Liberal Democrats on Kent County Council

County Council Questions

At each meeting of the County Council, there is 30 minutes allowed for Councillor's to ask questions of the KCC Leader, Cabinet Members or Committee Chairman. Any Member (or Councillor) can ask one question.

Questions must not:

• Ask for information already in the Member's possession or which has been published to Members either in a Committee report or otherwise.

• Be about something that is outside the responsibilities or powers of the Council.

• Criticise the motives or personal character of the other Members or any employee of the Council.

The KCC Lib Dem Group will post on this webpage ALL of the questions they have submitted and the FULL written answers recieved to those questions.

This page will be updated after every County Council meeting and will have the most recent questions / answers listed first.

Click here for County Council Agendas & Additional Documentation - including list of questions.

9 February 2012

Question by Ian Chittenden to Mike Hill, Cabinet Member for Customer & Communities

The proposed cuts to the youth budget could have a serious effect on young people, families and other citizens. Prior to the commissioning process starting with these reduced funds, Locality Boards in their various formats are being asked to meet and make a decision by the end of March on the way forward for their local Youth Service.

In keeping with the spirit of Open Government and KCC's own Customer Service Strategy statements 'that we are looking at the way we treat our customers … put them first when we design our services … to increase confidence in what we do' * , will the Cabinet Member for Customer and Communities:-

a) tell the Council how many Locality Boards have terms of reference and have met more than once, in public, with public access to the agenda, the meeting and minutes;

b) ensure these critical meetings of the Locality Boards where the future of the Youth Service will be discussed will be open to the public, promoted & advertised in advance and webcast so individuals who are unable to attend can see or review the debate? and

c) say what arrangements are to be made for those Boroughs where no Locality Board meeting these requirements of openness and transparency exist?

* Customer Service Theme One: Understanding Our Customer Statement in Full: 'We're looking at the way we treat our customers, so that we put them first when we design our services. Our purpose is to increase satisfaction with our services and confidence in what we do'.

Answer

a) To date nine Locality Boards have met. All Locality Boards are required to have Terms of Reference and those which have met have either adopted or have draft Terms of Reference. At present Locality Boards are informal advisory bodies able to discuss matters of mutual interest concerning the District and KCC - as such there is no formal requirement for them to meet in public nor to provide public access to the minutes, agendas etc. However, two Locality Boards (Gravesham and Swale) do make their minutes and agenda available on the District websites.

b) Locality Boards are not open to the public, and no arrangements are in place for their work to be webcast.

c) A number of Districts/Boroughs are still working to establish Locality Boards in partnership with KCC. In these cases, the intention is to establish ad hoc Member groups [comprising District and KCC membership] to enable discussions to take place on specific issues.

Question by Martin Vye to Alex King, Cabinet Member for Democracy and Partnerships

'Greater transparency and openness, making the decision making process more inclusive, robust and accessible' and 'greater accountability of decision makers' are two of the nine key objectives of our new hybrid model of governance*.

Will the Cabinet Member for Democracy and Partnerships agree that modern technology makes it possible to actively engage Kent's citizens to participate to an unprecedented degree in both our pre-scrutiny and our evaluation of policies that affect their services; and will he request officers to explore, including costings and timescales, ways in which electronic public engagement could be achieved at all Cabinet Committees and present their report to the next County Council on 29 March for discussion, approval and endorsement, to make Kent a leader in democratic engagement?

* The key objectives of the new hybrid model of governance http://bit.ly/wweah7

Response

The increasing use of social media and online forums gives new opportunities. Webcasting many meetings puts KCC in the forefront of innovative practice in this area. When the new governance arrangements come into force we will evaluate what works best for public understanding and participation.

Our community engagement team will also be piloting social media networks at a more local level during 2012, with the aim of giving a platform for local people to tell us what matters to them and what local priorities should be. This will be in support of the joint district/county locality boards currently being set up acrossKent.

Question by Trudy Dean to Mike Hill, Cabinet Member for Customer & Communities

Will the portfolio holder for Customer & Communities please state:

a) how much the County Council has spent in both capital and revenue on the creation and the ongoing running costs to the 31 March 2012 for the Gateway centres;

b) what evidence exists that the Gateway programme has reduced the costs of the County Council either by closing other outlets, or reducing transactional costs; and

c) if there is any evidence that the number of people accessing our services (via the Gateways) has increased and if so by how many numerically and in percentage terms?

Answer

In the 5 years since this programme began, Gateway has achieved national recognition and is regarded as an exemplar of public sector customer service.

a) Capital, Revenue and ongoing costs

i) The total capital spend between April 2008 to March 2012 on the Gateway programme is £4.6m. This figure is net of capital contributions made by external partners.

ii) The total Gateway revenue expenditure between April 2008 and March 2012 is £5.8m which covers the costs of the small strategic management team, 9 live projects (front-line staff and shared premises), two Gateway mobiles and the Customer Insight programme.

iii) The ongoing running costs of the current network - £2.2million pa (as above).

b) In relation to reduced costs by closing outlets or reducing transactional costs ….

i) To date service consolidation with the Gateway programme has led to the closure of the Park Mall Gateway; of Associate House; and of the Day Opportunity Centre in Ashford. These have capital receipts and reduced lease costs attached to them. In Sheerness with the opening of the Sheerness Gateway the Skills Plus Centre and the Library are now surplus to requirements. It is worth noting too that the Gateway network is central to the FSC personalisation agenda providing Health and Occupational Therapy assessments at reduced transactional costs. Transactional costs and all costs are being examined closely in the context of the new Customer Service Strategy and the Make Buy Sell review of the Gateway operation.

The Gateway Programme, along with Contact Centre are the first services to be the subject of formal 'Make Buy Sell Reviews'. The review will consider all options for the Gateway Programme including medium and long term improvements and will focus on value for money in conjunction with the scope of service and its partnership arrangements. It will clarify income and expenditure for the Gateway Programme and will consider the evidence on overall and transaction costs.

The review on the Gateways Programme will be reporting early in the new financial year.

c) The Gateway programme has grown incrementally and is now nearing completion.

The following figures set out the comparative activity data for all customers served. It relates to the opening of new Gateway's and reflects the impact of the recession and breadth and relevance of accessible services.

Year	Number of Gateway locations	Number of Customer Transactions	Growth as a percentage on previous year
2009	7	183,527
2010	8	409,356	123.0%
2011	9	687,840	68.0%
2012	10	Estimate 1,200,000	74.5%

The number of customer transactions had grown from 183,000 in 2009 to 687,000 last year an increase of 504,000 or 375%.

---

Question by George Koowaree to the Cabinet Member for Adult Social Care and Public Health

Along with increasing the Blue Badge issue fee from £2.00 to £10.00 KCC has restricted payment to 'payable by cheque only'* - there is no longer provision for applicants to pay by any other payment methods (i.e. postal order, debit card etc.); will the Cabinet Member for Adult Social Care and Public Health inform this council:

a) if he was aware that KCC had imposed this restrictive payment practice on some of our most vulnerable residents and is not enabling access to a range of cost effective payment methods for all and

b) how disadvantaged individuals who qualify for a badge but do not have a cheque book (i.e. those with a basic bank account*) are meant to pay for their blue badge?

* Extract from blue badge application form http://bit.ly/zKaD1V

* With a basic bank account you do not get a cheque book, source: The Money Advice Service - Basic Bank Accounts Guide http://bit.ly/AE93Fo

Response

The National Blue Badge permit scheme has been subject to a wide range of reforms within the last year in order to increase scrutiny of application, security of badges, reduce fraud and help Local Authority schemes become self funding. The most recent changes occurred on 1 January 2012 seeing an increase in badge costs from £2 to £10. With such a successful scheme, subject to strict assessment criteria, it will be inevitable that some applications will not be successful.

The reason we withdrew accepting Postal Orders was due to the change in policy which came in from 1 January 2012 which means payment is only taken if an application is accepted. Returning a cheque is straightforward, as the applicant can destroy the cheque and no funds will be taken from their account. With Postal orders, fees are not refunded and the Post Office requires the original receipt to obtain a refund.

As a result of feedback from several applicants, and discussions with the Blue Badge Team, the process was amended on 31 January 2012 so that Postal Orders can be accepted. All of the team that handle Blue Badge enquiries were made aware of this change late on the 31^st. Our application form and frequently asked questions are currently being updated on kent.gov.

We are asking anyone that chooses to pay by Postal Order, to ask the Post Office when they are purchasing their postal order, how to get a refund if necessary. If their application is declined, their postal order will be returned to them.

We are currently looking into card payments options through the national online blue badge system. Once this has been developed and the Blue Badge Team has agreed a way forward, our website and application form will be updated as appropriate.

We are currently working with the Customer Relationship Team to plot The Customers Journey on Blue Badge Applications and will ensure we follow national guidelines in this regard. We will of course continue to ensure cost effective and efficient payment methods are explored and offer choice to Service Users.

Question by Tim Prater to The Cabinet Member for Environment, Highways & Waste

Given the Government announcement of charging foreign lorry drivers to drive on Our roads, and the long term stated aim by this Council of seeing such a scheme pay for a long term solution to Operation Stack, what reassurance has been received that Kent will see additional funding from this scheme to resolve Operation Stack and remove this long term burden on businesses, hauliers and residents?

Response

We greatly welcome the Government's recent announcement that they are to consult over the proposal to charge foreign heavy goods vehicles using UK roads, (in fact they are planning to charge all lorries but UK lorries will be able to claim a refund through reduced road tax).

This is something which KCC has called for over many years. And as we made clear in our Growth without Gridlock transport strategy, we will seek a proportion of the revenue generated from this proposal to fund improvements and ensure greater resilience in Kent's strategic road infrastructure, including a long-term solution to Operation Stack, which as local Members will know, causes massive economic disruption to the county every time it is brought into use.

The Government forecast that from 2015/16, the scheme will generate net revenue of around £23M.

A significant percentage of the cost of the KCC solution to the problems caused by Operation Stack could be achieved from the revenue expected from the first year's charging of foreign lorries.

I have heard the Road's Minister recently assert that none of this money will be going to KCC. But the fact remains that 87% of all international road haulage that arrives in the UK, arrives via the Dover Strait and with the planned port development at both Dover and Calais and this figure will increase further.

Foreign lorries do not contribute a penny to the Treasury coffers, leaving the taxpayer (in particular Kent's council tax payers) to foot the bill for the external costs they cause. To compound the situation, foreign trucks fill up with diesel bought outside the UK, where fuel duty is far lower, so not only do they avoid contributing to the UK economy at the pumps, they also put UK hauliers at a massive commercial disadvantage. Clearly, ensuring that foreign lorries pay to use our roads is the right thing to do, after all many UK hauliers spend thousands every year on using roads in Europe via different road user charging schemes.

