From Cllr Clive Hart - TDC Leader
As the TDC Leader I need to know that the council is delivering the best value for residents that it can and a pay structure review is a part of council business which is undertaken by many authorities and is correctly undertaken by the Chief Executive of the council, as part of her delegated authority.
I am confident that the Chief Executive will carry out this review in a professional manner, but this is just the beginning of a 90 day consultation and it is not at all helpful for anyone outside of these negotiations to second guess just how the final scheme will appear.
In any event I am assured that the structure being consulted on does not propose any increase to the pay of the most senior staff within TDC, that it seeks to impact as few staff as possible and that everything possible will be done to protect those who are impacted.
We are obviously keeping a very close watching eye on negotiations but we are in the early stages of the consultation process which is quite rightly between the Chief Executive, the Unions and the staff.
Our Labour administration has an excellent relationship with our staff and we support them in any way we can to ensure that services are delivered in a way which reflects our vision and priorities.
Published by Thanet Labour Group Press Office, 44 Northdown Road, Margate, Kent, CT9 2RW.
Saturday 29 September 2012
Thursday 20 September 2012
Leader's Report to Council - 20th September
From Cllr Clive Hart - TDC Leader.
Fellow councillors:
This evening I'd like to focus on priority 10 of our recently published corporate plan. 'Influencing the work of other agencies to ensure the best outcomes for Thanet'.
As well as our core purpose - providing services directly to local residents and businesses, the council also plays a key leadership role for our district.
We are committed to working in partnership with other agencies to ensure that local people in Thanet get the best possible outcomes.
We also take a strategic view of the issues facing local people and we need to be prepared to actively challenge and influence other service providers, encouraging them to develop their services in such a way that best meet the needs of people here in Thanet.
We will always ensure our influence is exerted based on the best information available and through genuine public consultation. We will also lobby on regional matters that have implications for the people of Thanet.
Through our community safety partnerships and daily work with the Police we are in constant dialogue with the authority providing our safety and security here in Thanet. Indeed, just as she does locally day in - day out, Cllr Johnston will no doubt make sure the new Police Commissioner for Kent is aware of the issues our residents are facing and I can think of no better person to bring to account whoever is elected to the role. As our Cabinet Member for Community Services, Cllr Johnston will be our representative on the new Crime Panel.
Cllr Johnston is also keeping a very close eye on our local NHS and recent developments with Thanet Leisure Force.
Cllr David Green is currently working closely with education providers on issues around the provision of future school places her in Thanet.
At the East Kent Regeneration Board I am currently working with our officers, KCC and our neighbouring district authorities to further Thanet's interests through the emerging East Kent Growth Plan.
We most certainly do not duck difficult or sensitive situations either:
As a council we are now seen as a progressive authority thanks to our decision on equal marriage and on one particular contentious issue we have taken a very clear stance and I cannot thank Cllrs Fenner and Poole enough for their tenacity in relation to live animal exports through the port of Ramsgate.
When the Live Animal Exports re-started in May 2011 at Ramsgate Port, we were in opposition at Thanet District Council and we expressed our repulsion of the trade by putting a motion to Council to seek all legal avenues in order to stop it.This motion was agreed unanimously.
When we became the ruling administration here at TDC we vowed we would continue the fight against the trade, using the legal framework and showing a zero tolerance of any infringement of the welfare of animals.
The rigorous action and determination of Cllrs Fenner and Poole meant that the lorries were inspected very thoroughly, as they should. It then became apparent that on several occasions the lorries or the animals were unfit for further travel.
This led to our decision to suspend the trade in live animal exports out of Ramsgate Port on the ground that it does not have adequate facilities to care for the animals and that there is no control post nearby to take them.
The suspension of this awful trade shows that we take our responsibility seriously and that we are not afraid of taking the necessary actions, using the legal framework to pursue our aims.
We stood for election on our Manifesto which stated that we would defend the rights of animals. We fought for this to happen when we were in Opposition and we are delivering now that we are the ruling administration.
However, I'm afraid I have to report to council one particular issue on which we have failed to gain any influence whatsoever, despite our hardest efforts and the support of KCC Leader Paul Carter and his KCC Cabinet Members Mike Hill and Alex King. Through the Kent Forum and the East Kent Joint Arrangements Committee Cllr Poole and I pleaded with the KCC Leadership to help us create a Locality Board for Thanet just as they have done in almost every other district in Kent and they appeared very happy to help.
