Cabinet - Wednesday 23 April 2025, 5:00pm - Folkestone & Hythe webcasting

Cabinet
Wednesday, 23rd April 2025 at 5:00pm 

Agenda

Slides

Transcript

Map

Resources

Forums

Speakers

Votes

Initialising

 

Welcome to Folkestone and Hythe District Council's Webcast Player.

 

UPDATE - PLEASE NOTE, MEETINGS OF THE JOINT TRANSPORTATION BOARD AND FOLKESTONE AND HYTHE DISTRICT AND PARISH COUNCILS' JOINT COMMITTEE WILL BE STREAMED LIVE TO YOUTUBE AT: bit.ly/YouTubeMeetings. 


The webcast should start automatically for you, and you can jump to specific points of interest within the meeting by selecting the agenda point or the speaker that you are interested in, simply by clicking the tabs above this message. You can also view any presentations used in the meeting by clicking the presentations tab. We hope you find the webcast interesting and informative.

 

Please note, although officers can be heard when they are speaking at meetings, they will not be filmed.

 

At the conclusion of a meeting, the webcast can take time to 'archive'.  You will not be able to view the webcast until the archiving process is complete.  This is usually within 24 hours of the meeting.

Share this agenda point
  1. Cllr Jim Martin
  2. Cllr Jim Martin
  3. Ms Jemma West
  4. Cllr Jim Martin
Share this agenda point
Share this agenda point
  1. Cllr Tim Prater
  2. Cllr Jim Martin
Share this agenda point
  1. Cllr Rich Holgate
  2. Cllr Jim Martin
  3. Cllr Jeremy Speakman
  4. Cllr Jim Martin
  5. Mr Rod Lean
  6. Cllr Jim Martin
  7. Cllr Stephen Scoffham
  8. Cllr Mike Blakemore
  9. Cllr Jim Martin
Share this agenda point
  1. Cllr Tim Prater
  2. Cllr Jim Martin
  3. Cllr Gary Fuller
  4. Cllr Jim Martin
  5. Cllr Jeremy Speakman
  6. Cllr Jim Martin
  7. Cllr Jeremy Speakman
  8. Cllr Jeremy Speakman
  9. Cllr Jim Martin
  10. Cllr Polly Blakemore
  11. Cllr Jim Martin
  12. Jonathan Smith
  13. Cllr Jim Martin
  14. Folkestone & Hythe Officer
  15. Cllr Jim Martin
  16. Cllr Rich Holgate
  17. Cllr Jim Martin
  18. Jonathan Smith
  19. Cllr Jim Martin
  20. Cllr Tim Prater
  21. Cllr Jim Martin
Share this agenda point
  1. Cllr Jeremy Speakman
  2. Cllr Jim Martin
  3. Cllr Jim Martin
  4. Cllr Tim Prater
  5. Cllr Jim Martin
  6. Mr Jonathan Hicks
  7. Cllr Jim Martin
  8. Cllr Gary Fuller
  9. Cllr Jim Martin
Share this agenda point
  1. Mr David Whittingdon
  2. Cllr Jim Martin
  3. Mr David Whittingdon
  4. Cllr Jim Martin
  5. Cllr Tim Prater
  6. Cllr Jim Martin
  7. Cllr Rich Holgate
  8. Cllr Jim Martin
  9. Mr David Whittingdon
  10. Cllr Jim Martin
  11. Cllr Polly Blakemore
  12. Mr David Whittingdon
  13. Cllr Jim Martin
  14. Cllr Gary Fuller
  15. Mr David Whittingdon
  16. Cllr Jim Martin
  17. Cllr Gary Fuller
  18. Mr David Whittingdon
  19. Cllr Jim Martin
  20. Webcast Finished

Cllr Jim Martin - 0:00:00
Cllr Jim Martin - 0:00:03
This meeting will be webcast live to the internet.
For those who do not wish to be recorded or filmed, you will need to leave the chamber.
For members, officers and others speaking at the meeting, it is important that the microphones
are used so viewers on the webcast and others in the room may hear you.
Would anyone with a mobile phone please switch it to silent mode as they can be distracting.
I would like to remind members that although we all have strong opinions on matters under
consideration it is important to treat members, officers and public speakers with respect.
Super.
So welcome everyone and if we can move to the first item which is apologies for absence.
Gemma.
Ms Jemma West - 0:00:53
No apologies this evening.
Cllr Jim Martin - 0:00:56
Oh, and indeed we seem to have a full house.
So fantastic stuff, well done.
Are there any declarations of interest?

1 Apologies for Absence

2 Declarations of Interest

Does anyone have a declaration to make?
No? Jolly good? Okay.

3 Minutes

Moving on to item three.
Bizarrely, we have two sets of minutes to approve.
So, they are the minutes of the meeting on Thursday the 20th of March and the minutes
of the meeting on the 26th of March.
Is everyone okay with that?
Can I have a proposer then?
I'd be happy to propose both.
Could I have a seconder?
Cllr Tim Prater - 0:01:38
No, thank you.
Cllr Jim Martin - 0:01:39
So, Councillor Prater to propose, Councillor Blakemore to second and all those in favour
please indicate. Thank you very much.