Therefore at our next meeting with Mike Penning the Road's Minister, which is scheduled in three weeks time, we will be submitting a robust case calling for Kent's share of these new revenues to mitigate the adverse impact that foreign lorries have on Kent's roads, Kent's residents and Kent's businesses.

Question by Dan Daley to Cabinet Member for Specialist Childrens Services

Following the inspections by OFSTED during 2010, 2,600 children were identified as being without an allocated social worker. Will the Cabinet Member for Specialist Childrens Services please say

a) how many days or weeks since referral each of these children had to wait for a social worker to be allocated, and

b) how many days or weeks since referral each child waited for an initial assessment to be made by the allocated worker?

Answer

I would like to thank Mr Daley for his question and I'm sure he shares my commitment to improving Children's Services. Many Members have increased their knowledge of Children's Services through membership of the Children's Services Improvement Panel, the Corporate Parenting Panel, the Shadow a Social Worker Scheme, corporate parenting training and Council meetings and briefings. It is vital that we all take our role as corporate parents seriously to ensure thatKentnever again receives a poor OFSTED judgement for safeguarding the most vulnerable children in the county.

To provide the level of detail requested by Mr Daley about allocation timescales would necessitate extensive analysis and this has not been possible within the timescales set by democratic services. However, I can provide assurances that the concerns regarding unallocated cases is something that I have taken very seriously, having had this issue brought to my attention as a result of the review undertaken by Malcolm Newsam who was appointed at the Leader's direction as the Interim Corporate Director for Specialist Children's Services.

By February 2011, Mr Newsam had identified significant concerns about unallocated and un-assessed cases and about the backlog of work in the system and that some of these had been unallocated or un-assessed for many months. Action was taken immediately to address these concerns including ensuring that all looked after children and all those with a child protection plan were immediately allocated. Managers were also required to take action to ensure cases were assessed and allocated and to support this, additional resource was recruited by commissioning a peripatetic team to come intoKentto clear the backlog of un-assessed and unallocated work.

This work was effective in achieving the allocation and assessment of children's cases. By 8 May 2011, there were a total of 338 unallocated cases, 71 of which had been unallocated for over 28 days. The backlog of the 2668 un-allocated cases had therefore been allocated by this time.

Members will also recall that since July 2011 the number of unallocated cases has consistently been fewer than 200, showing that in addition to having successfully addressed the concerns regarding unallocated case work, Children's Services are now allocating all new cases in a timely manner. The most recent unallocated case reporting supports this, with 61 cases unallocated as at the 29January 2012, of which only 6 were unallocated for over 28 days.

In respect of timescales for carrying out initial assessments on unallocated cases, of the 2668 cases reviewed, 2021 cases had previously had an initial assessment, 1252 of these within 7 days of referral and 771 in more than 7 days. Subsequently, these cases had been held in a Team Leaders name pending allocation. A further 357 cases were referrals which had required the provision of information and advice only and therefore did not require allocation.

The final 259 unallocated cases in the cohort were more recent referrals that had not been assessed at the time the review was carried out and were waiting for the assessment to progress. Of these, 50 subsequently had an initial assessment within 7 days of the referral, 179 had an initial assessment more than 7 days after the referral and, for a variety of reasons such as subsequently being found to be requests for information or advice, 30 did not require an assessment to take place and led to no further action.

Question by Malcolm Robertson to Mike Hill

"Delivering the Customer Service Strategy will only be successful if we build trust and credibility for it among KCC staff, our customers and our partners ….. The success of the Customer Service Strategy depends on it being communicated to ensure that staff, customers and partners know about it, feel consulted about it and support it" (Customer Service Strategy, p.23) . Will the Cabinet Member for Customer & Communities inform this council how customers, Members, staff and our partners were consulted and fully participated in the drafting of the Customer Service Strategy and specifically their consideration of:

a) the principles* listed on page 2. of the strategy, and

b) the five themes:

1. Understanding our customers, p.7-8
2. Connecting with our customers - effectively and efficiently, p. 9-13
3. Empowering our staff to meet customer expectations, p. 14-16
4. Providing excellent quality and value to customers through better designed service delivery, p. 17-20
5. Improving customer experience working with our public service partners, p. 21-22

*The Principles:

We will treat all our customers:

• with dignity and respect, keeping our promises, exceeding expectations wherever possible
• in a way that empowers them to take control and make informed choices
• fairly, offering transparent and easy to understand processes
• equally, providing a consistent customer experience regardless of how they choose to contact us

We will continuously improve our services by:

• understanding who uses our services
• using customer insight, consultation and customer experience surveys
• understanding the customer journey
• providing easy access to a wide range of services
• working with partners to join up services in a way that makes sense to our customers
• providing greater efficiency by sharing accommodation with our partners

We will behave as one council by:

• managing information and knowledge to remove duplication
• matching customer need with the appropriate response
• delivering value to the customer
• training our staff to a consistently high standard of customer service
• resolving customer queries at the first point of contact
• promoting channel migration to the most effective channel

(Customer Service Strategy, p2.)

Response

The Customer Service Strategy has been developed in conjunction with customers, Members, staff and our partners and this is what we have done so far:

We have used the work we have already done in the Gateways, Contact Centre and Libraries as the main building blocks for the Customer Service Strategy. This will be an ongoing process as we build on information received through customer insight and customer journeys - this is information direct from our customers which will be used to continuously improve services for people in Kent.

We have established a Customer Relationship Team and they have already consulted with a wide range of people, including voluntary organisations and those representing minority groups.

Members have been involved with the Strategy and in January agreed it was ready to be shared more widely. As part of the ongoing process we will be taking the emerging strategy to the new Cabinet Committees during the next few months.

We have involved the full senior management team in KCC. The principles and themes of the new Customer Service Strategy came from the Challenger Group when we looked at their own experience of customer service and how it could be improved.

Consultation with staff is ongoing but we have already taken into account comments made by front line Library, Gateway and Contact Centre staff.

The Customer Relationship Team is talking to our partners and has already taken on board comments from the Police, Probation Service, District Councils and Public Health.

As part of normal KCC process an equality impact assessment has been carried out and is being used to inform current thinking behind the strategy.

The Strategy was launched to staff and members on 12 January 2012 using KNet and a series of road shows (28) will be taking place throughout the county during the next few months. The workshops will be based on a 'market place' concept to make sure we engage with and involve front line people.

15 December 2011

Question by Ian Chittenden to Bryan Sweetland, Cabinet Member for Environment, Highways & Waste

Under the 'making it happen' section of the Kent Design Guide, section J5, Commencement of Works, the guide recommends to developers that they meet with representatives or inspection staff to take photographs of the site prior to commencement of works, so that any damage sustained to the existing highway can be assessed where necessary.

In 2007, following failure to repair substantial damage and repair to Moncktons Lane in Maidstone, following its use by developers as an access over a three year period, it was found that the developers could not be held responsible as no pre inspection had been carried out. Subsequent repairs have been at the tax payers' expense. I am pleased to say pre-inspections were carried out at my request prior to developments starting in Melrose Close and Pickering Street in Maidstone, and the developers can be held responsible.

Can the Cabinet Member for Environment, Highways and Waste please confirm that this procedure is now being carried out on new developments across Kent and how many inspections have been carried out and where?

Answer

Chairman - I can confirm that the practice specified in 'Making things happen' is being followed stringently acrossKentby highway officers. We currently have a total of 75 sites with inspection reports and photographic evidence of the highway condition prior to commencement of works on site. A list of these sites is available on request.

Chairman, rather than read out details of all the 75 locations now, I will arrange for Mr Chittenden to receive a written response to answer this part of his question.

Question by Martin Vye to Paul Carter, Leader of the Council

Will the Leader assure the Council that he sees the function of the proposed Cabinet Committees to be that of scrutiny and evaluation of performance of the Council's services as well as assisting in the development of policy by pre-scrutiny of Cabinet and Cabinet Members decisions?

Response

Yes, on the agreement that call-in to Cabinet Scrutiny will reduce substantially.

20 October 2011

Question by Martin Vye to the Cabinet Member for Education, Learning & Skills

Will the Cabinet Member for Education, Learning & Skills inform the Council whether the numbers of children in each category of special educational need in any of Kent's districts exceed the capacity of the special schools assigned to that district; and how many children with special educational need currently have to travel more than 20 miles per day to attend a special school?

Answer

There are approximately 6500 children with statements of SEN inKent, of which just over 3000 are in special schools. In addition, there are children with SEN without statements who are supported in mainstream schools.

Whilst a child requires a statement of SEN to be admitted to a special school, not all children with statements are educated in special schools, nor do they need special school provision, as education within a mainstream or unit setting is more appropriate to meet the needs of many children, and meet parents' preferences.

The Local Authority assesses the special educational needs of each child referred and decides which school to name in a statement of SEN. This decision is made in accordance with Schedule 27 Section 324 of the Education Act 1996. During the statutory assessment process, parents are asked to express their school preference and if the Local Authority were to name a different school, the parent can appeal to the SEN Tribunal.

Kent County Council has invested £150 million in the recent years in the provision of special school and unit places.

If Mr Vye wishes to see a detailed breakdown of the incidence of SEN across the County, by district, by need type and by school attended, I have a copy of the School Census data fromJanuary 2011 available for him.

Turning to Mr Vye's second question, 216 of the 6500 children with a statement of SEN travel over 20 miles to a special school on a daily basis.

Question by Tim Prater to Trudy Dean, Chairman of Cabinet Scrutiny Committee

Will the Chairman of the Cabinet Scrutiny Committee say what lessons have been learned on the operation of the Cabinet Scrutiny Committee since her last report in July 2010?

Answer

In our July 2010 report we called for the Forward Plan to be improved, and that more Scrutiny work should be carried out by the Policy and Overview Committees. We therefore welcome progress on both issues being made, and in particular welcome the proposal for Scrutiny Committees to examine impending decisions before they are approved by Cabinet.

But whatever structure the Council chooses for itself in the future, problems remain with the timeliness, adequacy and accuracy of key decision reports need to be overcome to ensure that members are able to carry out their work effectively.