Unfortunately, the fact is, intransigence on the part of local Conservative county councillors has thwarted all our very best joint efforts and consequently this council is being deprived of cooperation and influence it so dearly deserves on a whole raft of issues affecting our residents. I can only assume this is being done for petty political reasons but the consequence is a district already distanced geographically from Maidstone being distanced further in numerous other ways through the selfish actions of some very misguided individuals.
When negotiations began on a Locality Board for Thanet I was informed that it should be made up of an equal number of County and District councillors. I was also informed that the Chairman should be the District Leader (unpaid) and that a County Member (paid) would be Co or Vice Chair. I was entirely content with those requirements as it meant TDC would have proper representation.
Furthermore, in order to help reduce any 'fears' that County members might have regarding cooperation, we held a preliminary - shadow - meeting to discuss the future of youth services here in Thanet. All went well, good debate took place and conclusions were arrived at. Certainly not one heated or confrontational moment during the whole process.
However, despite this clear success, I was later informed that our local County members still appeared to dislike their own KCC suggested numbers on the board.
After many weeks I finally got a meeting arranged with the Co Chair where he outlined further the concerns over the numbers representing each authority. In a last-ditched attempt to save the negotiations I offered to reduce the number of District councillors on a prospective Locality Board to six - being our TDC Cabinet. That made it eight County Councillors and six District Councillors but even more importantly seven Labour and seven Conservative - perfect you would think.
NOT SO - rejected completely by a meeting of Thanet Conservative County Councillors in a letter I'm holding here that gives no reasons as to why.
I therefore sadly report to council that after several months of extremely good natured and very polite negotiations, despite our very best efforts and those of Paul Carter, Mike Hill and Alex King at KCC, thanks to the intransigence of several local individuals, this council will not to be involved in a Locality Board for Thanet.
The only apparent benefit for Thanet appears to be any allowance that is being paid to the Conservative Co Chair by KCC.
Fellow councillors:
This evening I'd like to focus on priority 10 of our recently published corporate plan. 'Influencing the work of other agencies to ensure the best outcomes for Thanet'.
As well as our core purpose - providing services directly to local residents and businesses, the council also plays a key leadership role for our district.
We are committed to working in partnership with other agencies to ensure that local people in Thanet get the best possible outcomes.
We also take a strategic view of the issues facing local people and we need to be prepared to actively challenge and influence other service providers, encouraging them to develop their services in such a way that best meet the needs of people here in Thanet.
We will always ensure our influence is exerted based on the best information available and through genuine public consultation. We will also lobby on regional matters that have implications for the people of Thanet.
Through our community safety partnerships and daily work with the Police we are in constant dialogue with the authority providing our safety and security here in Thanet. Indeed, just as she does locally day in - day out, Cllr Johnston will no doubt make sure the new Police Commissioner for Kent is aware of the issues our residents are facing and I can think of no better person to bring to account whoever is elected to the role. As our Cabinet Member for Community Services, Cllr Johnston will be our representative on the new Crime Panel.
Cllr Johnston is also keeping a very close eye on our local NHS and recent developments with Thanet Leisure Force.
Cllr David Green is currently working closely with education providers on issues around the provision of future school places her in Thanet.
At the East Kent Regeneration Board I am currently working with our officers, KCC and our neighbouring district authorities to further Thanet's interests through the emerging East Kent Growth Plan.
We most certainly do not duck difficult or sensitive situations either:
As a council we are now seen as a progressive authority thanks to our decision on equal marriage and on one particular contentious issue we have taken a very clear stance and I cannot thank Cllrs Fenner and Poole enough for their tenacity in relation to live animal exports through the port of Ramsgate.
When the Live Animal Exports re-started in May 2011 at Ramsgate Port, we were in opposition at Thanet District Council and we expressed our repulsion of the trade by putting a motion to Council to seek all legal avenues in order to stop it.This motion was agreed unanimously.
When we became the ruling administration here at TDC we vowed we would continue the fight against the trade, using the legal framework and showing a zero tolerance of any infringement of the welfare of animals.
The rigorous action and determination of Cllrs Fenner and Poole meant that the lorries were inspected very thoroughly, as they should. It then became apparent that on several occasions the lorries or the animals were unfit for further travel.
This led to our decision to suspend the trade in live animal exports out of Ramsgate Port on the ground that it does not have adequate facilities to care for the animals and that there is no control post nearby to take them.
The suspension of this awful trade shows that we take our responsibility seriously and that we are not afraid of taking the necessary actions, using the legal framework to pursue our aims.
We stood for election on our Manifesto which stated that we would defend the rights of animals. We fought for this to happen when we were in Opposition and we are delivering now that we are the ruling administration.
