Your Councillors

DEMOCRACY COMMITTEE

10 January 2018

 

REVIEW OF OUTSIDE BODIES - UPDATE

 

Final Decision-Maker

Council

Lead Head of Service/Lead Director

Angela Woodhouse – Head of Policy, Communications and Governance

Lead Officer and Report Author

Caroline Matthews – Democratic Services Officer

Classification

Public

 

 

Wards affected

All

 

Executive Summary

 

The report provides more information on the outside bodies that the Committee would like to reconsider.

 

 

This report makes the following recommendations to this Committee:

1.   That the Committee makes a recommendation to Council on whether to retain the following Outside Bodies:-

Collis Millennium Green Trust
Medway Valley Line Steering Group
Kent Community Rail Partnership
Quality Bus Partnership

 

 

 

Timetable

Meeting

Date

Democracy Committee

10 January 2018

Council

28 February 2018



Review of Outside Bodies - Update

 

 

 

1.      INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND

 

1.1    The Committee considered a number of Outside Bodies at its meeting on
15 November 2017 and during the discussion requested that a further report be brought back to the next meeting to reconsider the following Outside Bodies:

Collis Millennium Green Trust
Medway Valley Line Steering Group
Kent Community Rail Partnership
Quality Bus Partnership


1.2    Further information has been provided for those Outside Bodies mentioned
         and Members are asked to reconsider them based on the further details.

         Collis Millennium Green Trust – A Trust Deed was established in 1999         
         to form a new charity to hold land as a Millennium Green.

         The Council were allocated one Trustee at the time, which was for a four      
         year term.  It was considered that due to the location of the Green, this  
         should be a High Street Ward Member.  However, in recent years there
         has not been a Council representative, although Councillor Mrs Joy
         (a High Street Ward Member) is an attendee but as a representative of the
         Parochial Church Council of the Parish of All Saints with St Philips,
         Maidstone.

         Should Members wish to continue to have representation on this Trust,
         they may wish to consider that the Heritage, Culture and Leisure
         Committee appoint a Trustee from the High Street Ward or a  
         neighbouring ward.

         Maidstone Quality Bus Partnership
– This is a Voluntary Partnership
         Agreement between Kent County Council, Maidstone Borough Council and
         Arriva Southern Counties.

         It was set up in 2012 for the three parties to share common objectives:-
        

·         To create a public transport network acknowledged by local residents, visitors and the business community as an increasingly attractive alternative to private car use.

·         To seek increased use of local bus services to assist in achieving a sustainable and self-sufficient transport system, capable of meeting the needs of the 21st century, enriching the quality of life in the Maidstone Borough, attracting investment, and enhancing work and leisure opportunities.

The meetings are attended by Council Officers and two Members.

Kent Community Railway Partnership
– This Partnership was set up to promote local rail lines in rural Kent and Medway for the social, economic and environmental benefit of residents and visitors and to support the social well-being of the communities served by those rail lines.

The meetings are attended by two Members.

Medway Valley Line Steering Group – The Steering Group has a particular role in assisting with priority action and funding, sharing relevant strategic information, advising on and approving the Rail Partnership Action Plan and informing other rural partnerships at, or below, county level.

The Members of the Group will act as professional, technical and community support and act as contacts for the Community Rail Partnership.

The meetings are attended by one Member.

 

 

 

2.       AVAILABLE OPTIONS

 

2.1      The Committee could decide to retain all of the Outside Bodies, retain some of the Outside Bodies or not retain any of the listed Outside Bodies. 


 

3         PREFERRED OPTION AND REASONS FOR RECOMMENDATIONS


3.1   The Committee is asked to reconsider the Outside Bodies listed and the
        additional information requested and make a decision to either retain them
        or delete them.
       

 

 

4         RISK

4.1    The Committee will need to consider risk as part of their option appraisal.  There will be no effect on the Council’s risk management framework whether the Committee chooses to retain or remove any of these Outside Bodies.

 

5         CONSULTATION RESULTS AND PREVIOUS COMMITTEE FEEDBACK

 

5.1     The Outside Bodies have been reviewed by the Outside Bodies Working Group and considered at the meetings of the Committee in September and November 2017.

6         NEXT STEPS: COMMUNICATION AND IMPLEMENTATION OF THE DECISION

 

6.1     Once the Committee have made a decision on the four Outside Bodies, a recommendation on the final list of Outside Bodies will be made to Council at its meeting on 28th February 2018.

6.2     Once a decision has been made by Council, the Outside Bodies can be allocated and dealt with accordingly.

 

 

 

7         CROSS-CUTTING ISSUES AND IMPLICATIONS

 

 

Issue

Implications

Sign-off

Impact on Corporate Priorities

The link to corporate priorities should be considered as part of the review of nominations.
 

Head of Policy, Communications and Governance

Risk Management

Covered in Section 4.

Head of Policy, Communications and Governance

Financial

There are no financial implications arising out of this report.

Head of Policy, Communications and Governance

Staffing

There are no staffing implications arising out of this report.

Head of Policy, Communications and Governance

Legal

A Councillor who is appointed to an Outside Body acts as a representative of the Council.  However, dependent upon the nature of the arrangement, it is likely that their main responsibility would be to the organisation to which they have been appointed.

[Legal Team]

Privacy and Data Protection

 

There are no privacy or data protection implications to this decision.

Head of Policy, Communications and Governance

Equalities

The recommendation does not propose a change in service therefore it does not require an equalities impact assessment.

Policy & Information Manager

Crime and Disorder

Not applicable.

Head of Policy, Communications and Governance

Procurement

Not applicable.

Head of Policy, Communications and Governance

 

8         REPORT APPENDICES

 

The following documents are to be published with this report and form part of the report:

·         Appendix A: Outside Bodies Additional Information

 

 

9         BACKGROUND PAPERS

 

None