1. During the year, we have called in issues which could and should have been considered by the relevant POSC had attention been paid to its meeting timetable. The report on the future of the Youth Service was presented for Cabinet on 18^th July, only ten days after the Customer and Communities Committee met, to authorise consultation commencing at the beginning of August. The report on the Edenbridge Centre was called in, with the support of the Local Member, partly because it had not appeared on the agenda of any POSC for as far back as records could easily be searched

2) Approval has been requested for urgent decisions, sometimes in less than a working day, for decisions which were clearly either not urgent, or could have avoided urgency by proper planning including taking into account the timetable of Scrutiny Committees.. The request for a loan facility of £100,000 to Kent Cultural Trading Company and the construction ofReptonSchoolwere examples of the latter. Examination of these urgent decisions by Roger Manning has convinced us they have not been thoroughly thought through and we have warned that in future we will be less inclined to approve urgent requests.

3) We have continued to receive reports which do not contain sufficient information either to make it clear what decision was being authorised, or to answer the questions Cabinet Members would have had. The decision onReptonPrimary Schoolwas an example of this.

4) One Committee meeting was held in the heart of the community affected by the decision under scrutiny. The Localism agenda should result in more such meetings. Our experience makes us suggest in future more care in choosing appropriate venues, ensuring good quality sound transmission, and appropriate advance local advertising for these meetings.

5) In general, we have been disappointed to receive very little support from the Communications Unit and ultimately produced our own press material. The Communications Unit should not be confined to supporting the work of Cabinet.

6) Over two years ago, the Committee asked permission to involve the public in its proceedings by taking electronic questions from them during the course of the meeting. No progress has yet been made.

7) We have had to request the Director of Legal Services to issue a reminder that Scrutiny Committees have the authority to require attendance of Cabinet Members and Senior Officers to answer questions, and that there is a duty in the constitution and in statute for them to attend. We do not consider it unreasonable for Scrutiny Meeting dates to be diaried by potential witnesses.

Against this background would like to commend Andy Wood, Dave Shipton and John Burr in particular for their positive approach to Scrutiny work, and commend the all party work done on charges within Adult Social Service and the Welfare Bill by Graham Gibbens which has resulted in our decision not to hold Scrutiny meetings in the last two cycles.

21 July 2011

Question by Martin Vye to the Cabinet Member for Education, Learning & Skills

Given the recent finding by the Local Ombudsman of maladministration on the part of Kent County Council will the Cabinet Member for Education, Learning and Skills inform the Council of action being taken, first, to establish procedures to rectify any errors or incidents which may affect selective testing at the time of testing; and second, to ensure that clerks, and chairs and members of Appeal Panels provided by the authority have sufficient capability and training to conduct hearings properly, and to make reasonable judgments on the complex issues presented to them in those hearings?

Answer

This question refers to an independent appeals panel which took place over a year ago, in May 2010. Six parents who were appealing for their daughters to get a place at a grammar school raised concerns related to the Panel's decision-making, time-keeping and record-keeping, as well as certain remarks made by the Chairman of the Panel. The Ombudsman found against the County Council on the grounds that the training for the Panels, which are made up of volunteers, needed to be more robust and also that the letters sent to parents should have been signed in person rather than using a facsimile signature. In this case, the letters were sent out in this form because the Clerk was anxious that the parents learn the satisfactory outcome of the appeal at the earliest opportunity.

We take the training of Clerks and Panel Members very seriously because we appreciate how complex school admissions can be and how important they are. Representatives of the Ombudsman have attended and contributed to training sessions and, from time to time, we hold meetings with the Ombudsman's office to review current practice. In fact, in the report, the grammar school in question states that their previous experience of using Panels trained by the Council had been, and I quote, 'positive and professional'. In the report the Ombudsman praises the quick re-hearing of the six cases, but he makes no mention that the grammar school appointed a clerk and two Panel Members who have acted for the Council for several years, and still do.

One of these parents also complained to the Ombudsman that her daughter's test had been poorly invigilated. Invigilators are given careful instructions but, with approximately 15,000 selective tests each year, occasional mistakes are made. The Ombudsman would like us to re-test candidates who complain that they were disadvantaged on the day of the test but I cannot see how this could be done in a fair way. We would either have to use a different test (which would arguably not be fair) or re-test all candidates and this could be an endless process. In fact, our legal department has confirmed this is not a necessity under law.

To deal with cases where a pupil's test performance is below expectations, we run head teacher assessment panels. Prior to the parents being told their child's test results, each primary head teacher is asked if they would like to refer any case to the head teacher assessment panels. The head teacher panels then determine whether a pupil's test score is in line with the pupil's school work over the past year. It is then possible for these head teachers to assess the pupils as suitable for grammar school. About 5% of those tested receive a positive outcome from this process. If any parent is dissatisfied with the result they still have the right of appeal to an independent Panel. I believe this is a fair and sensible system.

I fear that I am in danger of going into too much depth, as not all Members may be familiar with the report's contents. I would therefore like to invite Mr Vye to observe a training day for the appeal panel members and I would be happy to hear his views on the process following this.

Question by Tim Prater to the Leader

Can the Leader of the Council reassure this Council and its staff that Kent will not use the approach of making large numbers of staff redundant and offering jobs back on a reduced salary, a practice recently used by a number of other authorities?

Answer

I can confirm that we have no plans to use such an approach.

This is a practice used in extreme circumstances in both the public and private sectors and can have a role in responding to significant issues concerning staffing structures, numbers and costs. It has been recently used in some other authorities who have had to make significant decisions on such issues over short timescales.

The approach carries significant risk and potential impact - as is being experienced by others, who are currently the subject of both legal challenge and industrial dispute.

Most importantly, this course of action introduces real risks to service delivery, both in terms of continuity of provision and the engagement and motivation of staff in front line.

There are circumstances where this method of change will be appropriate for some employers. However, we have a good track record of delivering savings and managing staffing levels and costs, over medium term planning timescales, without this approach. Wherever possible, such changes have been achieved through suitable consultation, communication and transition arrangements. It is my expectation that this continues.

Question by George Koowaree to the Cabinet Member for Children Services

Will the Cabinet Member for Children's Services remind the Council of the total expenditure in 2010/11 on commissioning from the voluntary sector of services relating to children's safeguarding and wellbeing, of the planned expenditure on this in 2011/12; inform the Council of the numbers of Service Level Agreements with voluntary organisations working in this field which will be discontinued during this financial year, and of those due to be decommissioned on the 31st of March 2012?

Answer

Thank you for the opportunity to inform members how this part of the council's safeguarding responsibilities to children and young people are being taken forward.

In 2010/11, in what now comes within the remit of Families & Social Care, the total spend to Voluntary and Community Sector (VCS) organisations for services related to safeguarding and wellbeing for children and young people was £15.9m.

So far in 2011/12, commitments to the VCS related to safeguarding and well-being services for children and young people are planned to amount to £17.5m. This increased spending is largely due to investment in 16+ Leaving Care services.

During 2011/12, 13 service agreements with the VCS for children's safeguarding and well-being have expired or are due to expire. Of these, 1 ended on the 1 June and 12 will end on the 30 Sept, following a temporary 6 month extension of their previous agreements. The ending of the agreements may cause concern to the organisations delivering these services however Equality Impact Assessments have been undertaken. There were no high-risk implications for the protected groups of service users and these assessments will be published shortly.

On the 31 March 2012, a further 160 service agreements with VCS organisations delivering children's safeguarding and well-being services will expire, having reached the end of their current agreements. Work is progressing on introducing new commissioning frameworks for both Early Intervention & Prevention services and for Disabled Children's Services. These will ensure that new services are in place from the beginning of April 2012 and that in future all commissioned services are:

• Focussed on achieving our strategic objectives, such as the Improvement Plan
• Delivered by providers who have been quality-assured
• Commissioned in a way that avoids duplication and inefficiency, and are
• Competitively tendered and procured in line with 'Spending the Council's Money'

All current service providers have been informed of the planned changes and have been able to take part in the tendering process for new services. While I recognise the uncertainty this presents organisations, I am confident that this is the right approach to ensure that KCC delivers on its commitment to the safeguarding of children and young people and provides the best services to them.

Question by Dan Daley to the Cabinet Member for Customer & Communities

The Cabinet Member for Customer & Communities is reported as having said that the Youth Service proposals "…. are intended to transform the way we deliver services to young people so that we can continue to provide a first-class service… ". As I understand it you are expecting volunteers and Kent's voluntary sector to rush to the challenge.

Will the Cabinet Member inform this Council of the results of the market testing undertaken with Kent's voluntary sector and local community groups prior to the development of the Kent Youth Service Commissioning Model which has satisfied him that there is the interest to ensure locally provided first class youth services; and in the absence of any prudent market testing, do you intend to carry on with your closure programme before you are sure youth services will be taken up by local appropriately qualified volunteers and not a few 'professional' (non-county) providers?

Answer

I can confirm that we do indeed intend to continue to provide a first-class youth service across the county.

Two major infrastructure organisations have been actively involved in the drafting of the transformation proposal, and their extensive knowledge of the voluntary and community sector in the county supports the Youth Service's own view that there will be interest in the proposals for increased commissioning activity. It is also important to recognise that many more services for young people inKentare already being delivered through partners in the voluntary and community sector such as the Scouts, Guides, independent youth organisations and faith groups and that these services will not be affected by proposed changes to Kent Youth Service.

An extensive consultation process involving young people [including KYCC], staff and other stakeholders will commence on the 1^st August during which voluntary and community organisations will have the opportunity to express their views and levels of interest prior to any final decision on a new model being made later this year.

Implementation of the new model would not commence until 2012 and it is important to reiterate that this is not a closure programme, but is a proposed vision for how youth services can be delivered in a sustainable manner for future generations inKent.

Question by Ian Chittenden to the Cabinet Member for Environment, Highways & Waste

In recent years hundreds of trees on County Council land, in particular on verges and green areas adjacent to roads and footpaths have been cut down, with very few replaced. Many become diseased and die due to grass cutting around the base of trees with strimming tools which cut and removed the bark from the main trunks, resulting in disease and a slow death.

As the Cabinet Member responsible for the grass verge contracts will the Cabinet Member for Environment, Highways and Waste inform this Council when this destructive practice will stop and what action he will take to replace the trees removed from our tree lined roads due to this negligence? Please include in your response details of how many trees have been cut down over the past 5 years and how many have been replaced?

Answer

The health and condition of highway trees is declining as the population ages and succumbs to disease. The decline is particularly noticeable in residential areas where landscape planting from the 1960's is coming to the end of its safe life and removal of trees can have a significant impact on local amenity. KHS incurs significant costs due to the reactive nature of tree management and recognises that it has to give priority to safety issues.

