[Alan Atkinson made a Voluntary Announcement he was
the parish representative on the Joint Transportation
The Head of Corporate Governance introduced the
report that gave details of the Joint Transportation Board
Agreement between Kent County Council and Canterbury City Council.
He explained the agreement had recently been reviewed by KCC and
the Kent Secretaries, comprising the district and borough Heads of
Legal.. The Board were being asked to note the agreement, make a
recommendation to the Governance Committee on the number of parish
representatives and accept the additional wording in the agreement
in italics relating to petitions and scrutiny
The Board discussed the agreement and the Head of
Corporate Governance gave clarification where necessary, the
following points were made:
There was some support for the parish representative
to have voting rights on the Board
The date of the next Governance Committee is yet to
Discussion was had regarding the process that the
Kent Association of Local Councils (KALC) nominate the Joint
Transportation Board representative
The number of parish representatives on the Board
were discussed and suggestions ranged from one to eight
That there was a lack of environmental impact
assessment in the report. A suggestion was made that the
terms of reference for the Board should include how travel impacts
on the environment.
There was some support for a more straightforward
and streamlined petitions scheme for petitions that were submitted
directly to the Joint Transportation Board.
A request was made by a Board member that petitions
were dealt with through the Canterbury City Council (CCC) petition
scheme, rather than Kent County Council (KCC) especially as
meetings were held and administered by CCC.
Suggestions made by the Board outside of this report
regarding petitions and parish representative voting rights would
need to be examined separately, and any comments would be passed to
the Governance Committee.
The Head of Corporate Governance agreed to write to
the KCC portfolio holder about the suggested changes that were
outside the scope of the draft Agreement relating to the parish
councillor representative having voting rights and the potential
for operating a single petition scheme.
The option to have one parish representative on the
Joint Transportation Board was proposed, seconded and when put to
RECOMMENDED (to the Governance Committee) -
That there be one parish representative on the Joint Transportation
Reason for the decision: The current arrangements of one representative work
well and allowed the parish councils a voice on the
Record of the voting:
For (6): Clarke, Cook, Dawkins, Northey, Spooner and Wilson-Hamilton
Against (5): Flack, Harvey- Quirke, Linfield, Smith
Abstained (2): R.Thomas
The option for alternative and additional wording [in
italics] relating to scruitany be
incorporated into the plan was then proposed, seconded and when put
to vote agreed.
RECOMMENDED (to Governance Committee) that -
The alternative and additional wording [in italics] relating to
scruitany be incorporated into the
Reason for the decision: To allow ...
view the full minutes text for item 222.