To consider any questions submitted by Members.  (The deadline for questions is 4.30 pm on the Monday the week before the meeting – please contact Democratic Services by e-mailing democraticservices@swale.gov.uk or call 01795 417330).

The Mayor advised that four questions had been submitted by Members.

Question 1 – Councillor Mike Whiting

Councillor Whiting, who submitted question one was not in attendance and a written response would be provided.

Question 2 – Councillor Mike Baldock

Does the Leader agree that the decision on the Highsted Valley Planning Application 21/503914/EIOUT was unreasonably delayed by this Council?

Response – Leader

Thank you for your question Cllr Baldock, no I do not believe that the decision on the Highsted application was unreasonably delayed by this Council.

As Chair of Planning Committee, I am sure that you will be well aware, that at the point at which Swale Borough Council was set to make its decision, despite several months of effort to secure the required information from the potential developer, the application still required additional information to be submitted, such that legal advice confirmed our view that it could not lawfully have been approved.

Applications of all scales must be appropriately assessed against national and local policies, and evidence needs to be provided to allow those assessments to be consistent and robust. In the case of a planning application of this magnitude, the quantity of evidence to assess of course is vast. Likewise, applications need appropriate and commensurate consultation with the public and stakeholders. For the Highsted application this meant considerable time dedicated to engagement and review of representations received.

Throughout the process Officers maintained dialogue with the applicants representatives and I am confident that due process was followed as expediently as possible.

Supplementary Question:

As the statement regarding the Highsted applications being unreasonably delayed was a direct quote from Kevin McKenna, Labour MP for Sittingbourne and Sheppey in his request to the Secretary of State to call-in the applications, would he now agree to write to Kevin McKenna outlining why his comments were so long?

Response:

I think the term that was used by the MP Kevin McKenna was that it ‘may’ have been unreasonably delayed.  In terms of writing to him I really don’t understand what that would gain us, we have said this in a public meeting here, and what I have written is a matter of public record and I intend to do nothing further.

Councillor Lloyd Bowen raised a point of order, that the decision at the last Council meeting in December 2024 was binding for six months, so writing the letter would not have been able to be actioned under the Council’s Constitution.

The Monitoring Officer said that given the Leader’s response, he did not consider there was any need to debate this but took the Member’s point.

Councillor Mike Baldock raised a point of order, that new information had come to light since that meeting, and the content of the letter was unknown so it would have been in response to the letter and not the alleged comments in the Press Release.

Question 3 – Councillor Hannah Perkin

Following multiple consecutive years of parking charge increases, combined with issues of large puddles, potholes and lines which are difficult to see, residents have been become increasingly frustrated. There have been increasing incidents of cars going the wrong way around many car parks due to the arrow pointers being complete worn.

Could the chair of the community committee confirm when car parks will be resurfaced and lines be repainted, particularly at Faversham Central Car park, the busiest car park in the borough, and at Queens Hall car park?

Response – Chair of Community and Leisure Committee

Income from pay and display car parking is used to offset the cost of services across the Council. Whilst our parking charges have risen, so have our costs, such as the cost of materials/electricity and labour. An annual budget is provided for car park maintenance and management. Our officers inspect each car park regularly and prioritise health and safety works from this budget.

We can also utilise income from penalty charge notices to improve the car parks and this is often used for larger renovations such as those recently done at the Ship on Shore car park in Sheerness.

We will be formulating a programme of works for the 2025-26 financial year in due course and will reassess the car parks above.

Supplementary Question:

Does the Chair agree that in 2024 the Community and Leisure Committee Parking Working Group put forward an equitable policy which was then halted at the last minute, and at the next budget we should look to rectify that situation?

Response:

Yes, I do recall and yes, you are quite correct, and I think at the next budget it is down to Members to make the decision at the time of the budget.

Question 4 – Councillor Hannah Perkin

With the government white paper on devolution, and the apparent keenness of the administrations at KCC and Medway to undertake an accelerated path to local government reorganisation, many residents in Faversham have been in contact with councillors about the possible make-up of the proposed new unitary authorities.

One of the key concerns that has been highlighted is the possibility of a significant disconnect between local health structures and the new unitaries, especially given that Faversham sits in a different PCN meaning residents access healthcare to the East of the county.

Will the leader ensure that this concern is highlighted in discussions about possible new unitary council boundaries?

Response – Leader

Thank you for your question. We are at the early stages of discussions with our Kent Authority Partners about what any Local Government Reorganisation proposal would look like and I can share that there isn’t a common position across Kent. I understand that Health Structures are important and I certainly have been considering the impact on Health of any proposed unitarization. My main priority is that any Local Government reorganisation proposal is the best that it can be for all of Swale. Ensuring our councillor and resident voice is heard is paramount to the work we need to do over the coming months. I have set up a working group for Group Leaders to ensure that we can ensure that all voices across the political spectrum and heard and any proposal coming from Swale is co-produced and has our residents best interest at its heart.

Supplementary question:

There was no supplementary question.