4 UKSPF & REPF 22-25 update & recommendations for 25-26 spend

And item 4 which is the UK SPF and RE PF 22 to 25 update and recommendations for 25 26
spend pages 15 to 38 and I understand Councillor Holgate is going to lead us through this one.
Thanks very much, Rich.
Cllr Rich Holgate - 0:02:23
Good evening. I just wanted to read a short intro. Apologies, laptop's fuzzy, so I'm just going to read off my phone.
And so this report provides an update on the UK shared prosperity fund and rural England prosperity fund for 22 to 25,
highlighting key achievements and challenges. It also outlines recommendations for the 25 -26 transitional funding.
That's 327 ,000 for UK SPF and 171 ,000 for our EPF.
focusing on continuing successful projects like cost of living support,
skills training and rural business grants.
The report seeks cabinet approval to accept the funding
and propose a 10 % administration fee to ensure effective delivery.
Some highlights on key allocations.
So the UK SPF, there's £327 ,146 for £25 .26,
previously from 1 million over 22 -25.
And on the rural side we have 171 ,000 for 25 -26,
previously 571 ,000 over 23 -25.
The fund objectives to remind us the UKSPF focuses on levelling up
through three pillars, communities in place,
supporting local businesses, people and skills.
And the rural prosperity fund targets rural areas with projects
like renewable energy, broadband expansion and tourism.
To highlight a couple of achievements over the last three years, from a UKSPF perspective,
the cost of living aid including social action projects and measures to improve energy efficiency
such as the mobile pantry, warm spaces, food vouchers and appliance grants.
We've done plenty of skills training and green construction courses.
And on the rural side, we've achieved grants for energy efficiency and diversification
projects and also supported rural tourism such as the coastal destination projects.
In terms of the recommendations, one, accept 25 -26 UK SPF and REPF grants. Two, request 10 %
administration costs versus the default 4 % due to resource demands and three, to prioritize
successful existing projects such as mobile pantry while exploring new initiatives. And the next
steps pending that would be to submit the report and the delivery plan to MHCLG by 31st
of April this year.
I think that is a sufficient intro.
Thank you.
Thank you very much Councillor Algate.
Would you like to propose the report?
Yes that's the bottom of the thing.
Thank you.
I'd like to propose the report.
Cllr Jim Martin - 0:05:03
Terrific. I would very much like to second it, if I may.
And just to say that this is a good news story.
There isn't anything in this that I don't like.
I'm sure for many of us this is a big part of the reason
that we deliver all those leaflets and we stand for election
so we can do stuff like this.
So I'm very, very grateful to the officers.
I'm very, very grateful to central government
for the funding, and I'm very grateful
for the help and assistance that all of the councillors,
particularly ward councillors,
and the way that they've participated
in distributing these funds.
So having said that, I'm very, very happy
to open it up for further discussion.
Councillor Speake.
Thank you very much.
Cllr Jeremy Speakman - 0:06:01
It's great news and very much welcome.
Just a couple of points.
I think this is a very minor point.
I just got a bit confused.
1 .7, MHCLD have also confirmed that the REPF would also be extended and included in this
transition year but have not yet announced the funding allocation.
But they haven't.
I mean, that's just an error.
Or am I missing something?
reading that?
My reading of that is that there is likely to be some more money, it just hasn't been
allocated as yet.
OK.
So that doesn't refer to the 171402?
Sorry, much better to refer to the expert on this rather than give you my rather dodgy
interpretation.
I think I'm just being pedantic.
Yes, it is a slight error actually, in that when we were writing this report,
going through the process, by the time we got to here, they just announced it.
So yes, well picked up there, but it has been announced
and that was the amount that Councillor Holgate mentioned earlier.
So apologies for that.
Peddington, my apologies.
The other thing is, in terms of future projects and things,
do we relate this to the corporate plan?
Is there a process of input into this in some way, shape or form?
I would commend, for example, a bit of a plug for my award,
that Lim Parish Council have got a really excellent model
for wellbeing partnership with KCC and the Health Authority,
doing digital exclusion work with elderly people
and drop -in clinics and all that kind of stuff.
I think we've been ideal projects.
That's just an example, but I'm just thinking the process
of actually taking these forward, how that works.
I think to summarise, Councillor Speakeman,
Cllr Jim Martin - 0:08:03
