‘Remote working will reduce response times’


ANDREW Simms, manager of Boots in Maidstone and a director of TCM: “I AM very disappointed with theMaidstone Coun- cil’s decision to move CCTV to Medway.We have worked closely with the po- lice and MBC over the years and have developed an im- pressive relationship. “Priority has been given


to make sure that our town is safe for citizens and un- welcoming to those up to no good. Security guards, store managers and other business leaders have forged a great working rela- tionship with the CCTV op- erational team and we have many examples of great suc- cesses recently and in the preceding years. “Its strength is that it is a


local service that thrives on building local knowledge and local working partner- ships. “The CCTV system we


have is something we can be proud of.Working re- motely fromMedway will significantly reduce local knowledge and response times. “The safety of the public should be paramount, pro- tecting jobs by minimising shop theft is important and I believe that by moving CCTV to Medway we will see a significant reduction in our ability to achieve both.”


CCTV contract decision faces ‘call-in’ challenge


A CONTROVERSIAL decision to award Maid- stone’s CCTV monitoring contract to Medway Council is being reviewed. Some councillors and many businesses are not happy about the prospect of a “remote” service, especially as Maidstone Town Centre Manage- ment’s bid was on the shortlist. Even council leader Chris Garland cast his vote


in favour of monitoring being kept in Maidstone when the full cabinet decided by 3-2 votes to opt for Medway. The portfolio holder for commu- nity safety, Cllr JohnWilson, sided with Cllr Gar- land. But the vote for Medway means the current town centre monitoring arrangementwill end next spring, unless there is a last-minute change of heart. The issue was due to be debated at a special scrutiny meeting on November 30 after the cabinet decision was ‘called in’ by Inde- pendent Cllr Mike FitzGerald. Thefearisthat monitoring Maidstone’s CCTV from theMedway Towns will undermine its effectiveness because of the latency – techni- cal delays – of a system located 10 miles away, plus staff not being as familiar with local geog- raphy. But a few months ago,


IVAN White, chairman of the Mid Kent and Maidstone branch of the Federation of Small Businesses: “MY opinion, along with all the stakeholders involved with CCTV, is huge disappointment that the contract has been awarded to Medway. “When I heard just aweek be-


fore, that the full cabinet was taking the decision, I sent a two-


Night-long street lighting falls


under county council spotlight A DEBATE is hotting up about whether – and which – streetlights should be switched off to save money. The suggestion emerged in a report to county councillors but no decisions have been taken yet. At least one Maidstone councillor thinks there is merit in turning


off some lights at night – but not before 1am. The most radical proposal in the document is for up to 5,000 streetlights to be removed from Kent’s roadsides and for another 70,000 to be switched off in the early hours. KCC could trim its annual £5.1m energy bill by as much as 15%,


or about £765,000. Cllr Malcolm Robertson said the report presented ideas for mem-


bers to “kick around”. He added: “Some may say, ‘it will lead to rising crime, I don’t want anything to do with it’. “Some villages have streetlights, some don’t; in some places, res-


idents are opposed to having any. “I think there will be quite an interesting debate. Members will


have all sorts of views.” Cllr Robertson said turning off all – or every other – streetlight


after 1am on residential estates might be an option. He felt “relaxed” about that idea, though he said it might be al-


right inAllington, where he lives, but not necessarily in, say, Shep- way or Parkwood. “So long as it’s applied sensibly, I think there is room to save money. But initially it would involve capital investment to install clocks


in the lampposts. Previous photoelectric systems that switched on and off as it became dark and lighter became unreliable, he ex- plained.


 Kent has a total of 118,500 streetlights. In Essex, 91,000 are switched off after midnight.


4 Town


Ch Supt Matthew Nix told Maidstone Business Forum that a similar partnership between Med- way and Swale had “worked really well”. He added that “once you got over the staffing is-


sues” the quality of service and public safety ele- ments had been maintained, if not actually increased. It was Maidstone Town Centre Management (TCM), a private limited company dedicated to improving the town’s trading environment and its image, that last year launched a campaign to persuade the borough council to put the contract out to tender. TCM succeeded – and entered the bidding bat-


tle itself along with 13 other firms. At the time, town centre manager Bill Moss


said: “If we move to the final stage of bidding we will be proposing to run the service from the town centre, hopefully with the current staff.” In the end, TCM


WHEN Medway Council entered into a CCTV partnership with Swale 18 months ago, Cllr Mike O’Brien, portfolio holder for community safety, said: “This agreement is a first for the county and part of Medway’s ambition for its CCTV control centre to become a regional hub. This is just the start. “We are always looking at ways of running services as efficiently as we can without affect- ing quality or performance and collaborating in this way with other local authorities is a good way of achieving that.”


‘Years to regain lost knowledge’


page letter on behalf of small businesses and everyone that works, lives and visits our town, to all cabinet members as Iwas not convinced they appre- ciated that the success of our CCTV system is down to full in- teraction of all people involved.


was one of three shortlisted bids to enter into a partner- ship arrangement with


Maidstone


Council for 24-hour x 7-day cover. A coun- cil officer’s report rec- ommended Medway on both cost and quality. The cabinet supported it – but only just.


“Key people are the operators


and if they do not go with the system then all those years of knowledge will be lost and it will take years to regain it. By which time the whole confi- dence in the system is lost. “I sincerely hope our fears are unfounded and that it does per- form well. But we are all very doubtful. Once it has moved, that's it.”


Confusion over High Street signs Continued from page one


most difficulties. Cllr Robertson (pictured) believes there


is too much graphic and text information for motorists to absorb, resulting in cars being driven where they are not supposed to go. “I think the sign will be disregarded


and cars will come up the High Street willy-nilly. We want the Government to allowustohavesigns–astheydoin London – which says ‘No entry except for buses and taxis’. “Everyone understands the circular No


Entry sign – red with with a white line across it. But the one planned for the High Street regeneration is not clear enough for the average motorist.” Cllr Robertson is co-signatory, with Kent’s highways cabinet member Bryan Sweetland, to a letter to Transport minister Norman Baker, which say: “KCC fully supports the redesigned ‘No Entry’ exemption sign in the Government’s review of traffic signs, ‘Signing theWay’.


THE Department for Trans- port has allowed a trial in London of a new combined sign with the message ‘No entry except buses, taxis and cycles’.


Contraventions have


dropped by 75% as a result of the sign change and the department says it will con- sider “further trials where a dedicated need is identified”.


“Wewould like to see this new


sign implemented as soon as possible as the present sign is highly confusing and leads to significant abuse.”


The two councillors are urging


Mr Baker to extend London-spe- cific legislation to the county.


You can e-mail the Downs Mail — info@downsmail.co.uk


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40