Damage caused by careless use of equipment such as strimmers is a nationally recognised problem and can have a detrimental effect on the health and longevity of trees. The level of damage is variable and is difficult to quantify. KHS has introduced measures to reduce the incidence of such damage by installing strimmer guards around all newly planted trees in grass areas and by increased monitoring of contractors.

Replacement planting numbers have historically been below the numbers removed with the over riding constraint being budget availability.

Detailed felling and replanting figures are only available for 4 years as records were not kept consistently by District Highway Units;

Total felled (excluding current year) = 2066

Total replanted = 562 (27%)

Throughout Kent there are estimated to be 844 stumps remaining. If all sites were suitable for replanting this represents costs of £400 -500K.

We are involved in the "Big Tree Plant"; a Government funded initiative to get more trees planted acrossEngland's towns and cities. One such scheme has already been identified with a residents group in Canterbury. We are also setting up a joint initiative with the local Tree Warden scheme inKentto assist with tree planting schemes and tree management at a local level.

Member Highway Fund can be a useful source of funding for tree planting and a number of Members have paid for innovative local schemes. Officers will be very happy to assist on this point.

Question by Trudy Dean To The Cabinet Member for Environment Highways and Waste

Would the Cabinet Member please say when the County Council was first made aware of any interest in developing the former SCA site inNew Hythe Lane, Larkfield for treatment of waste, when contact with the County Council was first made by Biossense, and what major planning policy and highway issues will surround any future use of this site?

Answer

Officers of the Kent Minerals & Waste Development Framework Team first met Biossence to discuss its proposals for the SCA Site on 15 July 2010. These discussions were kept confidential pending progress on Biossence's negotiations with landowners. Biossence subsequently submitted the site for inclusion in the Kent Minerals & Waste Development Framework and it was reported with other sites promoted through this process to the County Council's Informal Member Group on 28 March 2011.

Biossence first outlined its proposals to officers of KCC's Planning Applications Group on 5 October 2010 and explained its proposals to Nick Chard as the relevant Cabinet Member on 14 January 2011. Officers from the Planning Applications Group also attended that briefing. A further briefing was given to me and David Brazier by Biossence and officers from the Planning Applications Group on 8 March 2011. The proposals became public knowledge soon thereafter as a result of the publicity and other discussions undertaken by Biossence.

The proposed inclusion of the SCA Site in the Kent Minerals & Waste Development Framework will now be "tested" through the formal plan-making process and any decision on its inclusion will rest with the County Council.

Any planning application for the future use of the site would need to be considered against relevant development plan policies and any other material planning considerations. Key issues are likely to include national and local waste planning policies, the land use identified in the development plan, transportation impacts and other policies relating to various environmental and amenity issues. The previous use of the site by SCA would also be a material planning consideration.

12 May 2011

Question by Martin Vye to Cabinet Member for Customer & Communities

Will the Cabinet Member for Customer and Communities inform the Council know how many District Councils have signed up to Locality Boards, and in the case of those which have not, give the reasons for the difficulties in achieving this?

Answer

The Leader of the Council wrote to all Members on 31 March with an update on various proposed changes to the County Council's arrangements for partnership working.

One of these changes relates to setting up Locality Boards which will involve County and District Members working together in the interests of the residents that we all serve. The Boards support the localism agenda and will help to shape public service delivery so that services are good quality, value for money and deliver against the priority needs of each of our very different district areas. It is important to emphasise that one of the underlying principles behind Locality Boards is that 'one size does not fit all' and that it has always been expected that the Boards will evolve in different ways and at different speeds.

Clearly the timing of District Council elections has had an influence on the capacity to develop models for Locality Boards. Despite this, I am pleased to report that there has been a lot of progress across the county in a fairly short period of time.

• Three District Council have agreed to develop Locality Boards;
• A further three Councils are actively developing models that will be discussed now the District Council elections are over;
• Four District Councils have wanted to wait until after their elections before giving serious thought to Locality Boards;
• The remaining two District Councils have indicated reservations about Locality Boards and we are in discussion with these Councils in order to address their concerns.

Locality Boards are a developing area. There will be lessons to learn as we move forward with different models across the County. Exploring the concerns and reservations are all part of the development process and I shall be meeting District Council Leaders to hear their views.

6 April 2011

Question by Martin Vye to Paul Carter, Leader of the Council

Given the taxpaying public's concerns about high pay in the public sector and the revelation that sums of more than £1,000 per day are being paid by the Council to several senior officers in interim posts, would the Leader of the Council ensure that Cabinet Members provide all Members with details of the work done justifying the payment of these sums, especially as the rate paid is often more than double that of the anticipated weekly salary for the equivalent permanent Corporate Director position.

Answer

I do not recognise the figure Mr Vye quotes in his question. When the total cost of the employment package for the ex-Managing Director for CFE is compared to the costs of the two interim Corporate Directors covering the revised posts, his figures do not add up.

The total weekly cost of the ex MD for CFE, including employer on-costs, was around £5300. This does not include sick pay or the cost of redundancy. The weekly cost of the interim Corporate Director Families and Social Care is almost exactly the same and for the interim Corporate Director Education, Learning & Skills is £3900.

I am in no doubt that we get value for money from our consultants. In every case, they have been set stretching, measurable, ambitious targets to achieve. In many cases they have delivered outcomes that could not have been achieved by substantive members of staff due to the nature of the work. Interims by definition are used to coming into an organisation and achieving quick outcomes. Each of the interims that we have recently engaged have proven and credible track records in similar Authorities.

Question by Dan Daley to John Simmonds, Cabinet Member for Finance and Procurement

There is running currently a very prominent national newspaper campaign to retain the 'First Past the Post' system of voting. These advertisements are taking whole pages in all of the national newspapers and possibly even provincial papers too.

In the cause of transparency in democracy, efforts have been made to discover exactly who is paying for these advertisements - which must by their very size, frequency and number - be costing many thousands if not hundreds of thousands of pounds in advertising and design charges.

In view of the extremely partisan Motion on our papers today asking for this Council to endorse the 'No 2 AV' Campaign - can the Cabinet Member please assure me that the County Council has not and will not be contributing to this national newspaper campaign advertising?

Answer

To give Mr Daley and his colleagues peace of mind, I can confirm that the County Council has not contributed to the national newspaper campaign to retain the first past the post system, and has no plans to do so in the future.

Question by Trudy Dean to Jenny Whittle, Cabinet Member for Children's Special Services

Can the Cabinet Member please explain the circumstances under which 286 children in 2008/9, and 327 children in 2009/10, went missing out of care in Kent?

Answer

During the years 2008/09 to 2009/10, looked after children who were missing from placement without permission for more than 6 hours were formally classed as 'missing children'. The vast majority of those children subsequently returned safely to their placements. For those who did not return quickly, further action was initiated to locate them.

Our system for recording these incidents was previously inadequate because the details of the child's return were only recorded in the child's case note. Therefore retrieval of the information in aggregate form was very difficult to achieve. During recent months this deficiency was identified by staff and a new system to record missing children is being developed and will go live on 9^th May 2011.

Information relating to all children and young people who are reported as missing is now recorded by Kent police on their computer system called COMPACT. A joint protocol has been in place between Kent police and Kent and Medway Children's Social Services (since 2006) to share information about children/young people who go missing. Kent Safeguarding Children Board are in the process of reviewing the protocols relating to all children/young people who go missing; not just looked after children, but also those who live at home with their families.

Following a successful pilot in the East Kent Police Area, a best practice model has been developed whereby the police and children's social services meet monthly to review and identify the TOP 10 children/young people (not just KCC LAC) who have been most frequently reported missing from that area, so that these high risk children have appropriate support and interventions in place. It is intended for this model to be replicated in all police areas across Kent.

In addition Kent Children's Social Services have in place an Alert system to inform the responsible District Manager and Head of Service when a KCC LAC goes missing.

17 February 2011

Question by Martin Vye to Leader of the Council

Will the Leader of the Council inform the council what progress has been made since the resolution made July 2010 (see foot note*) with regard to the Group Managing Director's urgent review of the interview, appointment, contract and severance payment procedures and at which 2011 County Council meeting he intends to report back to Members with the proposals to strengthen those procedures so as to minimise the risk of such large payments being made in the future?

*Foot note - Resolved at County Council Thursday 22 July 2010

(1) Given the information in the public domain regarding a significant payment to a senior officer, this Council notes that the Group Managing Director has been asked to carry out an urgent review of the interview, appointment, contract and severance payment procedures, and report back to Members with proposals to strengthen those procedures so as to minimise the risk of such large payments being made in the future.

(2) This Council also agrees to lobby the Coalition Government to amend the Employment Rights Act 1996; in effect to make employment fixed term contracts "fixed term".

Answer

A number of steps have been taken as a result of the review by the Group Managing Director which have been reported back to Members at a number of different forums, including the County Council meeting on 16^th December 2010.

New leadership behaviours have been defined and will underpin all selection, development and appraisal activity for senior officers at KCC. All internal applicants for vacant posts in the new operating framework have been assessed against these, prior to Member panel interviews. All those "slotted" against new posts were also measured against the competencies at a development centre. The feedback will be used to identify strengths and areas for improvement for each of the attendees and will form part of the target setting and appraisal feedback for 2011/12.

Our selection process for senior staff has been strengthened. Job descriptions include generic responsibilities as well as details of the specific professional responsibilities and these are covered at the Member interviews. Members involved in the current round of interviews attended a refresher day on interview techniques. All shortlisted applicants will attend the assessment centres mentioned above, and references will be rigorously pursued.

The Group Managing Director has made significant changes to the appraisal process for Corporate Management Team members including more rigorous and formal feedback from Members. Further changes for 2011/12 were agreed at the December County Council from the Change to Keep Succeeding report. The move to senior staff being part of the Total Contribution Pay process and the proposed introduction of 360 degree feedback will further strengthen and clarify the way senior officers are held to account and suitably recognised for their annual performance.

Contractual changes for senior officers posts have been agreed by Personnel Committee. As well as the move to Total Contribution Pay, the notice period for the new KR16 to KR21 senior grades will be reduced from 6 months to 3 months and the importance of performance and assessment during the probation period is emphasised.

All these measured, together with the lobbying of the Coalition Government to amend some aspects of Employment Law, should help minimise the risk of large severance payments being necessary.

