Visitors and members of the public who are unfamiliar with the building and procedures are advised that:

(a)      The fire alarm is a continuous loud ringing. In the event that a fire drill is planned during the meeting, the Chair will advise of this.

(b)      Exit routes from the chamber are located on each side of the room, one directly to a fire escape, the other to the stairs opposite the lifts.

(c)      In the event of the alarm sounding, leave the building via the nearest safe exit and gather at the assembly point on the far side of the car park. Do not leave the assembly point or re-enter the building until advised to do so. Do not use the lifts.

(d)      Anyone unable to use the stairs should make themselves known during this agenda item.

The Mayor outlined the emergency evacuation procedure.

To approve the Minutes of the Meeting held on 1 October 2025 (Minute Nos. 357 - 370) as a correct record.

The Minutes of the Meeting held on 1 October 2025 (Minute Nos. 357 – 370) were taken as read, approved and signed by the Mayor as a correct record.

Councillors should not act or take decisions in order to gain financial or other material benefits for themselves, their families or friends.

The Chair will ask Members if they have any disclosable pecuniary interests (DPIs) or disclosable non-pecuniary interests (DNPIs) to declare in respect of items on the agenda. Members with a DPI in an item must leave the room for that item and may not participate in the debate or vote. 

Aside from disclosable interests, where a fair-minded and informed observer would think there was a real possibility that a Member might be biased or predetermined on an item, the Member should declare this and leave the room while that item is considered.

Members who are in any doubt about interests, bias or predetermination should contact the monitoring officer for advice prior to the meeting.

Councillor Simon Clark declared a non-pecuniary interest in Item 9 – Motion – as he was a trustee of MenTalk Swale.

Councillor Alastair Gould declared a non-pecuniary interest in Item 9 – Motion – as he was a GP in Swale.

The Mayor advised that half way through her term as elected Mayor, herself and the Deputy Mayor had attended over 80 engagements.  Recent events included:

·         The dementia event;

·         unveiling of Milton Regis and Kemsley signs;

·         Faversham Carnival; and

·         a number of different events on the Isle of Sheppey including an interview with Sheppey FM and visiting The Criterion and Sheppey Little Theatre.

The Mayor said attending Remembrance Sunday and Armistice Day, remembering those who had given their lives, was a proud moment. She thanked all those that attended, particularly those that laid wreaths on her behalf.

Referring to upcoming events, the Mayor highlighted a fundraising event she was holding at luxury handbag manufacturers Elvis & Kresse in Faversham on Friday 21 November 2025. Among the many other events she was attending in the coming weeks she highlighted a domestic abuse event in Faversham, alongside Councillors Ben J Martin and Tom Nundy, Bobbing Christmas Fayre, Eastchurch Christmas Lights, Borden School Assembly for White Ribbon, Swale Youth Democracy event and celebrating Romanian culture.

Finally, the Mayor advised Members a Food Bank box would be placed in the Members’ Room, Swale House and she encouraged Members to donate.

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

The Mayor advised that one question had been received from a member of the public.  Mr Greenhill was unable to attend the meeting in person and the Mayor read out his question as set out below:

With reference to the proposal of Swale Council to close some essential public toilets in Swale, will the Council, having regard to the expressed intention of Kent County Council to refurbish the public library in Central

Avenue and create a Community Hub for the provision of many social and other activities which will doubtless create a greater need for toilet facilities:

a) reprieve the public toilets in Central Avenue and continue their provision; and

b) accept, that in any event those toilets are an essential facility;

and having enjoined public houses, restaurants and cafes, etc. in the town to make their toilet facilities available

generally to the public, will the Council lead by example and make toilet facilities at Swale House available to the public who attend there during the scant hours that the Council offices are open to the public; and in either case, if not, why not?

a) Councillors debated the provision of public toilets at their Environmental Services and Climate Change committee on 12 November. Councillors voted for the proposals, which suggested retaining the Central Avenue toilets in Sittingbourne and closing the Forum toilets. The report also detailed the benefits of rationalising locations for improved maintenance of the remaining sites. Central Avenue toilets are therefore earmarked for refurbishment in the future.

b) The report that Councillors considered, agree that town centre public toilets are vital for encouraging economic activity, attract visitors and support our vulnerable residents.

c) The Council reception at Swale House does contain a public toilet which can be used during our public hours of operation.

The Mayor advised that Mr Greenhill would receive a written response.

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 two questions had been received from Members.

Given the requirement for the timely determination of planning applications and the observed significant volume of applications currently awaiting a decision, could the Chair please explain the reasons for the recurring cancellation of scheduled Planning Committee meetings, with 3 of the 5 scheduled meetings between June & October being cancelled, and what immediate, action is being taken to address the subsequent backlog and ensure the statutory timetable for decisions is met going forward?

I will break this question down into separate elements , which are not as interrelated as they might appear. 