are there opportunities where we can add to existing projects,
existing funding streams, etc.,
because obviously there are projects like the one in Limb
that need to be continued, need to be developed, etc.
So if you could give us your thoughts.
Thank you.
Yes, absolutely.
Mr Rod Lean - 0:08:27
The aim is to obviously try and continue
with some of the excellent work that
happens in the current and previous financial year.
I think they have become a bit reliant in terms
of the community, the efforts that we're making there.
But we have made provisions so that we
can bring in some new initiatives
and welcome members thoughts on that
as we develop that programme for MHCLG.
It's fairly flexible, which is good, so we can alter it as we go,
which is helpful, but just be minded
that the money isn't quite as much as we had originally,
so it is slightly less. Thank you.
Councillor Scotten.
Cllr Jim Martin - 0:09:08
I should have come in earlier,
Cllr Stephen Scoffham - 0:09:11
because everybody who's spoken has said things which I was going to say anyway,
and I have to say that we hadn't talked about it amongst ourselves.
So that shows that we are thinking similarly,
even if we're not having the chance at the moment to liaise in the normal way.
Yes, first of all, I really welcome it.
I think it's been a wonderful programme
and maybe it's the moment to flag up that it's been very well administered
and the money has been very well accounted for.
And I think that... I don't want to single anybody out,
but certainly I've had lots of dealings with Andy Markwell on this
and I'm really impressed by the way that he's recommended.
the projects to us, investigated them and given us lots of details.
So, I'd like to flag that up very much at the beginning.
The range of projects is, I think, really interesting.
I noted...
Rich, you singled out a number of things,
but the number of households, for example,
that have been supported to take up energy -efficient measures is 1 ,000.
So, a thousand households supported on that front alone,
and 10 ,000 people affected on a wider front.
So, the range of projects is really interesting
and the impact is really significant, I think.
I brought along my copy of the draft corporate plan.
It's here in my hands.
And I think that just about everything that I'm reading in the report
aligns with the five headings.
Working with partners.
Yes, that's what this has been about.
Our government partners that will up the chain
and partners locally lower down the chain.
Quality of houses.
Well, insulation and energy efficiency measures
fit in there brilliantly.
Growing a sustainable economy.
Well, the help for businesses in a range of solar panels onwards.
Climate change and natural environment, biodiversity.
It's all, nearly all the projects tick that box
and improving people's health and wellbeing.
So the strap line for the corporate plan, our district, our world,
is actually already being lived out here.
So I think what I found particularly heartening was a sense of coherence.
I can see that what might look like a disparate set of projects
come together in these bigger headings.
And so my last thought on this is,
it may have escaped you, that yesterday was Earth Day.
And on the television news I was listening to astronauts
We've been up to the moon saying that exactly this is about the earth,
about the way in which we need to work together
and it's absolutely essential that we do that.
I think that strap line, our district, our world, is exemplified here.
So I really want to say that I'm going to be raising both hands
when we get the chance to vote on this motion.
Thank you very much. Councillor Blyton.
Yeah, I'd like to echo much of what somebody said.
I think the main target succeeds, I was my only support by a number of households currently receiving support.
Cllr Mike Blakemore - 0:12:18
It's now just short of 7 ,000 compared with an initial forecast of 1 ,000, so it's an amazing achievement.
The Mobile Food Service, I had the great privilege of helping to launch that soon after I was elected
and I was speaking to someone from the Rainbow Centre who provided Mobile Food Service
and they were telling me how much the use of the mobile food service has grown and it's
gone to new locations. So it's been a huge success story with the funding it's received
from this. Some people might wonder about the 10 % administration charge versus the 4 %
default but I think this demonstrates that actually investing that money in administering
funds like this properly shows that you can actually make the money go a lot further and
reach a lot more projects and be the success that it has been.
Excellent.
Cllr Jim Martin - 0:13:05
Any other comments or contributions?
Okay so we have a proposer in Councillor Holgate.
We have a seconder in myself.
All those in favour please indicate.
I think that's unanimous.
Thank you very much everyone.

