To receive an oral report at the meeting from the Leader (and Cabinet) on the business of the Executive or on any topic or subject that it is felt should be brought to the attention of the Council.
(Up to fifteen minutes is allowed for the Report of the Leader (and Cabinet), up to ten minutes is allowed for the Leader of the Major Opposition Group (or his nominee) to respond, up to five minutes is allowed for the Leader of any other Opposition Group (or his nominee) to respond. The Leader is allowed up to five minutes as a Right of Reply or 25% of the time given to the Opposition Group Leaders, whichever is the greatest.)
Minutes:
The Leader of the Council, Councillor P A Watkins, included the following matters in his report:
(a) The continued progress of St James’s (DTIZ) development with further tenant announcements expected shortly and the closure of the Russell Street car park which would allow major works to be undertaken on the site. Work was underway on site to prepare for the demolition of Burlington House. In addition, the housing on the corner of Castle Street had been nominated for a design award. Canterbury Archaeological Trust was thanked for the work that they were undertaking on the site.
(b) The future of the South East Local Enterprise Partnership following the decision not to renew the contract of its Chairman. The Chairman had been a supporter of Dover’s ambitions in respect of the Port of Dover, Albert Road and the Discovery and had overall done a good job. The new federated governance model that was being developed was expected to work better in a two tier authority model and stop domination by the upper tier.
(c) The continuing progress being made by the Dover Town Centre Group and its three working groups.
(d) The traffic management issues in Sandwich and the work being undertaken to try to protect the town from environmental damage from unsuitable traffic.
(e) That the outcomes of the Comprehensive Spending Review would be closely monitored and budgets would be reviewed if necessary.
The Leader of the Main Opposition Labour Group, Councillor M R Eddy, included the following matters in his report:
(a) To thank Members and Officers for their kindness.
(b) To welcome the progress of the DTIZ but warn that spending cuts could hold back the good work currently being undertaken in respect of regeneration in the district.
(c) The importance of the public sector in providing essential services that enabled the private sector to function.
The Leader of the Minority Opposition UK Independence Party Group, Councillor A F Richardson, including the following matters in his report:
(a) To welcome the signs of regeneration in the district and especially the DTIZ and the new housing on Castle Street. Canterbury Archaeological Trust was working hard with lots of local volunteers on the DTIZ site.
(b) To express concern over the departure of the Chairman of the South East Local Enterprise Partnership (LEP) given the importance of having someone sympathetic to the district’s regeneration needs.
(c) That the Comprehensive Spending Review could make local government become unviable in the future and put at risk the positive work being done.
(d) To offer support for the Government and the Council’s position on Syrian refugees and urge all countries to help.
In response, the Leader of the Council raised the following matters as part of his right to reply:
(a) That the possible locations for the 3rd Thames Crossing were either at the current location of the existing crossings or lower on the Thames at Gravesend. The Council supported the option for the lower crossing at Gravesend due to road issues, subject to the needed local road improvements being undertaken in advance, such as completing the dualling of the A2 and improvements to the A299 and A249. There had been meetings with Highways England on this matter and the Leader was seeking to meet with the roads minister in relation to the 3rd Thames Crossing and Operation Stack/Manston.