Agenda and minutes

Apologies were received from Councillors Ezekiel and Goodwin.  Members asked for their good wishes to be conveyed to Councillor Goodwin.

To approve the Minutes of the meeting of Council held on 23 February 2012, copy attached.

On the proposal of the Chairman, seconded by the Vice-Chairman, the minutes of the meeting of Council held on 23 February 2012 were approved by Council and signed by the Chairman.

To receive any announcements from the Chairman, Leader, Members of the Cabinet or Chief Executive in accordance with Council Procedure Rule 2.1 (iv).

There were no announcements under Council Procedure Rule 2.1.

To receive any declarations of interest.   Members are advised to consider the extract from the Standard Board Code of Conduct for Members, which forms part of the declaration of interest form at the back of this agenda.  If a Member declares an interest, they should complete that form and hand it to the officer clerking the meeting.

It was NOTED that all Members present had a personal interest in Agenda Item No. 18, “Members’ Allowances Scheme” (Minute No. 104 refers).

Councillor Driver declared a personal interest in Agenda Item No. 10, “Draft Corporate Plan 2012-16” (Minute No. 96 refers).

To receive petitions in accordance with the Council’s Petitions Scheme, as set out at Council Procedure Rule 12

On behalf of Mrs Jenden, the petition originator, Mrs Leslie MacKenzie presented a petition to “Bring Ray, the road sweeper, back to Birchington”.

It was NOTED that, in accordance with the Council’s Petitions Scheme, the petition would be referred to Cabinet for report back to Council within three ordinary meetings.

To receive questions received from the press or public in accordance with Council Procedure Rule 13

No questions were received from the press or public in accordance with Council Procedure Rule 13.

To receive questions from Members of the Council in accordance with Council Procedure Rule 14

No questions were received from members of the Council in accordance with Council Procedure Rule 14.

To receive Notices of Motion from Members of Council in accordance with the Council Procedure Rule 16

It was proposed by Councillor Driver, and seconded by Councillor Fenner:

“That Council notes the Government has launched a consultation on Equal Civil Marriage.

“Council also notes that the Government has invited local authorities to respond to this consultation by 14 June 2012.

“Council therefore agrees to submit the following response to the consultation:

‘That Thanet District Council:

a)  supports the removal of the ban on same-sex couples being able to have a marriage through a civil ceremony;

b)  supports the proposal to allow transsexual people to change their legal gender without having to legally end their existing marriage or civil partnership.’”

Motion to debate

It was proposed by Councillor Campbell, seconded by Councillor Fenner, that the motion on notice be debated.  This motion was, upon being put to the vote, declared CARRIED.

Substantive motion

Following debate, the substantive motion was, upon being put to the vote, declared CARRIED.

Adjournment of Meeting

The meeting was adjourned for two minutes to enable members of the public to leave, if they so wished.

The meeting then resumed.

In his report, the Leader of the Council focussed on visitor attractions across Thanet.  He referred to:

a)  the success of the Turner Contemporary, which was nearing its first anniversary, and his hope that this would be complemented by the re-opening of “Dreamland”

b)  final negotiations having been completed with the Steam Museum Trust for the re-opening of the Maritime Museum in Ramsgate, in time for the summer season;

c)  efforts by the new administration to protect green public open space in Broadstairs, and a commitment to assist the Town Council with refurbishment of historic public buildings in Pierremont Park.

Councillor Bayford, Leader of the Conservative Group, expressed the view that the lease to the Maritime Museum should have been subjected to scrutiny and stated his disappointment that the cost to the Council and the terms of the lease had not been disclosed.

Councillor Worrow, as Leader of Thanet Independent Group, congratulated the current administration in relation to the re-opening of the Maritime Museum.

Councillor King, Leader of the Independent Group, expressed the view that the Leader’s report could have covered issues such as addressing deprivation in Thanet at a time when the Government formula grant had been reduced by 16.9%.

In his responses, the Leader of the Council stated that scrutiny of the lease to the Maritime Museum had not been possible owing to time constraints and that the cost to the Council would be less than half of that estimated by the previous administration.

Councillor Driver declared a personal interest in this item.