5 New Finance and Asset Management System

Moving on to our next item.
Item 5, new finance and asset management system, pages 39 to 46.
And Councillor Prater, are you going to take us through this?
I'll give it a shot.
Cllr Tim Prater - 0:13:42
Thank you, Peter.
This is the diametric opposite of the last report.
It is not fun, it is not doing things directly for residents in the district and it is one
those moments whereby you look at it and go, do we really need to do this? And the answer
is we really need to do this. And the reason that this paper is before you now, as it has
been stared at by the finance teams and by CLT and across the piece, you have to balance
all decisions that you made of risk against reward and the risks of not replacing the
finance and asset management systems that we currently have now outweigh the rewards
of not replacing them. You might fit. I think what's also important to look at is that the
rewards of not replacing them are not as high as they look from the capital cost of £560 ,000.
So in paragraph 1 .7 on the report it gives the detailed breakdown of the capital cost
of the capital and revenue cost of the current systems versus the new systems. You'll see
there's a very significant revenue saving actually over the first three, four years
of the finance system, which makes back almost all of the capital expenditure.
Not quite.
The asset management system is more expensive than what we currently have, however, over
the next three years, one of the most critical things that this authority is going to be
doing is discussing its assets and where they are and what they are and how they're managed
and what work that they need and where the documents are and who's got the keys
and where those assets will be managed in future.
It's absolutely critical that we have that system in place and we have that data
and it is up to date because that's what we're going to be doing for the next three years
is being very clear on what those things are and making sure that whichever authority they
end up being transferred to, they're very clear about the ownership of those things
and the management of them etc as well.
And I think that's also a key point that we've got here, is that both of these packages are
reaching end of life.
And it's not a question of being able to use an increasing amount of sellotape to keep
them running for the next three years, because certainly in terms of the finance system they
have already used an increasing amount of sellotape, and we are getting to the end of
that.
I've had that discussion, I sat down with Alan, who's new, S151,
and said, are you confident that we need to do this?
That this is valid expenditure and that this is what we need to do?
And he absolutely is.
And if you have one of my asking questions directly,
a question in one of my direct me, I'm sure he'd be pleased to answer them.
So, this is an expense that we've flagged coming over the last couple of years.
it is one that we have looked at and seen if there was a way of avoiding or mitigating,
but without putting this authority at risk of ending up with end of life finance systems
and not knowing where our assets are, we don't believe that it's a cost that we can avoid
and we don't think it's a cost that we should avoid, because we need those systems to be
working. And whatever authority we end up being in three years time, whoever we end
up merger with, we are going to need to merge that finance data, that finance data and that
asset data into those new authorities as well. It is no use having a data system that we
can't get the data out of anymore, I mean into new systems or merger with new systems
or bring other systems into them. That's going to end up meaning that there's a significant
problem for our essence. So I apologise for the fact that it's not the exciting use.
I apologise for the fact that today is not new Asset Finance System Day. But it is something
that I strongly recommend that we do need to do as an authority. It's also something
that if we don't do it the finance team will sellotape me to the wall on my way out. So
please spare me that particular plate.
So the recommendations are in front of you,
one to five. They include the approval
of the capital budget which is there.
As I said, paragraph five and recommends
notes, recommends five points here
at paragraph 1 .7 as well,
which shows you the revenue savings
which are made against that capital budget.
Clearly if the.
procurement process is still in play, it's not complete yet, so I can't give you the
answer as to who is doing this and what. As I understand it, there were two people still
in the procurement process for this, which is lower, I think, than a big management,
certainly a third person one, where a third party was involved in that process. And I
think that's A, important to note that there is not a queue of people looking for this
money into this work. If we were offering a ridiculous amount of money for this system
and this work, there would be a queue out of the door trying to get it. It is very much,
it has been carefully specified as a project, it has been carefully worked through into
what we need to do. It's got a very tight timetable, delivering it for April 2026, although
it doesn't sound tight from here, it genuinely is for the transfer of those. So that's why
we also are looking at making this decision now because work is going to be difficult
to achieve that timetable. I'm reassured that it is still possible. Jonathan keeps looking
at me as if to say yeah I'm sure that's possible. So, and it was one of our huge advantages
of our new section 151 office is that he has done this before, migrating finance systems
from A to B. So he gets to get his big book of how I did this last time out and to apply
it the next time. So the recommendations that are clear in front of you. It is budgets which
you will have seen through the budget process and capital budgets which were set aside through
the capital process so we're not changing any budgets that were previously set aside
but we are giving the go -ahead that we need to do them because we've been back through
and even given the local government reorganisation where we are,
we just need to do this.
So I move the proposals and recommendations which are on the report
and I hope we have your support.
Thank you very much.
Councillor Fuller, are you indicating?
Cllr Jim Martin - 0:20:36
I was just going to second.
Cllr Gary Fuller - 0:20:41
Cllr Jim Martin - 0:20:41
Any... Oh, Councillor Speakman?
Sorry, are we open for questions?
Sorry, I should have.
Cllr Jeremy Speakman - 0:20:49
Yes, we are for questions and contributions.
I just wanted to clarify. I absolutely welcome it.