Question by George Koowaree to Cabinet Member for Regeneration and Economic Development

Will the Cabinet Member for Regeneration and Economic Development inform the council how he intends to work with Ashford Borough Council to implement the Audit Commissions recommendations to improve Kent's one-star rating for the management of the growth of Ashford for the benefit of the whole community and in particular how he intends to:

a) prioritise the proposals for the area, clearly identify impact of development projects and deal with the weak arrangements to manage performance and project risks,

b) place value for money at the heart of his plans to ensure he knows whether development schemes provide value for money in accordance with the high levels of public investment,

c) involve local people, community groups and businesses who are frustrated with the pace of improvement and the lack of social and community facilities in the development of Ashford?

Answer

Your question presupposes that we agree with the findings of the Audit Commission report, which for the most part we do not.

By working closely alongside the new Leader and Chief Executive of Ashford BC to maintain the momentum of the growth agenda, we have delivered, and are still delivering, a range of significant projects, among them shared space, Victoria Way, and the M20 junction 9 Drovers roundabout. All have come in on time and to budget. These projects will provide the capacity for Ashford to meet its aspirations for 31,000 new homes and 28,000 new jobs.

To be successful in securing funding for these projects we have had to demonstrate value for money and a strong return on investment, neither of which have been recognised by the Audit Commission. Local people have been, and continue to inform planning policy by being involved with Ashford Borough Council in planning exercises, and effective partnership working has seen the delivery of the Singleton Environment Centre, the Stour Centre Extension with a new Ashford Gateway and Art at St Marys currently under construction.

All of which puts Ashford in the enviable position of being able to grow in a controlled and sustainable manner for years to come - something which again the Audit Commission failed to recognise.

Question by Malcolm Robertson to Cabinet Member for Environment, Highways and Waste

With badly maintained roads costing Kent's 50,000+ small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) an average of £13,600 each per year, will the Cabinet Member for Environment, Highways and Waste inform the council how he intends to ensure that no Kent postcode area will again feature in the AA 'Streetwatch' survey overall ranking of one of the worst three postcode areas (for potholes, patched repairs, kerb stones, inspection covers, road works, uneven footpaths, blocked drains, road signs and road markings); and advise if he will endeavour to ensure a Kent postcode area features in one of the best three postcode area in the next survey?

Sources:

• UK Business Survey, 2009 - number of small and medium-sized enterprises in Kent
• AIA The economic impact of local road condition survey report, published 26.10.10. - costs to SMEs
• Automobile Association Streetwatch survey 1, published 17 January 2011 - Dartford: overall ranking of one of the worst three postcode areas

Answer

The report referenced by Mr Robertson was in fact was carried out by YouGov for the Asphalt Industry Alliance. The report revealed that 55 per cent of small and medium sized enterprises in England and Wales are losing on average £13,600 each per year. The report says nothing whatsoever about Kent.

The AA 'Streetwatch' survey also referenced to by Mr Robertson, sought the view of just 11 people across the whole of the DA postcode area - and as Mr Robertson will know the DA postcode area includes most of the London Borough of Bexley, part of the London Borough of Greenwich, as well as Dartford and Gravesham in North Kent.

So Mr Robertson bases his question on a survey covering England and Wales that makes no mention of Kent - and a survey that statistically takes the feedback of possibly 4 or 5 people with a DA postcode that may live in the Gravesend or Dartford area.

Mr Robertson will I hope acknowledge the intensive road maintenance programme carried out last year under the Find and Fix initiative, which improved the overall state of the county's roads to a level not enjoyed for several years. The severe winter weather of December 2010 inevitably led to some further damage to our roads and Kent Highways Services have been able to quickly and successfully mobilise an increased number of maintenance crews to repair the damage caused by the worst weather in nearly 50 years.

Question by Dan Daley to John Simmonds, Cabinet Member for Finance & Procurement

Even though all KCC employees have access to a corporate healthcare scheme which costs them £1.50 per person per week; Kent County Council spent over quarter of a million pounds* on private health care insurance for only 317 employees in the year 2009/10. Will the Cabinet Member for Finance & Procurement inform the Council how much that figure has increased (or decreased) in the current financial year and if he will consider cancelling this benefit and offer it as part of the £20million staff savings, thereby reducing the number of job losses?

• · 2009/10 private health insurance cost a total of £237,750
• · 2009/10 317 employees - value of public health insurance benefit £190,000 (Difference from 2004/05 £67,000)

Answer

Mr Daley is correct in saying that we have made available to all KCC employees the opportunity to have access to the Beneden healthcare scheme at very low cost. He is also correct in saying that some staff also have access to the Senior Officer Medial Insurance scheme which KCC administers on behalf of public sector partners in Kent including both Kent Fire and Rescue and Kent Police. Employees in the scheme are also able to pay for their partners to be covered. The level of membership has slightly decreased since 2009/10 and KCC currently has 251 funded members of the scheme. Current costs to KCC including administration, insurance and other associated expense is approximately £220k.

We have a formidable challenge to meet the target of £500k described in the budget book under "changes to HR policies. Obviously we will be looking at all the commitments we have and staff will be kept advised as the reviews progress. I understand Mr Daley's viewpoint and throughout this process we are keen to ensure that whatever we do is as equitable as possible in these difficult times.

Question by Tim Prater to Roger Gough, Cabinet Member for Business Support and Strategy

In the three year period April 2007 to March 2010 Kent County Council paid nearly £5million in payoffs and redundancies. Will the Cabinet Member for Business Support and Strategy inform this Council of:

1. 1. the total gross cost of payoffs and redundancies from April 2010 to 31 January 2011; and

1. 2. the calculated total gross costs to the Council of the loss of 6 of its most senior managers in the current restructure?

Payoffs and redundancy data cover 2007/08, 2008/09 and 2009/10:

• Redundancy payments £3,193,371
• Other end of Contract Payments £1,647,810
• Grand total £4,841,181

Answer

Since April 2010 195 members of non schools staff have received redundancy payments at a total cost of £2,505,197.63. Much of this reflects the implementation of restructuring proposals agreed in 2009 for Kent Adult Social Services and Children, Families and Education. A further 18 people have received other end of contract payments, including Peter Gilroy, at a total cost of £784,012.58

It is now known that 9 of our most senior managers will leave as a result of changes introduced by the County Council under Change to Keep Succeeding. The total cost of exit payments to these staff is £538,263.53.

Question by Trudy Dean to Paul Carter, Leader of the Council

Can the Leader of the County Council say what he understands by the Big Society and say how today's budget will use this concept to protect the young, the old and the vulnerable from the effect of cuts?

Answer

Today's budget protects vital front line services for the young, older people and the vulnerable in Kent. This is demonstrated through retaining the highly popular and visible Community Wardens scheme, the Freedom Pass and retaining eligibility criteria for social care at 'moderate' when most local authorities have moved to 'substantial' or 'critical'.

The Big Society represents an opportunity for root and branch reform of how the state works. Empowering the front line and moving away from large centralised bureaucracies with expensive monopoly providers, to become a smaller more enabling state. One that commissions services at the right level - including de-scaling provision to commission more locally - from a greater diversity of providers including greater commissioning from the social enterprise, voluntary and community sector.

In Bold Steps for Kent, our new Medium Term Plan, we have set out a range of measures to further support the Big Society in Kent. A new Society of Kent Schools to support schools as they taken on more responsibility from KCC, working to encourage new social enterprises to enter the health economy, moving to locality boards and local place based commissioning with District Councils of local community services and the creation of a Big Society Fund to provide funding for social enterprises and the voluntary and community sector in Kent.

16 December 2010

Question by Mr Martin Vye Cabinet Member for Children, Families and Education

In the light of the serious shortcomings in Kent's services which resulted in children being placed at risk, as detailed within the Ofsted Report on Safeguarding of Children in Kent, will the Cabinet Member for Children Families and Education:

a) explain why the recommendations of the Peter Gilroy report debated at County Council in April 2010 were not implemented, and

b) will she initiate research into best practice, in terms of effectiveness and cost, in other authorities, for example the Hackney model, and report back to this Council, in its role as corporate parent for children in care in Kent?

Answer

a) Mr Vye, as Vice-Chairman of the Children's Champions Board, will be aware that the Chief Executive's review and report were discussed and approved at that cross-party Board's meetings on 12th February 2009 and every subsequent meeting thereafter. Members were advised at one particular meeting in September 2009 that the Chief Executive's review found 'that child protection practice in Kent was fundamentally safe'. The recommendations were discussed and put in context by the social workers who attended the meetings. After April 2010, the Director of Children's Social Services, the Managing Director and the Cabinet Member all provided updates on the implementation of the recommendations.

Furthermore, on 14^th October 2010, I presented to the County Council a report in response to the Chief Executive's 'Safeguarding Children in Kent: Defending and Developing the Service' report, which was debated at the County Council on 1st April 2010. This report fully addresses the progress made against the recommendations and the Chairman of the Kent Safeguarding Children's Board was also there as several of the recommendations were for that Board. Records show Mr Vye attended the October debate. Further monthly updates on progress are provided at each Cabinet meeting; the next taking place on 10^th January 2011.

b) As far as best practice is concerned, Gary Cooke and I visited the Social Services Team in Hackney on 11^th March 2010 and invited Helen Davies, Director of the Specialist Children's Services Group, to join us to see what lessons could be learned for Kent. On my instruction, officers from ISG and Children's Social Services have already had a conference call with their counterparts in Lincolnshire to discuss the ICS system and which amendments to our system are advisable. Following these preparatory discussions, I plan to visit Lincolnshire with an ISG Officer and a practising Social Worker.

These are just two examples of actions which I have taken. I have also spoken with my opposite number in other South East authorities, many of whom have been facing similar challenges.

Finally, as part of our improvement plan currently under discussion with government ministers, we will be using outside advisers to help us turn the service around as soon as possible.

Question by Mr Malcolm Robertson To Cabinet Member for Environment, Highways and Waste

In order to improve community consultation on the highways budget in future years, will the Cabinet Member for Environment, Highways and Waste take in hand the development of the role of the Highways Community Liaison Officers, in order to facilitate annual meetings between them, local parish councils and residents' associations, and local county and district members, in order to establish priorities for highways spending in their area?

Answer

Kent Highway Services through its Community Operations team has established positive liaison links with Parish Councils and KCC Members. Many close working relationships have been built over the last year. I am keen to progress these further and to build upon community links.

Currently the formal process is via the Joint Transportation Board which includes County and District members with representation from the Kent Association of Local Councils.

KHS is reshaping its service delivery though the "Future Highways" project. As part of this major initiative we are reviewing the whole area of community engagement, and your request will be considered by this work. I am confident we will be able to progress local involvement with the highway service in future across a wide range of community groups.