It was proposed by Councillor Fenner, seconded by the Leader, that the recommendation at paragraph 11.1 of the report be adopted, namely:

“That Council approves the draft Corporate Plan and adopts the Vision for Kent, as suggested in options 8.1.1 and 8.2.1”.

Following debate, this motion was, upon being put to the vote, declared CARRIED.

It was proposed by Councillor Everitt, seconded by Councillor Johnston and RESOLVED that the recommendations as set out at paragraphs 6.1 to 6.4 of the report be adopted, namely, that:

1. Members note the contents of the report;

2. Members agree that from 1 April 2012 a two-pool approach will be undertaken for the authority’s debt portfolio;

3. Members agree the assumptions within the revised Housing Revenue Account Business Plan Financial Model;

4. Members agree that a new properties reserve be created.

It was proposed by the Leader, seconded by Councillor Poole, that the recommendation at paragraph 9.1 of the report be adopted, namely:

“That the Council adopts option 3 for the revised fees and charges for 2012/13 with the timetable for implementation”.

Amendment No. 1

Councillor Wells proposed and Councillor Bruce seconded an amendment:

“That the following words be added after ‘implementation’:

‘with the exception of the proposal for Albion Road car park in Birchington, which be deferred for detailed consultation with residents and traders’”.

Following debate and upon being put to the vote, this amendment was declared LOST.

Amendment No. 2

It was proposed by Councillor Moores, seconded by Councillor Wells:

“That the words, ‘a modified’ be inserted after ‘adopts’ and that the words, ‘reverting to the Cannon Road car park for free Saturday parking in Ramsgate’ be inserted after, ‘option 3’.

Motion that the question be now put

Following debate on this amendment, it was proposed by Councillor Campbell and seconded by Councillor Harrison that the question be now put.  Upon being put to the vote, this procedural motion was declared CARRIED.

The amendment was then put to the vote and declared LOST

Motion that the question be now put

It was proposed by Councillor Campbell and seconded by Councillor Harrison that the substantive motion be now put.

As the Chairman was of the view that insufficient debate had taken place, this procedural motion was REJECTED. 

Amendment No. 3

An amendment was proposed by Councillor Bayford, and seconded by Councillor Wells:

“That the words, ‘a modified’ be inserted after ‘adopts’ and that the wording, ‘changing the proposed free Saturday car park in Broadstairs to Vere Road’ be inserted after ‘option 3’”.

Motion that the question be now put

It was proposed by Councillor Poole and seconded by Councillor W Scobie that the question be now put.  Upon being put to the vote, this procedural motion was ADOPTED.

The amendment was then put to the vote and declared CARRIED.

Substantive Motion

“That the Council adopts a modified option 3, changing the proposed free Saturday car park in Broadstairs to Vere Road, for the revised fees and charges for 2012/13 with the timetable for implementation”

was, upon being put to the vote, declared CARRIED.

It was proposed by Councillor Johnston, seconded by the Leader, and RESOLVED:

1. That the recommendations as set out at paragraphs 6.1 & 6.2 of the report be adopted, namely:

  i.  that Council notes the contents of the Thanet Community Safety Strategic Assessment for 2011/12;

  ii.  that Council approves the priorities and actions in the Thanet Community Safety Plan 2012/13 as set out in Annex 2 to the officer’s report;

2. That Council regrets the changes in circumstance and the consequential detrimental effect on community policing in Thanet since the report was written;

3. That Council supports Cabinet continuing urgent talks with local Police partners to bring about a restoration of full community policing in Thanet.

It was proposed by Councillor Hart, seconded by Councillor Bayford, and RESOLVED:

1. That the recommendations at paragraph 6.1 of the report be adopted, namely:

  i.  Approve the Food Service Plan;

  ii.  Approve the increase in the base budget for between £94K and £112K, depending on qualifications plus on-costs;

  iii.  Approve the one-off cost of improved technology from the priority and improvement reserve;

2. That progress against the Improvement Plan be reported to the Corporate Budget & Improvement Working Party.

The report was NOTED.

The report was NOTED.