I think it's extremely money very well spent.
We are facing, as I'm sure we're aware,
some very challenging times just around the corner
and to have a robust finance and asset, particularly assets,
because I have an interest in that,
and being able to manage that effectively as we go forward
I think is going to be very worthwhile.
I've just got some questions originally about the tender process.
I mean, on 1 .9, you're saying the intended consideration is ongoing,
but it's due to completing the length of April.
So, presumably, that is now completed.
Would that be great?
John.
Thank you, Councillor Speaker.
So, the process did complete to an extent.
We had some clarification questions,
which we then needed to go back to certain suppliers over.
So, that was the original due date for completion of the evaluation process.
the evaluation criteria set out in Powerpuff 2 .4 of the report,
and those were the criteria that were being applied,
but there were some clarification items that we had,
which has only just been resolved in the last few days.
Fine. Okay, well, my follow -up on that is,
looking at 2 .1, around the procurement process,
you had Lot 1, finance system only,
Lot 2, asset management system only,
and Lot 3, both.
I'm assuming you wanted both covered
as it's a financial and asset management system.
It's headed in the report.
Sorry, so I think you've had one bid for finance
and one bid for both.
So in terms of, well, shall we say,
it rather narrows our choices, doesn't it?
I mean, I think choice might be perhaps not
the opportune word on that one.
I mean, I don't know whether you'd comment on that.
My only concern about that is without kind of
going down too far down that road,
We're spending an awful lot of money,
and our choices have narrowed.
That's my, if you've got any comments or thoughts about that.
None other than I can say that obviously we went out to a,
we've been out to market.
We've set out our requirements, and that was part of the process
was us setting out these requirements that we have.
In terms of responses to that, we received,
as you'll be aware from the report, one for both systems,
and one for one only, which was the finance system.
If it's the case that on the end of the evaluation we did
choose the tenderer who offered only
four, not one for the finance system, the re -procurement would go out for
the asset management system separately, sort of splitting it off from the finance
procurement, so that's also subject to this.
Yes.
I just don't feel it's an entirely desirable position to be in,
but maybe that's a personal situation.
Thank you very much.
Cllr Jim Martin - 0:23:48
The key thing here was the invitation.
The invitation was open.
So if tenderers wanted to submit, they could.
What the market has told us is, as Tim has outlined,
And because obviously we are intending to pay a very competitive price, there aren't
people queuing around the block to do it.
If we were a little more generous, shall we say, then there would be a few more people
interested in working for us.
But what this reflects is in effect the competitiveness of what we want rather than the competitiveness
of the market responding to it.
Cllr Jeremy Speakman - 0:24:36
Can I just come...
Cllr Jeremy Speakman - 0:24:40
Sorry, my concern is we might be led by what is available rather than what is absolutely
fit for purpose.
Cllr Jim Martin - 0:24:47
Yeah, and I think that's a key consideration.
You're absolutely correct.
But the key again in this is the invitation.
So long as they can fulfil the requirements of our scope of work or whatever, then we
should be on safe ground.
It's just a fact of life.
Depending on the economic cycle, etc, etc, you won't necessarily get people queuing up
to work for you, particularly at the price that we're prepared to pay.
I've got Councillor Blakemore next.
Thank you.
Cllr Polly Blakemore - 0:25:31
I just had a question about the transition process from the systems we're running at
the moment to the new systems.
It does sound like they're on quite a tight timetable, especially if the procurement process
goes on a bit longer.
Will the two run in tandem for a while, the old and the new, and what's the impact on
staff going to be of that process?
And that's the other part of that, is if we miss next April,
presumably it then gets delayed to the following April,
and how that works with LGR and so on.
Jonathan, in we go. A number of questions.
I'll try to deal with all.
Cllr Jim Martin - 0:26:08
Jonathan Smith - 0:26:09
Please forgive me if I miss anything, just come back to me, though.
Thank you, Councillor Blakemore.
There's two parts, actually.
I'll just also address some of the previous discussion
regarding the procurement exercise.
So part of the procurement process that we went through
was we're effectively using G Cloud,
which is through the Crown Commercial Services.
That's almost like a catalog
where we've specified our requirements
and then there's a catalog of suppliers
who are on the Crown Commercial Services framework,
G Cloud 14, and basically people who are on that
are able to then respond to our requirements.
And those are the ones we would consider.
If it's the case that we went with a supplier who only
offered, for example, for the finance system,
we would be able to go into a full market tender,
sort of a full open tender.
Because obviously, not every supplier
will be on the G Cloud framework.
So it slightly restricts the market.
But obviously, the design of the G Cloud framework
was to make it easier for public sector organizations
to procure, particularly cloud systems.
So that hopefully then deals with that particular point.
Regarding LGR and the impact and the sort of staffing resources,
so there is budget built in into this.
It's set out at paragraph 1 .7.
As part of this, we've got in the table for the capital budget,
we have an allowance for staffing resources,
which is to support obviously the fact that officers will be drawn in in terms of completing this upgrade in
the tight timeframe. However, we have got currently external consultants who are supporting us with this and they do believe it's
achievable. They've obviously delivered this for other
other organizations, other public sector organizations,
and so they think it's achievable.
And as I said, we have effectively a backfill
amount or budgeted for to allow for
additional support to ensure that we
obviously do meet the April 2026 timeline.
For ease, it is always best to.
It procured the system and go live on the
1st of April in line with the financial year.
It creates challenges certainly for the
audit if it doesn't if it doesn't sort
of happen on the phone based on the