Question by Mr George Koowaree To Mr Nick Chard, Cabinet Member for Highways, Environment and Waste

Will the Cabinet Member for Highways, Environment and Waste look into the removal of the bus gate in Beaver Road Ashford as the report of the Ashford Transport Forum (held on 26^th November 2010) minute on page 8 paragraph 6.5 suggests there is no monitoring or enforcement being done.

Answer

Beaver Road bus gate is an essential part of the Ashford bus route highway infrastructure and the Quality Bus Partnership agreement with the operator Stagecoach. It is served by 7 buses per hour all day on the A-line and B-line in both directions on Mondays to Saturdays (that is, 14 buses per hour in total).

Beaver Road is quite constrained, and the removal of the bus gate would open this road to all traffic wishing to access South Ashford to and from the town centre and station. At present all non-bus traffic is routed via Romney Marsh Road and Norman Road without any apparent problem. The additional traffic resulting from the removal of the bus gate would cause significant congestion as well as adding costs to the bus operation and reducing its reliability.

It is therefore important that the bus gate remains in situ. More effective enforcement is however needed, and we are investigating electronic ways of doing this since it is a low priority for the Police.

14 October 2010

Question by Trudy Dean to the Leader of the Council

Can the Leader of the Council please say whether, in the event of the Alternative Vote system being used in National Government elections, this council will lobby for Paragraph: the same system to be used in Local Government elections?

Answer

No - I am opposed to the Alternative Vote system. For 101 good reasons why I do not support AV, I asked my good friend Keith Ferrin, who gave me the following:

I am not surprised that Mrs Dean favours the alternative vote system since Liberal Democrats have always believed that it would give them a political advantage.

In my experience people who vote almost always have a very clear view about which political party they want to win an election and they do not want to vote for anyone else.

Those who cannot make their mind up usually do not vote at all.

It seems wrong to me to try and force people to make a choice they do not want to make.

I certainly do not want to vote Labour or Liberal Democrat and I doubt very much that Mrs Dean would want to vote Labour or Conservative - perhaps we ought to ask her who she would vote for when the Liberal Democrat was eliminated?

Without doubt the alternative vote system will make hung parliaments and councils much more likely, and that will mean that who runs the country or a council will be settled in back room deals rather than in the ballot box. Surely that cannot be right.

Question by Martin Vye to the Leader of the Council

Given the likely growing need for the County Council to make use of voluntary/notfor-profit organisations to deliver core services, and on the other hand to bear downon expenditure of all kinds, will the Leader explain to the Council how he will ensure that the County Council makes every possible effort to help voluntary organisations to grow their capacity; and at the same time to ensure that cuts in grants to the voluntary sector are carried out in accordance with the Kent Compact and have regard to the vulnerability of the voluntary sector.

Answer

Bold Steps for Kent envisages that the voluntary and community sector will be a critical partner in delivering the outcomes for the people of Kent, particularly in the context of the Big Society. Bold Steps will set out the following propositions:

• Establish a 'Big Society' Fund for Kent to provide start up monies for social enterprises and social entrepreneurs (with a significant fund).

• Reform our procurement framework to open it up more widely to the voluntary and community sector

• Introduce a 'Right to Bid' process for KCC services if local groups think they can run them better through mutuals/co-operatives

• Continue to support and use the Sustainable Communities Act

This programme of action enhances our commitment to the Kent Compact which recognises the need to establish financial stability within the voluntary and community sector and work with them on developing commissioning and procurement policies and protocols.

Clearly there will be less public money available, and the voluntary and community sector won't be immune from this. We will make every effort to give the sector as much notice as possible when funding is to be reduced, whether core grants or contracts for the delivery of services which is where the vast majority of KCC funding is spent. It is also important for the sector itself to rise to the challenge of delivering greater efficiencies along with other public agencies.

The sector is ambitious to improve its capacity and respond to this challenging agenda. Exploratory discussions are already taking place between us and the sector to establish how they can be engaged in the full range of options that will be set out in Bold Steps for Kent. This will ensure their existing skills and capacity are utilised but also that new approaches are developed that will offer a variety of different ways to respond to local need, including social enterprises.

Question by Ian Chittenden to Cabinet Member for Environment, Highways & Waste

Bearing in mind the recent call by the Communities Secretary Eric Pickles to cut street clutter and the promise by Maidstone Council to remove 200 pieces of clutter from our streets, what action will KCC take to remove many of the redundant signs, posts and other items that litter our highways and pavements throughout Kent?

Answer

Kent Highway Services is actively working on this issue.

Policy proposals on permanent highways signs will be considered by the Environment, Highways and Waste Policy Overview and Scrutiny Committee at its next meeting on 4 November. This will include proposals to reduce sign clutter, as well as stricter criteria for installation of new signs and their replacement following damage.

Plans are being developed to undertake sign reviews aimed at consolidating and reducing the size of directional signs to reduce their environmental impact. The sign review will include identification and if appropriate removal of redundant and unnecessary sign clutter. This will need to be a rolling programme in view of the scale of the task, accompanied by a programme of public awareness.

Removal of illegal advertising boards on the Highway continues, and a programme is in hand to identify the owners of redundant and unapproved private signs, and their subsequent removal.

The situation with housing and event signing is improving but there are still significant numbers of signs being put up each year without consent. The only temporary signage allowed is for traffic purposes and not as an advertising tool.

Lists of approved temporary signs are available to Highway Officers; they are empowered to remove illegal signs.

Question by Tim Prater to the Leader of the Council

Can the Leader of the Council explain the process that will be used to deliver the restructuring of this Council's Senior Management outlined in the "First Bold Step" proposals and "Changing to Keep Succeeding" Framework, and what risk assessment has been undertaken for the changes?

Answer

I believe this question may now be somewhat out of date.

As Mr Prater is only too aware, a comprehensive Cabinet paper outlining the process that will be used to deliver the restructuring of the top tier of management and the associated risk assessment has been published and discussed at open Cabinet and Scrutiny Board on Monday of this week. The Cabinet paper is available for all to view.

A special Cabinet Scrutiny meeting on this subject is taking place tomorrow.

I trust Mr Prater now has all the information he requires.

Question by Malcolm Robertson to the Cabinet Member for Environment, Highways & Waste

Will the Cabinet Member for Environment Highways and Waste please:

1. Report the responses from Joint Transportation Boards on his decision Policy for the management of Obstructions and Temporary Items on the Highway.

2. Say what action he proposes to take to respond to their representations and the response of the public to its implementation?

Answer

The response from JTB's have been to note the Policy Overview & Scrutiny Committee recommendation of 25th May, at which you were present, to approve the Managing of Obstructions Policy.

Implementation of the policy has commenced in line with Policy Overview & Scrutiny Committee recommendations. There have been no specific issues raised by the public, but I am aware that a petition may be due.

22nd July

Question by Martin Vye to the Cabinet Member for Environment, Highways and Waste

Given the harmful impact of recent installation of Traffic Management signage on important views of the cathedral and of other historical buildings in Canterbury; and given insensitive replacement of road and footway surfaces in the Old City with locally inappropriate materials; will the Cabinet Member for Environment Highways and Waste agree to instruct Highways Services commissioning officers to insist that contractors have proper regard for the special sensitivity of the historical environment of the Old City of Canterbury when planning and implementing highways improvements?

Answer

Kent Highway Services will always have proper regard for the special sensitivity of historic locations and this has to be balanced with effective location.

I shall ask that the signage that Mr Vye refers be investigated to see if a more suitable location can be mutually agreed.

Question by George Koowaree to the Cabinet Member for Adult Social Services

Will the Cabinet Member for Adult Social Services please inform this council why there have been a 2-year delay in the introduction of a Disabled Person's Registration Card (proof that they are eligible to use disabled facilities) for people who have as a significant disability:

• are registered as blind with a local authority

• have a Blue Badge parking permit

• receive Disability Living Allowance (either care or mobility component)

• receive Attendance Allowance or Industrial Injury Constant Attendance Allowance

• have a long-term indwelling catheter or stoma.

and need to use facilities provided for disabled people or need to ask for assistance; and inform members when this card will finally be available?

Answer

I met with Mr G Koowaree over the last two years, together with officers, to discuss the particular issue of people with hidden disabilities needing access to disabled facilities such as toilets.

Based on this discussion, it was agreed that the best way forward was to build links with local businesses and communities to look at the possibility of developing a suitable scheme in Kent.

Subsequent to that meeting, I also asked KASS officers to investigate a similar scheme in Nottinghamshire. Discussions are ongoing and I shall inform Members when further progress is made.

It is important that this is seen in the context of wider public health issues and to note that the council already provides means of identification for disabled people such as Blue Badges and disabled registration cards.

Question by Tim Prater to the Leader of the Council

Will the Leader accept that the statement of the Chief Executive in writing to staff on 12th January 2009 informing them they would receive just a 1% pay rise but adding that "The highest paid of our colleagues, the Chief Officers Group, have decided not to take any bonus next year in recognition of the financial situation we all face." has caused upset amongst staff who now see from the 2009-10 accounts that some Chief Officers did take bonuses in 2009-10 totalling around £53,000, albeit for performance in 2008-09.

Will the Leader explain how the Chief Executive could make a statement to staff which was not true as it was written, explain what the real intention and meaning of that statement was, assure staff that there will be no Chief Officer bonuses in the accounts for 2010-11, and offer an apology to all KCC staff who may feel that the authority said one thing on officers bonuses and then did another.

Answer

I think Mr Prater has confused his dates which I will clarify in this answer.

I do admit that Peter Gilroy's statement to staff could have been better worded. There was certainly no intention to mislead staff but because the wording was not explicit it was open to misinterpretation.

Let's make one thing quite clear - performance reward monies can only be paid to individuals after the completion of the year to which they relate. The payments made to Chief Officers in 2009-10 relate to performance in 2008-9 and this is where much of the confusion lies.

The intention of the Chief Executive's statement was to make staff aware that Chief Officers would not be considered for any payments relating to their performance during 2009-10 - this will be apparent in next year's statement of accounts. Chief Officers will not be receiving any performance pay for the current financial year, 2010/11, either as will be evidenced in the accounts published in the summer of 2012.

I hope that this clarifies the situation and I would like to apologise to staff who may have felt misled.

Question by Malcolm Robertson to the Chairman of Cabinet Scrutiny Committee

Will the Chairman of the Cabinet Scrutiny Committee say what lessons have been learned during the last year of the Committee's operation?

