Agenda and minutes

Overview & Scrutiny Panel
Tuesday, 25th April, 2017 7.00 pm

Venue: Council Chamber, Council Offices, Cecil Street, Margate, Kent. View directions

Contact: Charles Hungwe 

No. Item


Apologies for Absence


Declarations of Interest

    To receive any declarations of interest. Members are advised to consider the advice contained within the Declaration of Interest form attached at the back of this agenda. If a Member declares an interest, they should complete that form and hand it to the officer clerking the meeting and then take the prescribed course of action.


    There were no declarations of interest.


Minutes of Previous Meeting pdf icon PDF 121 KB

    To approve the Minutes of the Overview and Scrutiny Panel meeting held on 14 February 2017, copy attached.


    Councillor Campbell proposed, Councillor Connor seconded and Members agreed the minutes as a correct record of the meeting that was held on 14 February 2017.


Minutes of Extraordinary Meeting pdf icon PDF 116 KB


Cabinet Member presentation - the new Anti-Social Behaviour Tools pdf icon PDF 1002 KB

    Councillor Lin Fairbrass, Deputy Leader & Cabinet Member for Community Services to make a presentation on the new Anti-Social Behaviour Tools.


    Councillor Lin Fairbrass, Deputy Leader and Cabinet Member for Community Services introduced the item and handed over to Jessica Bailey, Community Safety Team Leader to lead the discussion with a power-point presentation. Ms Bailey made the following points:


    ·  The new Anti-Social Behaviour Tools and Powers were a welcome development of the legislation because they have helped streamline the enforcement process of antisocial behaviour regulations;

    ·  When considering Anti Social Behaviour volumes, it was also important to consider the relationship alongside deprivation, population density and unemployment;

    ·  Although Thanet had the highest incidents of reported antisocial behaviour cases in the county, the recent trend was showing a reduction in antisocial behaviour of 16% which was well above the county average of 8%;

    ·  To better understand Thanet’s performance, an analysis of most similar groups outside the county would show that when compared to areas of similar demographics, Thanet was showing stable figures over the last two years, since the new legislation, figures were slightly above average;

    ·  Benchmarking with other Kent districts would show that Thanet District Council was ahead of other councils in terms of enforcement and use of the new tools and powers;

    ·  Case study examples of how each tool and power had been utilised in Thanet were given and are set out below.


    Community Triggers

    ·  The new legislation also brought in ‘right to review’ cases of Anti Social Behaviour if the threshold was met. (3 reports made within a 6 month period);

    ·  Thanet has only received 5 trigger applications and of those, only 1 out of 5 that were submitted met the threshold;

    ·  3 recommendations were then made.


    Civil Injunctions

    ·  There had been 5 successful applications to date;

    ·  4 such injunctions had been successfully enforced;

    ·  1 injunction was still going through the courts;

    ·  There can be positive outcomes from enforcement using civil injunctions.


    Criminal Behaviour Orders

    ·  There were various enforcement actions that could be used and these included geographic restrictions, named and group non association restrictions, carrying items restrictions and alcohol consumption in public.


    Communication Protection Notices

    ·  This is a new flexible two stage notice issued by Council or Police officers;

    ·  Unlike previous orders it can be issued by officers without having to go to court;

    ·  If breached it enables the forfeiture or seizure of items being used to cause a nuisance;

    ·  Warning notices are issued on the spot if required, and are then in place for up to six months;

    ·  If breached then a formal notice is then issued, if this is breached then a fine can be issued and it becomes a criminal matter for further court prosecution;

    ·  Currently this tool was eliciting a 90% positive response rate. This meant that the nuisances were often being resolved before further enforcement actions are required;

    ·  59 such notices had been issued so far (at the time of producing the presentation);

    ·  This tool has also facilitated cross departmental working (for example working on an issue between Community Safety, Planning and Housing).


    Premise Closure

    ·  The Council and Police can apply for premises closures as  ...  view the full minutes text for item 111.


Responses from Cabinet to Overview & Scrutiny Panel Recommendations pdf icon PDF 151 KB


Review of public speaking at Overview and Scrutiny Panel meetings pdf icon PDF 160 KB


    Nick Hughes, Committee Services Manager introduced the item. He reported that although there had not been a huge uptake for public speaking, when the facility had been used, the administration of the scheme had not been a burden on Democratic Services and the Panel had found the expression of views by the public useful.


    Mr Hughes suggested that the pilot scheme could be renewed for another year and Communications could advertise the scheme via the Council’s twitter account. Members suggested that the requirement to register in advance to speak should be made more flexible so that an individual could have until the point at which the item is due for discussion at the meeting to request to speak.


    Members noted the report and agreed that the public speaking pilot scheme be extended for a further year, subject to Full Council approval.


Review of OSP Work Programme 2016/17 pdf icon PDF 101 KB


Forward Plan and Exempt Cabinet Report List for period 05 April 2017 - 30 November 2017 pdf icon PDF 97 KB