financial year cut off point or the 1st
for example, because then you might then need an audit done on both systems, which is why
it is preferable to go ahead that way.
And if there was a delay and if we had to then push back by a further year, we would
obviously evaluate whether that's the right thing to do and the right date.
Because it can be, we can have discussions with our external auditors about if we do
shift the timelines, but that would be the proposal, we'd be to push it back.
In terms of LGR, of course, we know that we're not in the accelerated program at the moment,
and so obviously we would expect that for a number of years we will still need a finance
system support up to the data that we are working with within the organization.
I hope that addresses all of the questions.
Alan, were you indicating that you wanted to come in on that?
Cllr Jim Martin - 0:29:39
Thank you, Chair.
Folkestone & Hythe Officer - 0:29:41
So I think the first thing I'd like to say is actually the approach that folks in the
High have taken towards this whole process has been really impressive.
The cross -organisational work that's been done in terms of the role of stakeholders
really understanding the requirements of our system requirements for the organisation has
really put this Council in a really good position to undertake this piece of procurement.
I think in terms of the actual procurement process itself, you're right in terms of there's
a limitation in terms of the number of people that come forward.
However, all of the systems that have come forward have been heavily scrutinized, have
been scored and that procurement process has been swept by an external advisor.
If they weren't fit for purpose, we would not procure that particular assistance.
So I think that's quite key.
and in terms of the organisation and how it's been supported
I think Jonathan's answered that quite well in terms of the
timescales that we have, yes they're challenging but again the strategy is in place in order to deliver that
but there will be challenges we will obviously address those as we come across them
but I think it's very important to understand that this being a cloud based solution
we will change our processes to meet it
rather than it change to meet our processes and that will enable us to streamline our processes
quite a lot and hopefully quite a lot of benefit out of that as well.
But again it should facilitate a quicker process in terms of getting
that implementation in place. Thank you.
Thank you very much. I've got Councillor Holgate next.
Cllr Jim Martin - 0:31:10
Cllr Rich Holgate - 0:31:15
I have some experience of violence system migration sadly.
And Jonathan the consultant said it was deliverable,
this gives me very nervous.
Call me a cynic.
Tim, you've gone to great pains to
this is necessary and reinforce that point.
I'm sympathetic to that but I
suppose I cannot just get away from the fact that there's an enormous amount of money
when
there's a twelve month to deliver it and if we don't land that by the first of April
2026
we then wait in the time of the year.
and end of life systems, we're an end of life council, forgive the turn of phrase.
And again, I suppose my question is, I'm a little bit cynical, I get it, I'm a bit cynical, I suppose.
If we are in a position in the year where we have to slide the project to further year,
how much money have we committed in the next 12 months, and do we have a get out point in the next 12 months time,
where we're not, or are we 560k all in, committed and done. How does that work?
Cllr Jim Martin - 0:32:17
Anyone like to get their crystal ball out and venture an answer to that one?
Thank you Councillor Holgate.
Jonathan Smith - 0:32:24
In essence, once we contract or want to engage a supplier, we obviously would be in contract.
And as I've mentioned before, it's not an insurmountable obstacle in terms of the date.
I mean, as I said, it would be up for consideration
to not roll out on the 1st of April,
but of course that bridge will be crossed with considerations at the relevant time.
So it is possible, it would just require additional work
with our external auditors as to whether it would be feasible
to actually just go live mid -year,
which is a possibility, but obviously the preference is always to roll out
on the 1st of April.
Councillor Pritchard.
Cllr Jim Martin - 0:33:10
Thank you.
Cllr Tim Prater - 0:33:15
Just to reiterate, the number of people who came forward is what the state of the market
is at the moment and that, as Alan has absolutely said, the tender will be evaluated and only
if the people meet what we have asked for will they be awarded the tender and we will
proceed with that.
And yeah, of course you'll like to be skeptical of any external consultant
telling you can do stuff or can't do stuff, but they are there to assist us in
the process of making this happen and make this happen by a date.
And frankly they're being paid to do that as well.
So it is their job to help us make sure that that works and that we have the right
system in place that we land in.
But just to come back to the reason why we're doing this is that we went through
the risk register I think at our last meeting and one of our highest risks is on cybercrime
and the threats to the organisation that way. If we do not replace this finance system you
get a new red risk coming in very soon because if the finance system is not replaced it is
moving towards end of life, it is moving towards unsupported, it is a non -cloud based system
and if it dies we're in a lot of trouble, not just in terms of internal next -door audit,
but in the colour of Jonathan's hair, in how far his laptop lands,
but in actual risk to the organisation and how we can operate successfully.
So I'm asking for your support for this, not only because I think it has been gone through for Leah,
that we strongly believe is the thing that we need to do.
And I'd far prefer to be turning around to you now and saying,
we'd best not spend £560 ,000 on this.
There's the real something or something else.
And if I could, I would, but I can't, because we need to do it.
So please don't make Jonathan re -invite the risk register
with a new and exciting risk on it.
We'd very much like to know this.
And if we can, I'm really hopeful
that if we agree this today, that the timeline will allow us
to go live on the 1st of April 26.
and that will be everything we do for the five -hour table for Krista to do it.
Okay, thank you very much.
Cllr Jim Martin - 0:35:31
Does anyone else want to make a contribution?
No?
So we have Councillor Prater who has proposed, Councillor Fuller who has seconded.
All those in favour, please indicate.
Thank you very much everyone.