Answer

On my appointment as Chairman of the Cabinet Scrutiny Committee I asked the Conservative/Labour Group Spokesmen and the Independent Member to serve as my Vice Chairmen. This has worked well as we share the responsibility and operation of the Cabinet Scrutiny Committee.

Scrutiny is the main tool available to all back bench members to examine and improve the decisions made by Cabinet and Cabinet members on behalf of the residents of Kent.

We have been pleased to see the latest improvement in quality of response from Cabinet to the recommendations made by Cabinet Scrutiny Committee.

However, what continues to cause concern to the Cabinet Scrutiny Committee and across the whole suite of Policy Overview and Scrutiny Committees is the information available to back bench Members to perform their role and serve the people of Kent more effectively.

There needs to be a fundamental change in the culture of the whole organisation to see Cabinet Scrutiny Committee as the "constructive critical friend". The Cabinet Scrutiny Committee has worked hard to lobby for more information to be included in the Forward Plan and the provision of quality and timely information.

Information requests need to be responded to promptly to avoid unnecessary call-in. Likewise recommendations for items to be considered by the appropriate Policy Overview and Scrutiny Committee have been ignored. Recommendations from the Cabinet Scrutiny Committee which have been agreed by Cabinet have on occasions been delayed in their implementation. (In the interest of expediency I have set out specific examples at the end of the formal written answer).

I look forward to a period of improved communication with staff and the members of Cabinet Scrutiny Committee, and scrutiny work being increasingly focused on the Policy Overview and Scrutiny Committees, leaving Cabinet Scrutiny Committee to pick up pre scrutiny, cross cutting and major decisions.

Examples:

• Commonly long delays in responding to questions: in a recent example five weeks elapsed before the officer responsible for making a decision was identified by the Children, Families & Education Department. Questions raised on gulley emptying in December 2008 remain outstanding. As a result scrutiny meetings have been held which could have been avoided had these questions been answered promptly.
• Delays have also been experienced in following up recommendations accepted by Cabinet: a report on Kent Design Guide Parking Standards has taken over seven months to be presented; and three months for a satisfactory report on Kent Digital Service; we still await review of the 15% Chief Officer Bonus scheme which remains outstanding since April 2009; so far there has been no review of the members feedback forms required as part of the Chief Officer appraisal process as requested in September 2010.
• The information were incomplete: The Future of Older Peoples Provision had neither the number of clients, or the number of staff affected detailed.
• The decision as written was unintelligible: such as a report on school maintenance contracts, or the report was unrelated to the decision being made as in the case of Community Wardens scheme called in yesterday.
• Would have been best dealt with by the specialist Policy Overview Scrutiny Committees but did not appear on their agendas: The Cabinet Member decision on the revision of Community Warden deployment was signed off two days before the Communities Policy Overview Scrutiny Committee but did not appear on its agenda. The £4.1m cuts in Integrated Transport Schemes do not appear on the agenda for Environment Highways and Waste Policy Overview Scrutiny Committee for 29TH July. Yet these are both issues in which there is likely to be intense public interest.

Question by Ian Chittenden to the Cabinet Member for Community Services

Would the Cabinet Member for Communities please provide the total costs and an individual breakdown for each of the 6 people (identifying Member and KCC Officers) who travelled to the Open Golf Championship at St Andrews including:

• Air travel
• Transport or mileage to/from Gatwick
• Transport & accommodation in Scotland
• Subsistence (i.e. meals, refreshments etc.)
• All other costs (incl. cost of officer hours)

Answer

The Open Golf Championship coming to Sandwich next year is a major event for the County Council. It is coming two years earlier than usual due very largely to the efforts made by the County Council and Dover District Council to persuade the Royal & Ancient to bring forward the date on account of the Olympics in 2012. The Open is expected to generate approximately £70m worth of inward investment to the County and it is absolutely critical that we make a real success of the Championship and at the same time maximise the benefit to Kent of this opportunity. The visit to St. Andrews last week was entirely in pursuit of these two objectives.

Of the total of five people attended St Andrews; one Member and two Officers from KCC; one Member and one Officer from Dover District Council.

The visit was undertaken at the request of, and as guests of, the Royal & Ancient. The travel and accommodation related expenses for the party were paid from the project budget which is provided by local authority partners for this work and the element for KCC representatives was as follows:

• £341 Air travel via Easyjet
• £50 Transport to and from Gatwick
• £105Transport and Accommodation in Scotland
• £660 Accommodation
• £123 Meals

There were no other officer costs. Officers worked their normal hours including significant unpaid overtime.

Question Trudy Dean To The Cabinet Member for Children, Families and Education

Will the Cabinet Member for Children, Families and Education please say what the consequences could be for Kent County Council Support Services, and for future admissions if a number of Kent schools opt for Academy status and can she say what representations KCC has made to the government on this issue?

Answer

As far as support services are concerned that is a difficult question to answer at this point. The current methodology for funding new academies and the low number seeking to convert mean that in the current year the impact will be very small. Services currently operating on a traded basis with schools can continue to offer services to converting schools. One of our key concerns - as highlighted in the report to CFE Resources & Infrastructure POSC this week - is that the government may seek to change the methodology of academy funding from as early as next year. This issue is one of the many questions we have been raising through all avenues with Ministers and DfE officials but to date we have not had any answers.

In terms of Admissions the new academies would become Admissions authorities in their own right - but many of those seeking to convert already are as they are Foundation Schools. Kent will continue to administer the admissions process for all schools in the county and as with the existing arrangements all schools will have to abide by the national Code of Practice.

13 May 2010

Question by Martin Vye to the Cabinet Member for Children, Families and Education

Will the Cabinet Member for Children, Families and Education outline the measures she is taking to ensure any instances of mishandling of serious cases at the local level are communicated swiftly up to her?

Answer

I am at a loss to understand what Mr Vye means when he asks about the 'mishandling' of serious cases. Every child death in Kent is reviewed by the Child Death Overview Panel and, if the case meets the criteria for a serious case review, an independent review is undertaken by Kent Safeguarding Children Board. This is a multi-agency review which is chaired by an independent chairman. The report is written by an independent report writer. As Cabinet member I am notified of these cases immediately by the managing director, and briefed appropriately.

Question by George Koowaree to the Cabinet Member for Environment, Highways and Waste

Will the Cabinet Member for Environment, Highways and Waste advise Members of the Protocol for informing the Local Member of any changes or cancellations to the schedule of Highways works approved by the Joint Transportation Board in their division?

Answer

The formal protocol of informing members of any schemes added or removed from the approved schedules is via the Joint Transportation Boards (JTB). This would be by an update report to the next available JTB. I would suggest that if Mr Koowaree has an issue with a specific scheme he initially speaks with his Community Liaison Officer who can follow up on the matter.

1 April 2010

Question by Martin Vye to the Leader of the Council

Given the disturbing information received by Members of this Council about the impact on staff morale and services of proposals for staff restructuring; will the Leader give his personal guarantee that all Members of the Council will have the opportunity to scrutinise all proposals for staff / unit restructuring across all the Directorates and describe the action he will take to ensure this occurs in sufficient time to influence the final decisions made.

Answer

Decisions on staff restructurings and re-organisations are delegated to officers by the County Council. Following the changes agreed at the County Council, scrutiny of all officer decisions is now a matter for the new Scrutiny Board, which may then ask the relevant Policy Overview and Scrutiny Committee to examine a particular matter. Members may request, but not require, the implementation of such decisions to be delayed until the scrutiny process has been completed.

The Authority's consultation process with staff has been agreed with our recognised Trade Unions, represents best practice and is effective. Members of staff have clear opportunities to raise issues or concerns about a reorganisation with their line manager, personnel representative or trade union representative during the consultation period.

Question by Malcolm Robertson to the Cabinet Member for Environment, Highways & Waste

Does the Cabinet Member not agree with me, that it was disingenuous of the Council to use regional television to encourage residents, who have suffered damage to their vehicles through longstanding unrepaired potholes, to submit compensation claims when it was quite clear that the Council was not going to accept the vast majority of these claims, and had little intention of recompensing people that have suffered losses through the Council's long term neglect of the road network in this County; this being witnessed by the fact that the recent financial monitoring report to EHW POSC actually boasts that "The Insurance Section continues to work closely with Highways to try to reduce the number of successful claims and currently the Authority manages to achieve a rejection rate of claims , where it is considered we do not have any liability, of about 75%." ?

Answer

If a person has a legitimate claim against the Highway Authority, we want to make sure that they have the knowledge of how to make this claim. Under the 1980 Highways Act, a legitimate claim is likely if one of the following conditions arises:

(a) KCC knew about a dangerous defect in the road and had failed to do anything about it within a reasonable time; or

(b) KCC had no means of finding out about a dangerous defect in the road because we did not have a proper system of inspection and repair.

KCC has a comprehensive system of inspection and repair which complies with its statutory duties and therefore we would expect to have a high rejection rate for claims. We have a duty of care to our council tax payers and where we are not found to have breached the two conditions mentioned, we will defend robustly any claims made against us.

Question by Tim Prater to the Cabinet Member for Finance

What additional costs in delivering Council Services, including delivering home care, are anticipated above the budgeted costs for 2009-10 and 2010-11 given the current high cost of fuel?

Answer

We are not anticipating incurring any net additional costs in 2009/10 over and above the approved budget, in fact the latest budget monitoring report is forecasting on overall net under spend of just over £7m excluding schools and asylum. As in every year this net position is made up of a number of variations (both under and overspends) from the original approved budget which are covered in detail in the quarterly and exception budget monitoring reports to Cabinet. We are not forecasting any pressures relating to fuel costs as we made provision for significant pressures within the approved budget.

We have made provision in the 2010/11 budget approved by the County Council at the last meeting to cover the base budget implications of any variations which occurred during 2009/10, plus our best estimate for unavoidable pressures which we anticipate arising during the year. Inevitably these are the estimated impact of future pressures and there will be some variations which materialise during the year. It would be improper and unlawful for the County Council to approve a budget which knowingly made inadequate provision for known factors.

The transport budgets across all directorates have been increased by some £2m in 2010/11, most of which reflects the rising cost of fuel.

Question by Trudy Dean To The Cabinet Member for Environment, Highways & Waste

In view of the public interest in the issue of Street Lighting will the Cabinet Member for Environment Highways and Waste please agree to defer his decision on Street Lighting Policy until it has been able to be discussed by members of the EHW POSC?

Answer

Yes.

