To receive any declarations of
interest. Members are advised to consider the advice contained
within the Declaration of Interest advice attached to this Agenda.
If a Member declares an interest, they should complete theDeclaration of Interest
Form
Mr Coombes and Mr Murphy spoke under the
Overview & Scrutiny Panel procedures for public speaking.
Councillor Stuart Piper and Councillor Bailey
spoke under Council procedure 20.1 and made the following
points:
There was little doubt that the
decision was made hurriedly;
Expected the reasons for that
approach would be explained when the report was made to Full
Council;
Why did council need two pontoons
when initially only one was required?
What was the business plan behind
the purchase of the pontoons?
Did the pontoons still had long to
serve before they were replaced?
No due diligence of the due process
was done in purchasing these pontoons;
Did council have firm commitments
from that there would be future business activity at the port as
asserted in the officer report that accompanied the decision?
Giving the background to the decision
Councillor Bayford, Leader of Council
made the following comments:
The capital programme had a budget
provision for the replacement of Berth 4/5;
A consultant was appointed who
carried out the costings for fixed berths costs and they confirmed
that those costs were higher than purchasing the two pontoons. The
cost would have been well over £2million;
The council became aware that there
were two pontoons available for sale as a package of two, by a
construction company. A proposal for the purchase of the pontoons
was considered by a cross party working party and agreed as a
viable proposal;
The windfarm business would justify
this purchase and this seemed like a prudent and smart
decision.
Members responded to the submissions with
comments and questions as follows:
It was useful to discuss the
proposals in a cross party meeting;
Nobody objected to the
proposals;
However this decision could have
considered as a cabinet decision where other members could have had
an opportunity to take part in debate before a decision was
made;
Did the harbour pontoons require
planning permission?
Was any part of the harbour
infrastructure designated as being listed and if they were they
would be a need to get planning permission;
Could Members of the Panel be given
an opportunity to study the legal advice relating to the
decision?
Was the purchase of the second
pontoon part of the business plan?
Who inspected the pontoons to
determine that they were still in good working condition and how
much did it cost the council to hire such service?
How long would it take Council to
get a return on its investment in the harbour?
What was the life expectancy of the
two pontoons?
Will there be any dredging required
to enable the pontoons to fit in properly and had that been
costed?
Was there going to be any further
decision to be made regarding the procurement of the pontoons?
In response to comments and questions from the
Panel, Councillor Bayford, Mike Humber,
Head of Maritime and Technical Services and Gavin Waite Director of
Operational Services made the following points:
Deborah Upton, Chief Executive of East Kent
Housing introduced the item and made the following points:
The performance are that was
challenging for the organisation was the capital programme;
The minor works/major works voids
were within set targets;
The major challenge posed by the
major works voids was due to the 14 days mandatory moratorium
before any work could be done to empty property where asbestos had
been detected;
With regards to universal credit and
income collection, the overall performance was within target;
Staff were picking up cases were
rent arrears were increasing over the year. Rent support for those
individuals who were moving to universal credit was about 5-8 weeks
and this was contributing to rent arrears;
In the ;last quarter, TDC gave
additional funding and this helped residents to stay in their
accommodation without being in arrears;
Staff were mildly confident that the
targets would be achieved by the end of the financial year.
Members of the Panel made comments and asked
questions as detailed below:
What specific measures were being
taken to address slippage regarding the capital programme
delivery?
EKH had shown limited or no
assurance after the gas inspection was conducted;
EKH had let down the council and
exposed residents to health risks;
Did EKH have plans for environmental
consideration like installing solar panels?
There were some businesses that were
installing these panels for free. Had EKH considered approaching
these providers?
EKH performance was totally
unacceptable. The sooner the housing stock was brought back into
council control, the better;
This was a massive failure by EKH,
especially in view of the Greenvale fire incident;
The failures put TDC into an illegal
position as a landlord.
In response Ms Upton and Mr Matt Gough,
Director of Customer Services said the following:
Staff were monitoring very closely
the performance of the capital programme;
Agreed that this was not a good
position for EKH to be in. Senior management had asked for the
audit to be conducted and they were now acting on the issues raised
by the audit;
Significant changes had been made by
the Chief Executive to the management structure;
There was a small budget for
insulation of the properties as part of the environmental
improvements;
There were no financial incentives
for installing solar panels as this was expensive.
Councillor Game, Cabinet Member for Housing
and Safer Neighbourhoods added that cabinet was in the process of
preparing an options report that was to be considered on 17
October.
Hannah Thorpe, Head of Communications and
Digital introduced the item for debate and highlighted the
following points:
Council was in a period of
transition regarding the corporate priorities as there was a new
corporate statement for 2019-2023 to be proposed for adoption at
the 10 October Full Council meeting;
In the meantime 2016-19 Corporate
Priorities were used to measure performance for Q1 2019/20;
In the main there were some positive
performances;
A high profile education programme
had been carried out in summer. However there was still a need to
increase public awareness regarding litter as more litter was being
dropped in public spaces;
A vehicle replacement programme was
coming soon which would help improve waste collection;
Council ,was keen to work with other
coastal areas to exchange experiences on how to manage a clean
environment;
TDC staff had been involved in a
litter picking campaign on 20 September. It was hoped that this
campaign would be made a regular event moving forward;
Decision time scales for
homelessness had been improved and the number of applications had
reduced as a result;
Tackling ASBO was moving in the
right direction;
Targeted work had improved the
handling of complaints;
Staff sickness levels had gone
down;
FOIs were below target. However a
new Head of Legal and Interim Head of Governance were now in post,
which would improve the staffing levels for the department;
Members made comments and asked questions as
follows:
There was great work being done by
the Homelessness Team;
Planning stats were also very
good;
There were some concerns with litter
picking in places where works were being carried out by Southern
Water or Virgin Mobile in some streets and litter was not being
picked;
Staff sickness was still too high.
What was the cause of the sickness was it stress related and was it
long term?
Was there a need to change the
culture within the organisation in order to reduce sickness
levels?
Some of the missed waste collection
was due to wrongly parked vehicles in some streets. There was a
need to provide more clarity on the problems that were encountered
by staff during waste collection;
Some of the public bins were
overflowing. There should be a faster route for councillor
reporting on such issues;
There was a need for more education
on disposing of dog waste;
Huge bins that had been set up in
some parks had greatly improved the park environment;
Signage on bins could be improved
and beaches should be cleaned early in the mornings;
Messages to take litter or waste
home should be put across more politely;
Could council consider introducing
smaller but more frequently paced public bins?
There were a high number of homeless
women. Could the council consider setting up homeless units for
women alone?
Could a message be passed on to
Malcolm, a member of the street cleaning team for a good job he is
doing in Ramsgate.