6 Health and Safety Policy 2025

Our next item is Health and Safety Policy 2025.
We will be led through this by Councillor Speedman.
Thank you, Chair.
Cllr Jeremy Speakman - 0:36:02
It's my pleasure to introduce this report, which I've obviously had an involvement in
terms of my portfolio, and I can attest to the fact that it's been both an excellent
piece of work and a lot of hard work has gone into it.
Essentially, elected members, just by way of introduction, elected members of the council
have a statutory duty to ensure that the council's responsibilities for health and safety are
fully discharged, including the legal requirement to review and publish its health and safety
policy.
This report presents a revised and updated health and safety policy as in Appendix 1,
which was considered and approved by the Audit and Governance Committee on 19 March, and
and is now for consideration and approval by cabinet.
It sets out how the Council achieves compliance with health and safety legislation as both
an employer and provider of services and facilities to the public.
This policy was last reviewed in December 2022 and the main substantive changes as highlighted
in section 2 .2 of the report give clearer definition to certain key roles, functions
and responsibilities as they relate to the effective management of health and safety
across the Council.
The review of this policy forms part of the recommendations from a health and safety audit
conducted by the East Kent Audit Partnership in 2024.
A follow -up to this audit is expected after April and will be reported to the Audit and
Governance Committee in July.
So that cabinet is fully aware of the council's responsibilities
for ensuring appropriate arrangements are in place
for managing health and safety across the council,
including its legal requirement to review and publish
its health and safety policy.
The recommendations to members are, firstly, to receive a net report,
and secondly, that cabinet reads and understands
its responsibilities for health and safety,
approves the changes made to the attached policy
for publishing on the council's website.
I'd like to move the report.
Thank you very much Councillor Speakman.
I'm very very happy to second the report.
I think it's an excellent piece of work.
Congratulations to the team and particular Jonathan.
I think it's a forward looking piece of work.
Cllr Jim Martin - 0:38:31
Often these documents tend to be very sort of staid and formulaic and you know they're
But there's a lot of anticipation in that report.
I found it really refreshing.
So very, very happy to open up for discussion or questions.
Councillor Praiser.
Cllr Jim Martin - 0:38:52
I'm going to give Jeremy back what he's given the rest of our panel.
Cllr Tim Prater - 0:38:57
Firstly to say that I think the review of this policy is really good.
And what I found really refreshing about it is that as far as I can see the revised policy
is shorter than the original, which is an unusual direction of travel and a really welcome
one, so really well done on that.
It is a clearer and more focused document and that tends not to happen when you review
a document and update it.
So that's a really good improvement.
I absolutely understand the recommendations and why we're discussing this is because it's
about making sure that both the executive and councillors
and staff, et cetera, have really good visibility
about health and safety requirements and policies.
And one thing that I particularly
on 2 .1 that the audit picked up that the staff may
be unaware of roles and responsibilities, et cetera,
within that, and this is a key part of embedding that.
Another key part of embedding that
is that if you go to the council's website
and you click the Search button top right
and you type in health and safety,
the policy which is currently in place
should come up, not the 2014 version from Sheppway District Council, which is currently
what comes up. Also, if you go to the policies page of the Council's page, it should have
the health and safety policy linked to from the policy page. It is currently not on the
policy page of the Council. It doesn't come up under search and it's not on the policies
index. We're not doing our job about telling people about this thing, right? I accept that
That's the 2022 version.
As of now, we will have a 2025 version,
which we can put live, and we can make sure
that that fixes those things tomorrow.
But that's gotta be a key part of it.
If you can't find it, unless you,
publishing it on the internet,
and publishing it on our website,
is not a question of making it appendix to the cabinet.
It's published on our website now.
It's gonna be in the minutes of this paper.
It's in the agenda, and nobody's looking for it there.
If you type in health and safety at the top of that website,
it should give the most up -to -date policy
and if it invents that.
So I really hope that we can follow through
in terms of not just making sure that we agree this debate,
we've all read it and I think that's improved our understanding
of the organisation's health and safety priorities.
I'm sure it will then be embedded in training
of the new staff and things like that as well.
But one key part of that needs to be that our employees,
ourselves, our councillors need to be able to find it and we just need to make sure that
we get cuter in terms of making sure that it's findable in those ways as well, which
is a simple thing that we can do tomorrow and I hope we do.
Cllr Jim Martin - 0:41:41
Thank you very much, Councillor Proater.
Just on that point, I'll come back to you, Councillor Fuller.
Could we just have a comment on that, please, John?
Absolutely, thank you.
Thank you, Councillor Proater.
Mr Jonathan Hicks - 0:41:52
So, completely acknowledge that and we'll address that immediately.
I think as part of the review of the health and safety work that the Audit and Governance
Committee do, we have committed to producing an annual report.
I think as part of that, we should highlight the fact that it is published and accessible
and that that has been done and it's fine.
So I think promotion of this is a key part.
There's a lot this year that we've had to change and address,
so apologies for the oversight, but we will rectify it. Thank you.
Thank you. Councillor Fogg?
Cllr Jim Martin - 0:42:29
Just briefly, as I've suggested it before,
Cllr Gary Fuller - 0:42:34
I'll suggest it again to add a suggestion
that maybe we should add an easy -read version of the policy.
This isn't quite public -facing in the same way,
but I still think it's useful for members of the public
to be able to understand how we work, as it were.
Okay, maybe we can take it on board and see if it's possible.
Cllr Jim Martin - 0:42:52
Yeah, terrific.
Okay.
So any further questions or queries on this?
It's an excellent piece of work.
Councillor Speakman has proposed.
I've been very happy to second.
All those in favour, please indicate.
Thank you very much.
That's unanimous, which is great.