18 February 2010

Question by Tim Prater Cabinet Members for Environment, Highways and Waste

Will the Cabinet Member for Environment, Highways and Waste confirm that Kent Police contacted Kent County Council on Wednesday to get roads treated and would he also agree that the response by Kent Highways to the snowfall on 10th / 11th February was totally inadequate in Folkestone and surrounding areas, leading to main roads being completely impassable, cars being abandoned and a number of road accidents.

Answer

There is always very close liaison between Kent Police and Kent Highway Services during these situations. Kent Police are fully aware of the primary and secondary salting routes, but will contact KHS if they feel additional action is required. I have no record that they did this last Wednesday.

Lib Dem Questions 2009:

• Why 28.5% of children in the year 6 cohort entered grammar schools in Kent in September 2009 in comparison with county norm of 25%?

• Opportunity offered by next year's break clause of the contract between Kent Highways Services and Jacobs to fully investigate all options on how to deliver Highways Services in future to a high standard and the lowest cost to KCC?

• When this Council will have the opportunity to debate the review of Kent TV and vote on the continuation of the internet TV channel?

• How many people and what value has this Council offered an exit package to avoid the possibility of an unfair dismissal claim?

• When will the process of appointing a new Chief Executive commence?

• What action he has taken or is to take to plead the need for continuing SEEDA Cultural Grant support?

• List of the Academy projects under serious discussion in the county; explain the criteria adopted by the CFE Directorate for deciding whether or not it will support an Academy project?

• List of

• 1. the weekly allowance KCC paid to foster carers,

• 2. the weekly allowance KCC paid to kinship (family & friends)

• 3. the Government-recommended minimum allowances?

• Ensure the input into the strategic highways and transportation planning decision making process of the views of Local Members, Borough Council Members and members of the public?

• The process of the review of Kent TV conducted by external consultants, including who is being invited to give their views, and will he say when the review will be available to all Members?

• What resources the County Council is able to make available to assist in the clean-up of our rivers?

• Give an assurance that Kent County Council will resolve to use the Act by submitting proposals by 31st July 2009?

• Give the Council the reasons why Kent's schools carry out the greatest number of exclusions?

• Explain how this fits with the clear picture created in the Kent Regeneration Framework document that the KCC is leader and district councils followers in the areas of planning and housing, which are primarily district functions?

• Proceed to appoint a Flood Risk Officer , at a senior level, to coordinate and drive forward the actions required of KCC to provide the best possible safeguarding against flood risk and impact?

• Confirm when further initiatives will be announced specifically targeted to reduce deaths and injuries on Maidstone's roads?

• Submit comments to the current Application for 1,500 acres of polytunnels currently with Tonbridge and Malling Borough Council, and to work with Kent Planning Officers to produce Kent wide Supplementary Planning Guidance on the use of polytunnels?

• Give an assurance to the Governors of More Park Roman Catholic Primary School, West Malling that compensation will be paid to meet the costs of the flooding on 10 February 2009?
• Find the resources to repeat last April's intensive blitz on potholes?
• Ebbsfleet Landmark Competition - how much, if any, of the £1m shortfall KCC plans to donate?
• How much is in the budget for the Children Centre for South Willesborough?

Lib Dem Questions 2008:

• The cost of the animated advertisement for the recruitment for the post of Managing Director of Children, Families and Education?
• Review of the maximum caseload per Social Worker ?
• Explain whether bus journeys taken between 9.00 and 9.30am by over 60s and people with disabilities in Kent will be paid for in full by KCC or not?
• Why there has been a 3 month delay in the completion of the Newtown bridge project in Ashford?
• What level of savings the County Council would need to make from the Budget next year in order to achieve no increase in the Council Tax?
• Stree light and roundabout advertising - why there is a need to further distract drivers attention?
• How much funding is allocated for the backlog of road and footpath repairs in Kent?
• Astor Hever School Farm - plan has effectively been buried and that the mitigation for the loss of the school farm was not much more than a means of stifling local opposition?
• How many Youth Service posts have been discontinued?
• Why the first areas to receive the Kent Freedom Pass were areas of low deprivation with the lowest numbers of families in financial need?
• Please assure me that the two recent prolonged shut-downs at the Allington Incinerator due to serious and expensive engineering failures will not ultimately result in increased gate fees?
• Update members on progress following the motion in County Council on 25 May 2006 with regard to agreeing a common code of practice for our own staff who carry out home visits?
• What assistance is KCC able to offer the residents of Aylesford village to secure a village centre location for its Post Office?
• Will the Leader of the Conservative Group and the Leader of the Opposition Labour Group join the Liberal Democrats in supporting the Bill in the House of Lords to give Ghurkha soldiers serving before 1997 rights to stay in this country and pensions equal to those of British soldiers?
• How much will be allocated for footpath repairs?
• Confirm that a survey of highway drains in Kent in 2006 identified an annual need for investment in road drainage of £12.208 million?

Lib Dem Questions: 2007

• Processes in place to ensure collection of recyclables within schools and the engagement of children in the recycling message in the County's schools?
• The cost so far for the reconfiguration of the Ashford Ring Road and if its within the budgeted sum?
• When PFI contractors will finally vacate the site of Aylesford School Sports College, any future working operations will be in accordance with planning permissions granted in order to protect local residents quality of life and students learning?
• Type of provider chosen to run the nursery in existing Children's Centres; and in each case the charge made to parents, and by how much, if at all, this exceeds the value of the Government Voucher?
• Consider the introduction of signage across the KCC Highway network?
• What arrangements are made with developers or records taken of highways prior to developments taking place to ensure that the costs incurred as a result of damage to highways and footways?
• Identify the parishes in Kent where standard access to Broadband is not available, and give the Council the combined population figure for these parishes?
• How many Kent residents' cheques have been cashed in advance of the crossover installation works, why has the stated agreement to hold cheques until the work is "in hand" been over-ridden and whether KCC intends to compensate these residents?
• Why the scheme to improve safety by extending the existing 20mph zone into Hilary Road in Maidstone to include St Paul's School, under the Safer Routes to School' scheme, has been withdrawn?
• Please state whether there has been an increase in domiciliary care protection cases or complaints from clients, explain the current system of checks on home care assistants and advise if there are any plans to strengthen those checks?
• Percentage of pupils in Kent grammar schools who are recognised as having an educational difficulty or disability and the total percentage of their pupils who are entitled to Free School Meals?
• Clarify what Kent's Conservative administration plan to do about Kent Grammar Schools?
• It would be reprehensible for this County Council to encourage advertising on lamp posts purely as a revenue-earner?
• Confirm which authorities outside Kent are using the Allington Incinerator for domestic waste disposal and what progress made in making arrangements for the disposal of domestic waste from East Kent?
• What is the frequency of clearance of Highways drains, are residents asked to remove parked vehicles in advance of clearance work; and what plans to increase the frequency of drain clearance?
• What is being done to address local concerns about lane marking, signage and traffic light phasing connected with the Leybourne - West Malling Bypass/junction 4 scheme?
• Support those users of Junction 10 of the M20 who have signed a petition?
• Identified any ways in which KCC can help to ameliorate the problem of the shortfall in uniformed officers patrolling our streets?
• With regard to street and public footpaths lighting in the Borough of Ashford:

• 1) the current budget allocated to street lighting maintenance
• 2) how many lights are currently not working
• 3) how many have been out for over a month

Lib Dem Questions 2006:

• KCC's policy on the use of fingerprint systems in Kent schools?
• Setting up a Select Committee on Kent's Youth Provision?
• Daily return service by Eurostar between Ashford International?
• Percentage of the total A Level passes (A-C) in Kent schools were in Modern Foreign Languages?
• New Kent Police protocol for responding to reports from schools of intruders?
• Mainstream primary schools are equipped to comply with the requirements of the Disability Discrimination Act?
• The cost of implementing each proposal in the "Towards 2010" document?
• Implementation of the recommendations of the white paper "Our Health, Our Care, Our Say"?
• Has Conservative Administration adopted a policy which is uniquely hostile to small schools?
• Tackling bullying by production and distribution of anti-bullying cards?
• Why the NHS 'Health Profile for Kent 2006' states that Kent's older population is less well supported to live at home compared to England?
• Development and implementation of the Local Compact between KCC, voluntary and community organisations?
• What progress for Horticultural Vocational Centre at Astor of Hever School?
• Delayed publication of the report of the Select Committee on Gypsy and Travellers Sites?
• How many pupils currently have places in Kent secondary schools as a result of passing a non-PESE entrance test?
• Number of young people presently receiving a second chance education through Alternative Curriculum Project?
• Removal of Members Smoking Room, which also contravenes the KCC Smoking Policy introduced in 1994?

Lib Dem Questions May - December 2005:

The Lib Dem Councillors asked 8 questions at County Council meetings during this period:

• Update on the Discovery Centre in Ashford as regard to funding and completion date?
• Identify the present problems associated with poor delivery of highway services?
• Cancellation by Kent Adult Education Services of all non-statutory learning courses for adults with learning difficulties?
• Confirm that the Administration to spend extra money in the budget for the Youth Service for 2005/06 on 'new projects' and not on much-needed strengthening existing services?
• How many children did not obtain a place for September 2005 at the secondary schools in Canterbury which their parent had chosen?
• Current situation on the establishment of vocational centre?
• How many 3 year old children in the Canterbury District are not in pre-school provision?
• Any traffic management measures to ameliorate the problems of congestion and gridlock?

Lib Dem Questions November 2004 - April 2005:

The Lib Dem Councillors asked 16 questions at County Council meetings during this period:

• Why it is necessary for the County to propose changes to the Duke of Edinburgh's Awards?
• The action being taken to address the 'Black Hole' in the KCC Pension Fund.
• The lorry parking strategy for Kent.
• The river bank at the Old Bridge Gardens, Aylesford.
• The insufficient places for children wishing to attend St Marks School in Eccles.
• The number of Kent's children, attending Primary or Secondary School, whose results are below the national average.
• The number of street lights in Kent which are not working.
• KCC Superannuation Fund underfunding.
• County Council's policy with regard to 20mph zones outside schools.
• What is KCC doing to encourage lifts in blocks of flats?
• Will East Malling be supported with a dedicated youth facility?
• Will the impact of the 'management action' be absorbed by the Schools Advisory Service?
• The future of Astor of Hever School?
• Malling & Maidstone, are these areas for further development?
• Will the retained Joint Transport Boards mean local councillors can have their say on Highways matters?
• Can KCC help alleviate the execessive noise & vibration levels for the residents of Blue Bell Hill & Kits Coty?

If you would like details of the full question & answer to any of the questions listed above, please email the Lib Dem Group, quoting the question(s) you are interested in: libdems@kent.gov.uk