In terms of the general ‘backlog’ of applications and volume of applications that are awaiting decision, this is reducing.  We work to a definition of ‘backlog’ as any application that has not had any activity for over  a year.  This has reduced from 189 cases in February to 21 now.  There are still over 200 out-of-time planning applications with the Council but we can see from the activity that is recorded that these cases are being worked on and the number of such applications is also reducing.  This has been achieved through a variety of measures but, in the face of other commitments, such as the Highsted Inquiry, three other large scale strategic applications being with the Council, historic and legacy staffing challenges, and oft-changing requirements such as BNG, this significant progress.

A measure that is being introduced that is expected to support in further reducing the backlog is the introduction of charging to make amendments to planning applications, as approved by Full Council very recently.  Moving forward, as amendments to planning applications will be less common, officers can expect to determine more applications within the conventional time periods, with a reducing reliance on agreeing extensions of the determination period with applicants.  Working more frequently within statutory timeframes will reduce the flow of applications into the backlog, with existing older applications gradually being reduced in number. 

With this in mind, the cancellation of scheduled Planning Committee meetings is only partly related to the number of older applications that remain undetermined. 

We maintain a list of applications that are due to be presented to Planning Committee.  At this time the list comprises 25 items.  8 of those are applications related to the occupancy period of caravan parks on the Isle of Sheppey that will be presented to committee this year, having only been validated in September 2025.  Of the remaining 17, three are strategic major applications for over 1,000 dwellings and, as members will be aware from a recent briefing, they are being worked on with the expectation that they will all be presented to Planning Committee in early 2026.  Of the remaining 14, there are a mixture of applications from this year or older applications where there have been on-going discussions or problems identified that an applicant is attempting to address.  It  ...  view the full minutes text for item 471.

The Leader said:

“Madam Mayor, thank you.

As Leader of Swale Borough Council, there is, as always, a whole range of matters that I could report on this evening and of course many activities across the borough that I would ordinarily wish to highlight.

However, I am mindful of the significant and pressing items before Full Council tonight, and I believe that it is important that we devote our time and attention to the business requiring decision.

In that spirit, and out of respect for the importance of the agenda ahead, I will keep my statement deliberately brief and cover pertinent issues at December’s meeting when less constrained by time.

In the meantime I will touch briefly on a few pressing matters of particular relevance to our residents, notwithstanding what is to follow on this evenings agenda. Firstly, the continuing highways issues in and around the Sittingbourne area and secondly the pressures and difficulties within education provision in Swale, both of which are of course Kent County Council responsibilities. These challenges have a direct and daily impact on our communities, and I want to reassure colleagues that I am continuing to raise these concerns directly with KCC Leader and relevant Cabinet members, pressing for more effective action and clearer communication.

I also wanted to place on record my welcome for the proposed reopening of Faversham Cottage Hospital on the second of December having lobbied for its return. This is a positive step for local healthcare provision and for our communities in the Eastern part of the borough, and I hope to see this progress continue in collaboration with our partners.

To close Madam Mayor, I would like to conclude by expressing my appreciation for the continued professionalism and dedication shown by our officers during what are uncertain times. And to state that personally I remain committed to working constructively with all colleagues as we navigate the challenges and opportunities that lie ahead.

Thank you Madam Mayor”.

In response, the Leader of the Conservative Group agreed that the disruption and impact on residents and the local economy as a result of the highways issues was appalling and spoke frustratingly at the lack of action to address it. He referred to the additional delays caused because of the change in traffic light frequency and priority at the junction of St. Michaels Road and Crown Quay Lane, Sittingbourne. He welcomed and thanked those involved in the re-opening of the Cottage Hospital, Faversham giving particular thanks to the Faversham and Mid-Kent MP Helen Whately. Finally he said that political groups working together efficiently made the Council better.

Referring to the traffic issues in the area, the Leader of the SIA Group was critical of the promises made previously to address it, with no changes. He said many residents had contacted him about the closure of The Appleyard, Sittingbourne and he asked the Leader if there was anything the Council could do? 

The Leader of the Liberal Democrat Group said the Faversham Cottage Hospital was  ...  view the full minutes text for item 472.

Before inviting the proposer of the motion to speak, the Mayor advised that Councillor Sarah Stephen would now be seconding the motion in Councillor Paul Stephen’s absence.

Councillor Nundy confirmed with Members they had all read the motion as set out in the Agenda, and he began by sharing that he had known many men who had died by suicide and spoke emotionally about how he felt when he received such news. He said the theme for International Mens’ Day this year was ‘Celebrating Men and Boys’ and said it was important to discuss the struggles that men and boys faced.  Councillor Nundy spoke about the toxic gender roles imposed on men by society and the stress these expectations caused.

Councillor Nundy informed Members that Swale ranked as the third highest borough in Kent for suicide rates, with an average of 12.8 suicides per 100,000 people and a rolling average of 18 to 20 men per 100,000 - above the national average, where men accounted for 75% of all suicide deaths. He noted that the reasons for the high rate among men were varied, but emphasized that men often did not talk about their feelings. 

Councillor Nundy said the motion asked the Council to acknowledge the crisis in our community and to urge the Government to do better. He highlighted the national support groups ‘The Campaign against Living Miserably’ and the Samaritans as well as local groups including MenTalk Health Swale and ‘Sheppey Dads’.

