

Councillor Robertson identified that a ‘taster service’ of the new High Speed trains had been running between Ashford and St Pancreas for three weeks.  Southeastern had noted that there had been a particularly large number of commuters who had opted to travel on the High Speed service as opposed to the traditional rolling stock, despite the additional cost.  He expressed concern at the possible future effects of reduced numbers travelling on the ‘classic’ services.

In respect of one of the RUS proposals, Councillor Robertson noted that it has been suggested it would be cheaper to run the future additional fast shuttle service into Maidstone as opposed to Ashford, however it would still require considerable costs.  Running the service to Ashford would require Eurostar to share the platform it currently used, which it did not wish to do.  However, Ashford remained the operator’s preferred option and it was up to Maidstone to put forward a convincing business case for it to come to Maidstone.

A Member commented that sustainability was the key to the provision of these services, and that the general public should be aware of the work that the Council was doing.  Furthermore, it was important to consider people who were travelling into the borough, as well as  ...  view the full minutes text for item 44.

With regard to the scoping of the Maidstone Rail Services review, the Committee agreed to remove ‘To investigate what level of service would be best for Maidstone’ from the list of objectives.  A Member requested that the National Census be added to areas from which evidence could be sought, and information should be obtained with regard to car park capacity and usage, , and fares into London from various stations.  It was also requested that service users travelling into Maidstone should be spoken to.

Resolved:

That:

a)   ‘To investigate what level of service would be best for Maidstone’ be removed from the list of objectives;

b)  The use of Census data be added to the sources of evidence;

c)  Evidence be collated with regard to car park capacity and train fares; and

d)  Service users travelling into Maidstone be spoken in addition to those travelling from Maidstone to London.

The Acting Overview and Scrutiny Manager, Louise Smith, informed the Committee that it would next meet as the Crime and Disorder Committee to scrutinise the Safer Maidstone Partnership.  Further to the Committee’s agreement at its previous meeting, a co-optee had been arranged from Kent Police Authority, and the Committee would be required to formally agree to co-opt him as a voting member. Anyone with concerns with regard to this matter was requested to contact Miss Smith.

It had been arranged that the Chief Executives of West Kent Primary Care Trust and the Maidstone and Tunbridge Wells NHS Trust would attend the Committee’s meeting in October.

Resolved: That the Future Work Programme be noted.

Start:  6.30 pm to 8.30 pm