However, I'm afraid I have to report to council one particular issue on which we have failed to gain any influence whatsoever, despite our hardest efforts and the support of KCC Leader Paul Carter and his KCC Cabinet Members Mike Hill and Alex King. Through the Kent Forum and the East Kent Joint Arrangements Committee Cllr Poole and I pleaded with the KCC Leadership to help us create a Locality Board for Thanet just as they have done in almost every other district in Kent and they appeared very happy to help.
Unfortunately, the fact is, intransigence on the part of local Conservative county councillors has thwarted all our very best joint efforts and consequently this council is being deprived of cooperation and influence it so dearly deserves on a whole raft of issues affecting our residents. I can only assume this is being done for petty political reasons but the consequence is a district already distanced geographically from Maidstone being distanced further in numerous other ways through the selfish actions of some very misguided individuals.
When negotiations began on a Locality Board for Thanet I was informed that it should be made up of an equal number of County and District councillors. I was also informed that the Chairman should be the District Leader (unpaid) and that a County Member (paid) would be Co or Vice Chair. I was entirely content with those requirements as it meant TDC would have proper representation.
Furthermore, in order to help reduce any 'fears' that County members might have regarding cooperation, we held a preliminary - shadow - meeting to discuss the future of youth services here in Thanet. All went well, good debate took place and conclusions were arrived at. Certainly not one heated or confrontational moment during the whole process.
However, despite this clear success, I was later informed that our local County members still appeared to dislike their own KCC suggested numbers on the board.
After many weeks I finally got a meeting arranged with the Co Chair where he outlined further the concerns over the numbers representing each authority. In a last-ditched attempt to save the negotiations I offered to reduce the number of District councillors on a prospective Locality Board to six - being our TDC Cabinet. That made it eight County Councillors and six District Councillors but even more importantly seven Labour and seven Conservative - perfect you would think.
NOT SO - rejected completely by a meeting of Thanet Conservative County Councillors in a letter I'm holding here that gives no reasons as to why.
I therefore sadly report to council that after several months of extremely good natured and very polite negotiations, despite our very best efforts and those of Paul Carter, Mike Hill and Alex King at KCC, thanks to the intransigence of several local individuals, this council will not to be involved in a Locality Board for Thanet.
The only apparent benefit for Thanet appears to be any allowance that is being paid to the Conservative Co Chair by KCC.
Friday 14 September 2012
Thanet Labour delivers on animal rights
From Cllr Michelle Fenner
When the Live Animal Exports re-started in May 2011 at Ramsgate Port, we were in opposition at Thanet District Council and we expressed our repulsion of the trade by putting a motion to Council to seek all legal avenues in order to stop it.This motion was agreed unanimously. This was our first victory.
When Labour became the ruling administration of TDC we vowed we would continue the fight against the trade, using the legal framework and showing a zero tolerance of any infringement of the welfare of animals.
Our rigorous action and determination meant that the lorries were inspected very thoroughly, as they should. It then became apparent that on several occasions the lorries or the animals were unfit for further travel.
This led to our decision as TDC Cabinet to suspend the trade in live animal exports out of Ramsgate Port on the ground that it does not have adequate facilities to care for the animals and that there is no control post nearby to take them.
The UK Government, as the Competent Authority under the EU Regulation 2005/1, is responsible for setting up such a control post but, so far, they have not complied with this requirement, in spite of a promise they made in July 2011.
The suspension of this awful trade by the Labour administration of TDC shows that we take our responsibility seriously and that we are not afraid of taking the necessary actions, using the legal framework to pursue our aims.
We stood for election on our Manifesto which stated that we would defend the rights of animals. We fought for this to happen when we were in Opposition and we are delivering now that we are the ruling administration.
When the Live Animal Exports re-started in May 2011 at Ramsgate Port, we were in opposition at Thanet District Council and we expressed our repulsion of the trade by putting a motion to Council to seek all legal avenues in order to stop it.This motion was agreed unanimously. This was our first victory.
When Labour became the ruling administration of TDC we vowed we would continue the fight against the trade, using the legal framework and showing a zero tolerance of any infringement of the welfare of animals.
Our rigorous action and determination meant that the lorries were inspected very thoroughly, as they should. It then became apparent that on several occasions the lorries or the animals were unfit for further travel.
This led to our decision as TDC Cabinet to suspend the trade in live animal exports out of Ramsgate Port on the ground that it does not have adequate facilities to care for the animals and that there is no control post nearby to take them.
The UK Government, as the Competent Authority under the EU Regulation 2005/1, is responsible for setting up such a control post but, so far, they have not complied with this requirement, in spite of a promise they made in July 2011.