Finally, Councillor Nundy spoke of those in our community who had died by suicide, and he asked Members to support the motion.

In seconding the motion, Councillor Sarah Stephen spoke passionately about MenTalk and the support it had given to so many men in the borough, including setting up educational programmes, walking groups and art classes, as well as 24/7 chat support. She said MenTalk was a lifeline for many men and it had not lost a single man to suicide. Councillor Stephen said MenTalk were expanding onto the Isle of Sheppey with strong community backing from Sheppey Matters, Sheppey United Football Club and Sheppey Rugby Club. She added that they were also supported by the current Mayor of Faversham and the vicar of St. Mary of Charity Church, Faversham. Councillor Stephen asked for SBC’s help to work as a partnership and to identify billboard locations across the borough to use to display life-saving messages to reach those that needed it most.

Members were invited to speak and raised points including:

·         Was supportive of the core aims, particularly the commitment to destigmatising men’s mental health, promoting support services and calling for improved access to care from Government and the NHS ;

·         raised concern that paying tribute to those in our community who had tragically died by suicide was complex, and loved ones might not wish to be referenced in public or in a political forum;

·         should take care not to cause distress or appear to use tragedy symbolically;

·         gave examples of individuals who, after engaging in  ...  view the full minutes text for item 473.

In proposing the recommendation, the Leader said the Community Governance Review (CGR) Member Steering Group had met and developed the draft Terms of Reference and these were set out within Appendix I.

The Chair of the Member Steering Group seconded the recommendation and in doing so paid tribute to the members of the steering group and the Chief Executive, the Policy and Communities Manager and the Local Government Review (LRG) Project Officer for their work. He urged Members to agree the terms so that matters could be progressed. 

The Leader of the Conservative Group welcomed the report but urged caution that any newly-established Town or Parish Councils should be made aware of the additional costs that might bring.

The Leader of the SIA Group said it was Members’ responsibility to communicate and keep residents informed of implications.

The Chair of the Member Steering Group responded to a Member’s request for clarification on paragraph 5.1 of the report, and he advised Members that the deadline for putting forward suggestions for areas to be reviewed was the following week. Another Member reminded Members that representations could include the desire to keep the current boundaries in addition to considering merging or abolishing existing Parish Councils, as well as forming new ones.

Other comments made by Members included:

·         Transparency was vital as Town and Parish Councils could accrue debt in addition to assets;

·         hoped that Sittingbourne formed a Town Council like the other two significant towns in the borough did as it needed the custodianship; and

·         warned against the lack of interest from residents in some areas to sit on their Parish Council.

Resolved:

(1)  That the adoption of the Terms of Reference for the Community Review in Swale be agreed.

The Mayor explained the process that would be followed for the item, drawing attention that the recommendation did not include a recommended business case option and the reasons for this was set out in the report.

The Leader introduced the report and proposed the recommendations.

The Mayor seconded the recommendations and reserved her right to speak.

The Leader of the Conservative Group thanked the Chief Executive and other officers at the Council for their work on the LGR, and he said that SBC were very well-informed on the topic thanks to their efforts. He also thanked the Leader and other Group Leaders for their communication over the preceding months. The Leader of the Conservative Group referred to the five options, and said that the only positive for the option for a single unitary authority was the cost. He said options 3a and 4b had some merit, and he could not support the options that split the borough. The Leader of the Conservative Group said none of the recommendations were preferred options for Swale.

The Leader of the SIA Group expressed his appreciation to the officers for their efforts, acknowledging the complexity of the work undertaken. He remarked that some of the options presented were highly unsatisfactory and cautioned against pursuing option 3a. Whilst noting that all available options were undesirable and imposed upon SBC in a manner he considered anti-democratic, he indicated a preference for option 4b as the least objectionable choice.

The Leader of the Liberal Democrat Group acknowledged the difficulty of selecting the best option when none truly reflected the wishes of Faversham residents. She stated that the LGR did not strengthen local governance and would result in Swale residents having less influence. She was highly critical of option 1a, the single authority model, noting that whilst it was the cheapest, this did not make it the most suitable. She further expressed concern that options 3a and 4b risked silencing local voices, while options 5a and 4d, —although preferred by Faversham residents — could become secondary considerations in any reorganisation. She highlighted that an Equality Impact Assessment would only be required once the Government announced the final unitary model and that tax-payers money would be used to make the changes. Concluding, she emphasised that none of the options preserved local character or decision-making and asserted that residents deserved better.

The Leader of the Reform UK Group referred to the potential cost savings achievable under a single unitary authority and warned that some councils could face bankruptcy if action was not taken. He acknowledged that no one was happy with the LGR proposals but stressed the need for realism. He highlighted that coastal communities in Kent incurred the highest costs and, if divided, other areas could not be relied upon to subsidise them. He reported that residents he had spoken to wanted lower Council Tax and improved services, and argued that services would not improve if Kent was split. The Leader of the Reform UK Group identified Adult Services  ...  view the full minutes text for item 475.

There was an adjournment from 8.53 pm to 9.03 pm.

Members agreed to extend Standing Orders at 10 pm in order that Council could complete its business.