7 Folkestone Neighbourhood plan

Coming on to our final item, the Folkestone neighbourhood plan.
So Folkestone Town Council has submitted a neighbourhood area application which is the
first stage in producing a neighbourhood development plan.
As the proposed area is the same as the parish boundary, the district council must now designate
it.
At this stage, David, if you don't mind, I'd be very happy to hand over to you
for some more detail on this.
Mr David Whittingdon - 0:43:48
Okay, thank you, Councillor.
Essentially, there are three tests when someone submits a neighbourhood area
and the parish council has met that.
They've included the relevant information,
there isn't a current neighbourhood area being considered in the area.
So the legislation is quite strict,
but you basically have to designate it now.
So it's a formality, I'm afraid.
Cllr Jim Martin - 0:44:17
We've gone through some different iterations of wording around this,
which have been flying around to get their description correct.
But I think that bridge has been crossed.
Mr Hazel, you sent me some today I think?
Mr David Whittingdon - 0:44:37
I'm not sure. I think the wording you've received,
you've just run out, is what Hazel sent you.
Yes, for sure, but I think that was the final iteration of it.
Cllr Jim Martin - 0:44:53
Just to say, this is a long journey they're sitting out on.
So this is kind of the first step
in what is often an arduous journey, shall we say.
It is complicated and it can be expensive.
So we'll just have to see how they go on it.
But this is the first step.
So congratulations to them.
Particularly as we move towards unitarization,
I think it's a very, very healthy step
for Folkestone Town Council to do this.
and I will be encouraging other town councils to try and do something similar.
But yes, so I'm very, very happy to move the report if someone would care to second.
Councillor Praiser.
Happy to second.
Cllr Tim Prater - 0:45:49
I vaguely declare an interest as a Faxham town councillor.
Very good. Any... Councilor Hulgate?
Cllr Jim Martin - 0:45:55
Cllr Rich Holgate - 0:45:58
Just, yeah, to support the intent, hopefully the intent to...
that other town councils could do us in the journey and protect as much localism as possible
in the upcoming changes would be... I'd wholeheartedly support.
Two quick questions, the one around the levelling up bit,
but I don't know where the timeline and how... whether it affects some of the function of our future work,
but maybe it doesn't because of how long these things take.
It cancels the place of knowledge, so maybe that's answered.
And just on the referendum, in terms of...
It talks about a referendum taking place
only if the parish boundary is different,
but then there isn't...
Will a referendum take place or not?
I may have misunderstood from the report.
If we could go for clarity.
David.
Cllr Jim Martin - 0:46:41
Mr David Whittingdon - 0:46:42
OK, I think as part of the...
As the process continues, they submit the plan to ourselves
to then go out for further consultation
and then submit it for examination.
The examiner will consider whether the boundary is correct
and whether or not to extend that.
If they come through with us,
then that will be put forward as part of the referendum.
Cllr Jim Martin - 0:47:09
Gilligan, Councillor Blangmore.
Just a couple of quick questions.
Cllr Polly Blakemore - 0:47:14
First, I'm interested to know if this decision goes anywhere near the planning committee.
And secondly, well, it kind of echoes my earlier question on the assets and finance system.
With LGR on the horizon, is this going to have to be ratified by the new unitary at
some stage?
Because it sounds like they're not going to be through the process before that happens,
because it's quite a long -winded process.
It's just understanding the hoops they're going to have to jump through.
Thank you.
OK.
Mr David Whittingdon - 0:47:46
With regard to the unitary, whatever unitary that is, they will probably need to go for
them to ratify it at the end of the stage.
They would take over the, I assume, the whole process of running the referendum and then
bring it into force.
But essentially, I'd imagine that we still held within the focus of the area, we're still
running as an authority for the larger area.
And sorry, what was the first question?
It was if the planning committee has any involvement.
Right.
The final document would become part of the development plan.
So that would be in line with our own core strategy
review and the place in policy for the plan.
So it is part of the development plan.
So any planning applications which come through
would have to have the input, the comportee
with the local plan, unless there is any issues which
override that.
I can't be with the actual planning term.
But yeah, it'd be part of the planning committee.
But as part of the process, it's like a development,
developing a plan whereby it will gain weight as it goes through the process.
So at the moment it will have very little weight and would not be of an impact to any
applications at the moment. But as it moves through the process, it's
submitted to ourselves then it'll be material consideration.
So it will move through and once it's adopted it will carry the same weight
as the rest of the design plan documents.
Cllr Jim Martin - 0:49:42
Councillor Fuller, you indicating?
Yeah, I was, sorry.
Cllr Gary Fuller - 0:49:48
I very helpfully lost the bit of the report that reminded me about that.
Just one thing, there's a list somewhere in the report
of the extant planning documents, isn't there?
Just one thing I noticed is it didn't mention the Sandgate design statement.
which is a common refrain of Sangate Parish Council
when they have their planning committee.
So I just wondered why that wasn't mentioned in that list.
Mr David Whittingdon - 0:50:18
OK, the Sangate design statement was adopted as a supplementary planning document.
That doesn't fall within the umbrella of development plan documents.
They don't have the same weight as the adopted development plan.
Cllr Jim Martin - 0:50:36
Just incidentally, I had a very interesting conversation with CALC yesterday.
This is one of the areas that they see as Tannen Parish Council development.
If unitaries need area authorities, or not authorities, but area committees to look at
these sort of granular aspects of planning applications, then they want to position themselves
to do that.
So you know, we'll have to see where it all goes.
So sorry, I've lost my track now.
Did I propose that?
I proposed it.
Councillor Prits has seconded.
Oh, sorry, Councillor Follo.
Sorry, I've just, I've actually found the section now and it was
Cllr Gary Fuller - 0:51:26
actually just the bit
I was referring to was 1 .116, which is the development plan for the district currently
consists of.
That's the bit where I was asking about.
So I wasn't necessarily asking why it isn't on the same level, but why it's not mentioned
as part of that.
It's not part of the development plan.
Mr David Whittingdon - 0:51:45
It's a secondary document which is a material consideration when you're considering planning
policies.
Cllr Jim Martin - 0:51:56
So I've proposed, Councillor Prater has seconded.
All those in favour, please indicate.
Thank you very much.
Again, unanimous.
And I think that's a conclusion of our business this evening.
Thank you very much for attending.