The suspension of this awful trade by the Labour administration of TDC shows that we take our responsibility seriously and that we are not afraid of taking the necessary actions, using the legal framework to pursue our aims.
We stood for election on our Manifesto which stated that we would defend the rights of animals. We fought for this to happen when we were in Opposition and we are delivering now that we are the ruling administration.
Friday 7 September 2012
TDC leadership call for government action
Ramsgate Port is the only port in the UK to be currently used by transporters to export live animals to mainland Europe for slaughter or fattening.
Whilst it is a lawful trade, the Labour administration of TDC is also conscious of its responsibilities regarding the welfare of animals passing through the port. Our Labour Councillors consider it paramount that the EU regulations are implemented strictly in order to avoid any suffering caused to the animals by transportation.
The RSPCA were invited by TDC to conduct a thorough visit of Ramsgate Port in June 2012 by 2 of their inspectors. Their report concluded that “there were no suitable facilities at the port for handling or housing farm animals”. This was deemed unacceptable.
On the issue of dealing with emergencies the report states that the solution at present appears to be informal agreements between AHVLA and local farmers or that the lorries go back to the nearest control post available in Gloucestershire or Northamptonshire
A subsequent visit by RSPCA on 21st June 2012 also confirmed that they had serious concerns about the stocking density, the ventilation and water supply.
On Wednesday 29th August 2012 an incident took place which highlighted how precarious the situation is at Ramsgate Port.
A lorry carrying lambs arrived at the port with a severely damaged tyre. The Police served a prohibition notice on the vehicle moving further until it was repaired. The agent had arrangements to repair the vehicle but these were not available in the locality due to the nature of the work required and it took a considerable time for these to get to the port. The lorry then had to drive back to Northampton , making it a very long and uncomfortable journey for the animals. The animals were probably on the lorry for the best part of 24 hours.
This incident was further evidence of the need for a lairage facility (for livestock resting) in Kent so that should there be problems associated with a sailing or a lorry issue such as this one, the vehicles and animals only travel to a destination within Kent where they can be removed, fed and watered.
In 2008 an FVO report on a mission they carried out to the UK stated that “the Competent Authority (ie: UK Government) should take measures to ensure that arrangements are in place so that where there are delays at ports or emergency measures are needed to deal with non-compliance detected, the CA can take any necessary actions to safeguard animal welfare, including the possibility to unload animals in suitable accommodation, as required by Article 22(2) and 23(2)(e) of regulation (EC) No 1/2005.”
Such a lairage facility was ‘promised’ by the UK Government, according to correspondence from Jim Paice (then minister for …) to TDC in July 2011 but it is still not in place and, as stated previously, informal arrangements with local farmers fall short of the minimum requirements defined by EC regulations.
TDC’s Labour administration will not shrug its responsibility regarding its duty of care towards the animals in transit through Ramsgate port.
It expects that the laws and regulations regarding the transport of live animals be applied strictly.
TDC’s budget has been hit hard by the funding cuts imposed by the Tory-led Government and it is not in a position to provide adequate facilities at Ramsgate Port.
A letter has been sent by the Labour Cabinet to the UK Government and EU Commissioner to request a formal lairage / control post be set up in Kent as a matter of urgency; legal support to make inspections of lorries (and ship) by RSPCA mandatory; direct liaison with counterparts in mainland Europe so that the overall journey time and conditions of travelling can be verified.
In the absence of a control post in Kent and the lack of facilities at Ramsgate Port , our Labour administration at TDC has also requested to be given legal support to refuse access to its port for lorries transporting live animals, on the grounds of its lack of facilities should an emergency occur.
THE LETTER TO GOVERNMENT: http://www.thanet.gov.uk/pdf/Owen%20Paterson%20Letter%20final070912.pdf
Whilst it is a lawful trade, the Labour administration of TDC is also conscious of its responsibilities regarding the welfare of animals passing through the port. Our Labour Councillors consider it paramount that the EU regulations are implemented strictly in order to avoid any suffering caused to the animals by transportation.
The RSPCA were invited by TDC to conduct a thorough visit of Ramsgate Port in June 2012 by 2 of their inspectors. Their report concluded that “there were no suitable facilities at the port for handling or housing farm animals”. This was deemed unacceptable.
On the issue of dealing with emergencies the report states that the solution at present appears to be informal agreements between AHVLA and local farmers or that the lorries go back to the nearest control post available in Gloucestershire or Northamptonshire
A subsequent visit by RSPCA on 21st June 2012 also confirmed that they had serious concerns about the stocking density, the ventilation and water supply.
On Wednesday 29th August 2012 an incident took place which highlighted how precarious the situation is at Ramsgate Port.
