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 Chair outlined the emergency evacuation procedure.

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.

No interests were declared.

The Chief Executive introduced the report and explained that the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government (MHCLG) had requested representations from all Kent and Medway councils on the Structural Change Order (SCO).

It was emphasised that, due to the committee system, it was important that the Council’s response reflected Members’ views rather than officer views.

The Head of Policy and Transformation and the Project and Transformation Manager gave a presentation outlining:

• the purpose of the Structural Change Order
• the five geographic models still under consideration
• the requirement to submit a Council response by 16 June 2026
• the key questions posed by MHCLG, including governance structures, joint committees, elections, implementation arrangements, and naming conventions

Members considered each question in turn.

Recommendation 1 – Transitional Governance Model

Members discussed the proposed transitional governance models.

Members raised the following points:

• concern that a single authority model would not provide sufficient representation for all areas, including Medway
• the importance of ensuring all predecessor councils were involved in transition arrangements
• that a joint committee model would provide more inclusive governance during transition

Recommendation 2 – Membership of Joint Committees

Members considered the proposed membership arrangements for Joint Committees.

Members raised the following points:

• clarification was sought on how county and Medway representation would be reflected within the proposed membership
• officers confirmed that the intention was to include representation from all predecessor councils, including the county and any existing unitary authorities
• Members noted that, particularly for Option 1A, there was a need to ensure that the size of any Joint Committee remained manageable

Members also discussed potential approaches to representation under Option 1A, including the use of geographic groupings.

Recommendation 3 – Chair and Deputy Chair of Joint Committees

Members considered whether the Chair and Deputy Chair should be specified.

It was noted that::

• that it would be preferable for the Joint Committee to appoint its own Chair and Deputy Chair at its inaugural meeting
• that this approach was consistent with practice elsewhere

Recommendation 4 – Political Balance

Members considered whether Joint Committees should be politically balanced.

It was noted:

• that there was no requirement for political balance under MHCLG guidance
• that the primary purpose of Joint Committees was transitional rather than executive governance

Recommendation 5 – Returning Officer

Members considered the appointment of Returning Officers.

Members raised:

• the importance of appointing an individual with appropriate experience
• that the geography of the new authorities should inform the decision

Members agreed that this would be best determined once the final structure of new authorities was known.

Recommendation 6 – Implementation Team

Members considered the proposed implementation team structure.

Members raised the following points:

• the scale of work required, particularly for county disaggregation
• the importance of appointing individuals with sufficient experience and capacity
• questions regarding the role of the Deputy Senior Responsible Officer (SRO)

Officers clarified the proposed arrangements and noted that further detail would be developed through the Kent and Medway programme.

Recommendation 7 – Parish and Town Council Elections

Members discussed alignment of parish and  ...  view the full minutes text for item 57.

The Chief Executive introduced the report which set out proposals for Member engagement in the Local Government Reorganisation (LGR) process.

Members were advised that, whilst Joint Committees and Shadow Authorities would provide formal governance, these would only involve a limited number of Swale Members. Additional mechanisms were therefore proposed to ensure wider Member involvement.

Recommendation 1 – Establish a Cross-Party Member Working Group

Members raised the following points:

• that the working group should be focused and manageable in size
• that Group Leaders would be best placed to participate, with the ability to disseminate information within their groups
• that provision should be made for substitutes where appropriate

Recommendation 2 – Establish Quarterly LGR Member Briefings

Members raised the following points:

• that flexibility would be required due to the pace of the programme and future Government announcements
• that a quarterly schedule may not always be sufficient and additional briefings could be required
• the importance of ensuring that all Members, including those not in political groups, were able to access briefings
• that briefings had generally been held remotely to support attendance, although attendance levels had varied
• that Members had responsibility to ensure key information was shared appropriately

Members also discussed the format of briefings and the potential for involvement of both Members and officers in their delivery.

Recommendation 3 – Additional Governance Arrangements

Members raised the following points:

• that there was a need to ensure public awareness and understanding of Local Government Reorganisation
• that consistent and clear messaging would be important to avoid confusion
• that at the current stage, limited information was available to provide definitive answers to residents
• that Local Government Reorganisation would be of interest to residents once impacts on services and costs became clearer
• that communication should be clear and avoid the use of technical acronyms where possible
• that existing Councillor and Resident Forums could be used to provide updates

Resolved:

(1) That a cross-party Member Working Group be established, comprising Group Leaders, with substitutes permitted as appropriate.

(2) That LGR Member briefings be held on a minimum quarterly basis, with additional briefings arranged as required.

(3) That Local Government Reorganisation be included as a standing item on Councillor and Resident Forums to support public awareness and engagement.