Visitors and members of the public who are unfamiliar with the building and procedures are advised that:

(a)      The fire alarm is a continuous loud ringing. In the event that a fire drill is planned during the meeting, the Chair will advise of this.

(b)      Exit routes from the chamber are located on each side of the room, one directly to a fire escape, the other to the stairs opposite the lifts.

(c)      In the event of the alarm sounding, leave the building via the nearest safe exit and gather at the assembly point on the far side of the car park. Do not leave the assembly point or re-enter the building until advised to do so. Do not use the lifts.

(d)      Anyone unable to use the stairs should make themselves known during this agenda item.

The Chair outlined the emergency evacuation procedure.

To approve the Minutes of the Meeting held on 8 November 2022 (Minute Nos. 422 – 427) as a correct record.

The Minutes of the Meeting held on 8 November 2022 (Minute Nos. 422 – 427) were taken as read, approved and signed by the Chair as a correct record.

Councillors should not act or take decisions in order to gain financial or other material benefits for themselves, their families or friends.

The Chair will ask Members if they have any disclosable pecuniary interests (DPIs) or disclosable non-pecuniary interests (DNPIs) to declare in respect of items on the agenda. Members with a DPI in an item must leave the room for that item and may not participate in the debate or vote. 

Aside from disclosable interests, where a fair-minded and informed observer would think there was a real possibility that a Member might be biased or predetermined on an item, the Member should declare this and leave the room while that item is considered.

Members who are in any doubt about interests, bias or predetermination should contact the monitoring officer for advice prior to the meeting.

No interests were declared.

Tabled Update added 17.01.2023

The Head of Housing and Communities introduced the report which provided details of proposals to address the shortage and costs of Temporary Accommodation Purchase (TAP) in Swale.  She drew attention to the proposals set out under paragraph 3 on page 9 of the report which included the purchase of up to 50 properties for Temporary Accommodation (TA) use within Swale at a cost of £11m.  

The Head of Housing and Communities referred to the tabled addendum to the report which detailed the new £500m Local Authority Fund (LAHF) from the Department for Levelling-Up, Housing, and Communities which would run over the 2022-23 and 2023-24 financial years.  In response to a question, she said the Council needed to make a decision on the funding by 25 January 2023.

The Chair invited Members to ask questions and make comments and these included: 

·         Sought clarification on what was meant by TA and what happened once residents left it;

·         the Government had put little-to-no thought into how those from Ukraine and Afghanistan would be supported once they were here;

·         the Government were spending £72m a day on bridging hotels.  Why had they not looked at long-term solutions such as using empty barracks and modular builds;

·         appalled that the Government were asking for 60% of taxpayers money to sort out the mess they had created;

·         would not support the ‘bridging’ element set-out in the tabled addendum as it was a “step too far” and would be far too much extra work for officers;

·         did not support paying 50% of residents money on long-term housing;

·         what was the average time someone would be in TA in Swale?;

·         would the proposed 50 houses be spread across the Borough?;

·         supported the TAP report and agree they should be spread evenly across the Borough;

·         concerned that the Government had rushed into this and Local Authorities were left to pick up the pieces;

·         the Government made a firm commitment to house refugees from Ukraine and Afghanistan and should fully fund their housing, so could not support the addendum;

·         could the Council improve management of the proposed housing over the longer-term?;

·         welcomed the TAP proposal;

·         for the bridging element, what did the property general stock refer to?;

·         felt ‘ambushed’ by the tabled paper and did not think Members were in a position to make a decision on it;

·         the addendum paper did offer a large sum of money from Government that the Council was not expecting and should be accepted;

·         concerned about the lack of financial detail in the report considering Members were being asked to consider such a large sum of money;

·         requested that the Policy and Resources Committee be given a more substantive report detailing all of the financial implications of the proposal;

·         would like to see the Council negotiate terms in advance with valuers and structural surveyors;

·         did not think the bridging scheme in the tabled addendum was viable and how much would both schemes cost long-term?;

·         considered there was an undervaluation in the report for purchasing properties,  ...  view the full minutes text for item 583.

Members considered the Forward Decisions Plan and the following points were raised:

·         Requested a schedule of Temporary Housing across the Borough;

·         Members were often not clear on how residents could apply for temporary housing and a clear background needed to be provided;

·         training for Members was also required in respect of health provision in the Borough; and

·         concerned there was no confirmation of when the Housing Assistance Policy and the Nightly Let Procurement Award would be considered by the Committee.

In response, the Head of Housing and Communities explained that the Housing Assistance Policy currently in place complied with current legislation and she had delegated authority to make any minor amendments required to the Policy and was confident the Council were legally compliant.  With regard to the Nightly Let Procurement Award, she explained that officers were working with other Kent authorities and timescales for the tender were unknown. 

Resolved: That the report be noted.