A lorry carrying lambs arrived at the port with a severely damaged tyre. The Police served a prohibition notice on the vehicle moving further until it was repaired. The agent had arrangements to repair the vehicle but these were not available in the locality due to the nature of the work required and it took a considerable time for these to get to the port. The lorry then had to drive back to Northampton , making it a very long and uncomfortable journey for the animals. The animals were probably on the lorry for the best part of 24 hours.
This incident was further evidence of the need for a lairage facility (for livestock resting) in Kent so that should there be problems associated with a sailing or a lorry issue such as this one, the vehicles and animals only travel to a destination within Kent where they can be removed, fed and watered.
In 2008 an FVO report on a mission they carried out to the UK stated that “the Competent Authority (ie: UK Government) should take measures to ensure that arrangements are in place so that where there are delays at ports or emergency measures are needed to deal with non-compliance detected, the CA can take any necessary actions to safeguard animal welfare, including the possibility to unload animals in suitable accommodation, as required by Article 22(2) and 23(2)(e) of regulation (EC) No 1/2005.”
Such a lairage facility was ‘promised’ by the UK Government, according to correspondence from Jim Paice (then minister for …) to TDC in July 2011 but it is still not in place and, as stated previously, informal arrangements with local farmers fall short of the minimum requirements defined by EC regulations.
TDC’s Labour administration will not shrug its responsibility regarding its duty of care towards the animals in transit through Ramsgate port.
It expects that the laws and regulations regarding the transport of live animals be applied strictly.
TDC’s budget has been hit hard by the funding cuts imposed by the Tory-led Government and it is not in a position to provide adequate facilities at Ramsgate Port.
A letter has been sent by the Labour Cabinet to the UK Government and EU Commissioner to request a formal lairage / control post be set up in Kent as a matter of urgency; legal support to make inspections of lorries (and ship) by RSPCA mandatory; direct liaison with counterparts in mainland Europe so that the overall journey time and conditions of travelling can be verified.
In the absence of a control post in Kent and the lack of facilities at Ramsgate Port , our Labour administration at TDC has also requested to be given legal support to refuse access to its port for lorries transporting live animals, on the grounds of its lack of facilities should an emergency occur.
THE LETTER TO GOVERNMENT: http://www.thanet.gov.uk/pdf/Owen%20Paterson%20Letter%20final070912.pdf
Wednesday 5 September 2012
New user fee charges imposed by KCC examined by cross-party group
From Cllr Jenny Matterface
The cross-party group set up by the Overview and Scrutiny Panel met for the first time on Monday evening, September 3rd. Its brief was to examine the impact of the new user fee charges being imposed by KCC .
Cllr. Graham Gibbens, KCC Cabinet member for adult social care and two KCC officers were invited to attend along with Thanet’s county councillors, users and other representatives.
Cllr. Kay Dark was elected Chair for the meeting and invited Cllr. Gibbens to speak to the group. He talked about the consultation that had taken place prior to the setting up of the charging structure but there was some confusion between his account and that of Mr. Thomas Sam from KCC who told us the consultation had run over 6 weeks but there were two meetings held in Thanet on different dates. Cllr. Gibbens only referred to one in Margate but there was another meeting later at Northdown House although no-one else present could recall such an event. Perhaps it wasn’t widely-publicised.
It was clear from the questions put by the group members that neither Cllr. Gibbens nor the officers were able to give us the answers we needed. They were asked about the number of users but the only figure they could quote was for the county-wide use. We asked about the charges e.g. who had imposed these? How were they decided? How many paid the full £40 per day? How many paid nothing? How many paid on a sliding scale? We were given percentages but no actual figures. To be told 10% pay the full charges is a meaningless figure unless we know if that is 2 people or 20.
Following some robust questioning from the group members other county councillors spoke followed by Cllrs Driver and Worrow and three members of the public who gave us the information we needed especially regarding the consultation process. Mrs. Godby talked about how important the centre is for her husband and many others and how users are being deterred from coming in as often as they need or would like due to the cost. Her husband gave a moving account how important it is to him to keep friendships going.
It is clear that the review group will need to meet again once we have written evidence from the relevant officers at KCC. To some a charge of a few £s per day may not be a significant amount but to many the charges imposed do mean the users cannot enjoy the facilities and vulnerable residents will lose the vital contact with others that keeps them involved in the community.
Cllr. King made an excellent comment about how unpaid carers should have their input valued and this reflected in the fees’ structure.
Committee members are Cllrs. Bruce, Cohen, Coleman-Cooke, Dark, King, Matterface
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)