Resolved:  That all items be web-cast.

Councillor Daphne Parvin, Councillor Heather Langley and Councillor Jane Griffin sent their apologies.

There were no Substitute Members.

It was noted that Councillor David Pickett attended as a Visiting Member interested in item 9.

Councillor Butler disclosed a personal interest in Item 8, tackling Obesity, by virtue of his mobility business which catered for obese persons.

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

 Resolved:  That the minutes of the meeting held on 11 January 2011 be     agreed as a correct record of the meeting and duly signed by   the Chairman.

Interviews with

·  Jim Boot, Community Development Manager;

·  Jane Coombes, Healthy Lifestyles Coordinator;

·  Pat Maynard, Zeroth; and

·  Donna Kavanagh from Maidstone Leisure Centre.

The Chairman welcomed Jim Boot, Community Development Manager  and Jane Coombes, Healthy Lifestyles Coordinator.  The Chairman also welcomed the representatives from local Weight Management Programmes; Jill Maynard from Zeroth Active Zone and Donna Kavanagh and Sara Matthews from Maidstone Leisure Centre.

Jim Boot began by explaining his new role managing the community development team, the team was focussed on enabling local communities with the purpose of improving the lives of residents and included the Sports and Play function. The Officer made reference to Maidstone’s Health Profile for 2010 and the few red indicator results which showed Maidstone as significantly worse than the England average on a small number of health issues.  Those that were showing as red were physically active children and obese adults. The Officer made reference to the forthcoming Olympics in 2012 as an opportune time to tackle these inequalities.  Mr Boot explained that the 2 year Service Agreement with the Primary Care Trust (PCT) to develop health programmes was coming to an end but that it would be 2 years before the new health structures were in place which would involve GP Commissioners.  The Officer explained that they would know at the end of March whether the Health Prevention funding would continue.  The Committee expressed their hope that funding would be continued.

Jane Coombes, Healthy Lifestyle Coordinator explained that the funding for her post came from the PCT and that through their Health Needs Assessment they had identified the number of people that needed to be reached through the Health Programmes. As a result of this 60% of the budget was targeted towards Health Programmes.  They had also engaged a nutritionist to go out to rural areas where people couldn’t be reached through the weekly programmes devised. She explained that it was a 2 year programme run according to evidence based practices.  The success was in the holistic approach, recognising that from the evidence in the Health Needs Assessment, it was not just diet that was important; behaviour change and motivation were involved. The Officer felt that Body Mass Index (BMI) was not always the best measurement. At the beginning and end of each 10-12 week programme weight and measurement was taken; following the programme 6 monthly contact was maintained with participants.  Ms Coombes told the Committee that overall the programmes were a success and they were on course to meet the targets set by the PCT in the Service Level Agreement.

Members questioned the BMI criteria and the referral process. The Committee were told that patients could self refer or were referred by GP’s, practice nurses, dieticians, school nurses and through advertising and  leaflets distributed widely to doctor’s surgeries and libraries. Members questioned the BMI level and why it was set at 28. It was explained that it was set at that level so intervention could take place before a patient became obese. Members questioned the use of the internet to promote the programmes. Mr Boot responded by explaining that there was a definite link between  ...  view the full minutes text for item 90.

Interview with John Littlemore, Head of Housing and Community Safety.

The Chairman invited John Littlemore, Head of Community Services and Housing and Councillor David Pickett, Visiting Member to the meeting.

Members had been invited to the recent stakeholder events on CCTV including a visit to the Medway CCTV Centre and a Questions and Answers session.  Mr Littlemore explained that there would also be a neighbourhood forum that the Committee could be involved in as part of the consultation process. The Officer informed the Committee that the report to the Cabinet Member was likely to be delayed until March 2011.

The outcome from the Stakeholder Question and Answer session was discussed and the Committee were supportive of this: there would be a stakeholder steering group who would be involved in the specification for the CCTV monitoring service.  Members highlighted a concern that there would be a loss of local knowledge if CCTV was moved to Medway.  Shops in Maidstone were said to have built up a partnership involving CCTV which had nothing but praise for the current system. Some members felt that this provided the local, on the ground knowledge that was vital. It was also highlighted my some Members that as County Town of Kent a move to Medway may result in a loss of control.

The Chairman told members that the partnership between Maidstone and Medway meant that only the ‘remote’ control of the cameras were going to Medway and referred Members to the Health and Safety issues of the current set up that are a factor in the decision. Mr Littlemore explained that the long term usage of current facilities was not viable and would not comply with minimum Health and Safety requirements.  He also explained that there were technical issues to consider and the current set up meant the Town Hall were still using VHS recording. The Officer explained that an alternative would have to be considered so if it was not Medway another solution would be sought. Members referred to the recent visit to Medway and told the Officer how impressed they were with the facilities.  Members felt that the issues were centred around the ‘ownership’ of the service.

Mr Littlemore explained that stakeholders had been listened to and that staff would be transferred across to Medway with the authority going above and beyond to ensure local knowledge remains. The Officer also confirmed that regular meetings with the ‘town centre partnership’ had been included in the specification and the Officer believed this to be achievable.  The Chairman emphasised that local knowledge was about maintaining local people’s relationships with Police and the Fire Service predominantly. Members felt that there was also an issue to consider in reducing the ‘fear of crime’ which CCTV in Maidstone currently offered. Mr Littlemore reemphasised that if it was not Medway and the Partnership arrangement then a tendering process would take place which would look more widely at possible service providers.

Mr Littlemore informed the Committee that with regard to response times, technical and digital links would be better at Medway and  ...  view the full minutes text for item 91.

The Committee discussed their future work programme focusing on their next meeting as the Crime and Disorder Committee.

It was resolved:

a)  That Ian Learmouth, Chief Constable of Kent Police should be invited to provide and update on his priorities for Kent and Maidstone; and

b)  The Local Strategic Partnership delivery group, Safer Maidstone Partnership, should be invited to update the Committee on their current priorities and issues and provide and update on Domestic Violence as discussed at their last meeting.

6.30 pm to 9.20 pm