Alison Broom, Chief Executive, introduced Dr Tony Jones, Ms Gail
Arnold and Ms Alison Burchell to the Committee. Mrs Broom stated that a workshop had taken place
on 25 February 2019. At the workshop,
Members had raised concerns about the infrastructure and staffing
for General Practitioner (GP) provision. Additionally, the issue of historical Section 106
(S106) agreements had been debated.
This issue had been considered in further detail with the Chairman
of the Strategic Planning, Sustainability and Transportation (SPST)
response to questions from the Committee, Officers stated
·Changes to GP Practice staffing had been implemented
in line with the NHS 10 Year Plan. This
was expected to increase the capacity available for managing
·The NHS West Kent Clinical Commissioning Group (CCG)
had taken positive steps to implement the high impact
recommendations in the NHS England Time to Care Scheme. These changes were expected to have a positive
impact on staffing capacity.
·CCGs monitored risks to continuity of service, such
as closures of GP Practices.
Conversations between the CCG and GP Practices were undertaken to
promote resilience and sustainability.
·The potential links between areas of deprivation and
issues with recruitment and retention at GP Practices had not been
researched at a local level.
·The development of new houses resulted in an
increased need for GP Practices. This
meant that available business space needed to be maximised, while
appropriate recruitment also needed to be undertaken.
·It was important to promote Maidstone as an
attractive place to live and work. This
encouraged people to move to the area and deliver services required
·Maidstone Borough Council worked closely with other
organisations to ensure that projects to expand GP Practices and
deliver infrastructure were completed in a collaborative and
·Maidstone Borough Council had worked with the West
Kent CCG to support the allocation and use of S106
monies. There were, however, challenges
when spending this funding. Firstly,
the money was only to be spent on improving the capacity of health
facilities in order to meet the needs of a population. Secondly, S106 funding was made available to the
CCG at agreed milestones. Projects
could therefore not be commenced until the S106 monies had been
released to the CCG. Finally, S106
funding was considered to be a capital
contribution. This meant that there
were restrictions on how the money could be spent and often
required match-funding from GPs or other property
·In some instances, S106 money was pooled to enable
large scale extensions.
·The local media could share information and raise
awareness about how to appropriately use services. This could include information regarding social
prescribing, to ensure that professionals and residents had a
common understanding of this and the potential it had to improve
Broom stated that the queries and suggestions were to be collated
and submitted to the Communities, Housing and Environment Committee
in 2019/20 to ensure that dialogue on key issues
RESOLVED:That the report be noted.
Note: Councillor Purle arrived at 6.45
p.m. during consideration of this item.