It was proposed by the Leader, seconded by Councillor Poole, and RESOLVED:

“That Option 2 as set out at paragraph 7.1 of the report be adopted, namely:

‘That the Planning Committee is increased to 16 seats and the additional seat is given to the Thanet Independent Group;

‘That the Overview and Scrutiny Panel is increased to 15 seats and the additional seat is given to the Thanet Independent Group;

‘That a seat is removed from the Independent Group on the Governance & Audit Committee and that seat is given to the Thanet Independent Group’;

‘That the Independent Group loses its seat on the Boundary and Electoral Arrangements Working Party and that seat is given to the Thanet Independent Group’”.

It was proposed by the Leader, seconded by Councillor Campbell, and RESOLVED that Councillor Poole be appointed as representative to the Campaign for the Protection of Rural England.

It was proposed by the Chairman and seconded by the Vice-Chairman:

1. That the recommendation at paragraph 7.1 (a) of the report be adopted, namely:

“That Council adopts the draft 2012/13 Members’ Allowances Scheme as set out at Annex 1 to the report and retrospectively implement the scheme from 1 April 2012”;

2.  That Council recommends to the East Kent Joint Independent Remuneration Panel (EKJIRP) that the basic allowance is increased in line with the current level of the Consumer Price Index and a report is brought to Council on EKJIRP’s recommendations’.

Upon being put to the vote, this motion was declared CARRIED.

It was proposed by the Chairman and seconded by the Vice-Chairman that the recommendations as set out at paragraph 9.1 of the report be adopted, namely:

1. That Council retains a petitions scheme;

2. That Council keeps its Epetition webpage;

3. That no amendment is made to the petitions scheme appeals process;

4. That the Council’s petitions scheme webpages remain on the Council’s website;

5. That Council continues to acknowledge petitions, tell petitioners what it intends to do with their petitions and places the petitions on the Council’s website;

6. That Council retains the list of required steps as part of its petitions scheme;

7. (a)  That the existing scheme of thresholds that automatically determine whether a petition is sent to Council to be sent to Cabinet, the Overview and Scrutiny Panel or to Council for debate and the ability to create a petition to ask an appropriate officer to give evidence be retained;

(b) That the level of thresholds remain as they are for referral to the Overview and Scrutiny Panel and for Council debate;

8. That Council notes the removal of the power of review by the Secretary of State;

9. (a)  That the Monitoring Officer alone be allowed to reject petitions if they relate to a regulatory decision or include no contact details;

(b)  That a petition should be rejected by the Monitoring Officer if a petition had already been received that was substantially similar to the one received within the preceding twelve months;

(c)  That when a petition is rejected, the grounds for rejection are reported to the next available Overview and Scrutiny Panel meeting;

10. That the Democratic Services & Scrutiny Manager be delegated authority to amend the Council’s petitions scheme to reflect any of the changes made to the scheme.

Amendment

An amendment was proposed by the Leader and seconded by Councillor Campbell:

“That the level of threshold automatically triggering full Council debate be reduced from 1,300 signatures to 1,000 signatures”.  (No. 7(b) above refers)

Upon being put to the vote, this amendment was CARRIED.

The substantive motion was then put to the vote and declared CARRIED.

It was proposed by the Chairman, seconded by the Vice-Chairman, and RESOLVED that the recommendations set out at paragraph 6.1 of the report be adopted, namely:

“That Council approves the amendments to the Contract Standing Orders and Purchasing Guide listed below and the associated amendments to the Constitution as required:

1. Amendments made to bring the documents in line with the new Council structure;

2. Addition to wording of Clause 11.5 and Appendix 1 of the Contract Standing Orders of, “the appropriate Shadow Portfolio Holder or another Shadow Cabinet Member”, and to Clause 11.5 of, “In circumstances where both Portfolio/Cabinet Member and/or, both Shadow Portfolio/Cabinet Members are unable to attend, opening of tenders can and should be undertaken in presence of officers and at least one substitute Member to ensure procurement programme is maintained”.

3. Addition to wording of Clause 7.4 of the Contract Standing Orders of, “Consideration to be given to suitably qualified Thanet Supplier/s, if available”;

4. Addition of Clause 2.3.6,  “When, for technical or artistic reasons, or for reasons connected with the protection of exclusive rights, the goods, services or works may be provided only by a particular service provider”, to the Contract Standing Orders.