Agenda and draft minutes

Apologies were received from Councillor Green.

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 the Declaration of Interest Form

There were no declarations of interest.

To approve the minutes of the Overview and Scrutiny Panel meeting held on 11 March.

Councillor Kup proposed, Councillor Currie seconded and the Panel agreed the minutes to be a correct record of the meeting held on 11 March 2025.

Councillor Keen to make a presentation on "Poverty in Thanet and the extent of mitigation measures that Thanet District Council provides."

Councillor Keen introduced and outlined the presentation (see attached).

Further to questions and comments from the Panel, it was noted:

·  The benefits of Thanet initiatives could be shown locally but Thanet was still a deprived area comparatively to some other areas in Kent.

·  The statistics around deprivation and health inequalities outlined in the presentation had come from Kent County Council. There was a question around an error in KCC’s data as it had been stated that Cliftonville East was the most densely populated.

·  Members were able to access further information on the TDC website and were encouraged to signpost to residents initiatives such as Active Thanet.

·  TDC was part of the Thanet Health Alliance and the East Kent Health and Wellbeing Partnership. Councillor Keen, as the relevant portfolio holder was a member of Kent County Council’s Health Overview and Scrutiny Committee.

·  Members raised concerns around the prevalence of breathing related disorders and mental health difficulties in the district. Concerns were also raised about residents experiencing loneliness.

·  The Community Shield Scheme was highlighted as there was support in the community and it was felt it was a good idea but not everyone was aware:

https://www.thanet.gov.uk/info-pages/community-shield/

·  The Section 13A scheme allowed Thanet residents to make a request for outstanding council tax to be reduced or written off. However, it was only allowed in certain circumstances and on an exceptional basis.

·  A Member raised concerns that there was a link between poor or delayed development of literacy skills and health outcomes.

·  The importance of call buttons or personal alarms for vulnerable or elderly people at risk of falls was highlighted.

Members discussed options for future Cabinet Member presentations and working groups. It was suggested that the next working group (which had been proposed by Councillor Green at a previous meeting) could have a particular focus on health and wellbeing.

A suggestion was made that another future working group could consider lease and asset disposal.

Future Cabinet Member presentations were suggested:

1)  Economic development and regeneration, and year-round economy

2)  Estates and commercial properties

3)  A review of the previous financial year’s budget and spending.

Members noted the report.

Nick Hughes, Committee Services Manager, introduced the report. The Panel was asked to review the steps the Council had taken in the processing of a petition received. The petition was rejected on the basis that a petition prayer must include what action the petitioner wish the Council to take. The petitioner had appealed the decision to reject the petition on the basis that what they wished the Council to do had been included in their covering letter and asked what legal powers did the Council have to reject the petition.

The Panel was advised that signatories would have signed on the basis of the prayer and not the wording in the covering letter. It was also noted that TDC was not required to have a petition scheme or accept petitions.

Those planning to start a petition for submission to TDC were urged to make contact with Democratic Services before collecting signatures to discuss valid wording of the prayer.

Further to comments and questions from Members, it was noted:

·  Members said that having reviewed the steps taken by the Council, that the petition had been dealt with as per the Council’s petition scheme However, Members also felt that there should be some acknowledgement of the concerns raised regarding anti-social behaviour in Cliftonville and the wider district, given the number of signatories and the strength of sentiment expressed.

·  It was suggested that the Petitions Scheme and advice be publicised.

·  Members asked for the Petitions Scheme to be reviewed by the Constitutional Review Committee and for there to be a review of the webpages dedicated to the Petitions Scheme to make these more accessible and easy to understand.

RESOLVED to note the report and that the petition had been dealt with as per the Council’s Petition Scheme.

Ashley Jackson, Head of Housing and Planning, introduced the report on the Thanet Cycling & Walking Infrastructure Plan (TCWIP).

Councillor Garner addressed the Panel, raising concerns about road safety in Thanet and asked questions of officers in relation to timescales for TCWIP to be implemented. There were specific junctions referenced in the TCWIP, one of which was situated next to the new Thanet Health Hub. It was queried how this plan fits in with the transport plan for the Thanet Health Hub.

Adrian Verrall, Strategic Planning Manager, answered questions and responded to comments from the Panel. It was noted:

·  The Plan was to be adopted as soon as possible after the consultation.

·  Projects for the coming year included: the St Peters Walking Zone, covering the primary and secondary schools in this area, and relating to the junction near the new Thanet Health Hub, cycle route improvement near Queen Elizabeth Queen Mother (QEQM) Hospital and another to improve connections between the railway station in Ramsgate and the town centre.

·  Audits for the TCWIP were undertaken primarily by Sustrans by bicycle. The St Peters ‘walking zones’ audit had involved schools, teachers and schools.The work had been undertaken to gain understanding on what might be barriers to people walking and cycling.

RESOLVED to note the report.

Ashley Jackson, Head of Housing and Planning, introduced the report.

Further to questions and comments from the Panel, it was noted:

·  Officers would look into any technology which would help with mould, such as positive air pressure systems.

Councillor Austin proposed, Councillor Packman seconded and Members agreed to endorse the recommendations to Cabinet as follows:

1.  Approve the draft Tenancy Strategy and Tenant Management Policy for consultation;

2.  Authorise officers to undertake a consultation process with key stakeholders, including tenant representative groups and Registered Providers; and,

3.  Delegate authority to the Corporate Director to make any necessary minor amendments following consultations before final adoption by Cabinet.

Ashley Jackson, Head of Housing and Planning, introduced the report.

Further to questions and comments from the Panel, it was noted:

·  There was already a waiting list so the message was being received in the district by owner occupiers and by landlords.

Councillor Austin proposed, Councillor Scobie seconded and Members agreed to endorse the recommendations to Cabinet as follows:

1. That Cabinet agrees officers accept and distribute the £1.55M (approx) funding allocated in accordance with the eligibility criteria set out in this report.

2. That delegated authority is given to the Head of Housing and Planning to agree with Procurement & Legal colleagues a direct award to appoint an installer by calling them off of a framework that the Council is a member of.

Councillor Bright, Chair of the Youth Services Provision Scrutiny Review, introduced the report, outlined the work that had been undertaken and the resulting recommendations. Thanks were given to all those who had contributed to the production of the report and recommendations.

Councillor Manners addressed the Panel and suggested that the Council had a role in liaising and engaging with young people. It was suggested that Members would benefit from training on how to work with young people and it was felt that they had a role in reaching out to youth groups and schools. Concerns were raised that young people needed to be encouraged and engaged with in the community. It was suggested that there be liaison between TDC and the private sector to encourage enterprise initiatives with young people.

Further to questions and comments from the Panel, it was noted:

·  There was a recommendation from the working group around Members’ involvement and training to engage with youth groups. It was highlighted that this would involve DBS checks.

·  Thanks were given to Councillor Bright as Chair of the working group.

·  There were recommendations made by the working group that involved spending and these were to go through the budget process, alongside the other competing priorities. Feedback was to be given to the Panel following the recommendations involving a spend being considered in the budget process.

·  The recommendations were to be split into two categories, those with no cost and those with financial implications. It was suggested that the focus moving forward should be on working groups making recommendations without budget implications.

RESOLVED to endorse the recommendations as outlined in the report.

The Panel noted the Forward Plan and Exempt Cabinet Reports list.