IT is probably a little much to declare it a 'victory' - as the inevitable press release described it - but it is undeniably good news that KCC, along with a handful of other councils, are poised to recover  the money they invested in former Icelandic banks.

KCC on course to get Icelandic cash back>>

But while the words "rejoice" may be resounding around the corridors of Sessions House, it is worth making a couple of relevant points.

KCC originally invested the £50m because it was attracted by the rather generous interest rates being offered by the banks, around 5-6%. It put the money there precisely for that reason and no other. It is not, however, money the authority will be seeing - and you can do the maths yourself to see what budget papers usually refer to opaguely in accounts as the "net impairment loss."

According to KCC's audited accounts for 2010-2011, the sum associated with the 'net impairment loss' is £7.6m. Now, I am guessing this is the sum that the council expected to make as a return on its deposit but now won't. Victorious in the courts, yes but that is only part of the story.

And the protracted legal wrangle, which lasted three years, will also have a cost but as the action was being pursued on behalf of 100+ authorities, this may be relatively modest.

There is no doubt that treasury management policies at County Hall were not quite as robust as they should have been at the time this happened, but neither were they at many other town halls and public bodies (and before I'm reminded the now defunkt Audit Commission was among them).

There was the unopened email that meant £3m more was invested when brokers had advised KCC to halt, for example.

One consequence of the saga is that there is now a little more transparency about how and where taxpayers' money is being invested. Previously, little was volunteered about the subject and what was was largely impenetrable to many.

However, much of it unfortunately goes through an informal members group at County Hall, whose meetings are closed to the public.

******************************************************

SOCIAL services chiefs appear to have finally got to grips with the crisis in vulnerable children's social care. A positive Ofsted report which apparently says KCC has successfully addressed many of the problems identified in a highly damning report issued a year ago is due out shortly. We'll know the full details in a week or two.

Having overcome that challenge, another is on the horizon - adoption, where Kent appears to have a fairly dismal track record compared to many others when it comes to the speed with which it deals with applications from would-be adopters.

Clearly,the downward trend began a few years ago but for whatever reason, was not spotted or was but ignored.

Adoption challenge for KCC>>

All of which makes me wonder again exactly how it was that for several years, KCC secured high ratings from inspectors for the quality of its social services.

The suspicion is that County Hall had any number of policy wonks skilled in completing self-assessment forms on which judgements were often based but rather fewer people overseeing what was actually happening at the coal face.

SINCE January, councils up and down the country have been publishing thousands and thousands of invoice details on websites, listing all transactions of more than £500. They have been doing so in response to the government's much-vaunted transparency crusade - a genuine effort to encourage the public sector at all levels to engage the people they serve by telling them much more about how money is being spent.

In the case of councils, the communities secretary Eric Pickles has spoken of his desire to enlist the support of an army of armchair auditors, in the belief they may be able to spot areas where money might be saved or more appropriately spent. The only problem with this tsunami of information is that it is almost unintelligible and incapable of being scrutinised.

The invoices are the worst kind of crude data, providing no context and no explanation. Comparisons are next to impossible to make. Councils like KCC have literally thousands of invoices to publish each month and to be fair, it presents them in a way which makes the data easy to sift and sort. But that is about as far as it goes.

Calling councils to account on the basis of what they publish under this transparency regime is next to impossible. That is not to say they are deliberately misleading us or trying to draw a veil over what they are up to. They are doing just what the government wants them to do.

If you really want to establish why, for example Kent County Council spent £1,995 on lunches at the Open Golf championship at Royal St George's, you won't find it in the invoice details.  The only real way is to ask via the Freedom of Information Act for an explanation and account. And from personal experience, I can say that what superfically may look to be an example of unnecessary profligacy often turns out to have an entirely reasonable explanation.

In the case of those golf lunches, KCC says the costs were recouped from sponsors and therefore no costs fell to the taxpayer. Not that you would know from the invoice.

Anyway, attached is a recent response to an FOI request I submitted to KCC querying seven particular transactions - including £1,346 spent on hotel accommodation, drinks and food at a Ghananan beach resort - and the authority's explanations.

FOI.11.1070 Transactions.pdf (9.27 kb)

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 

An almighty behind-the-scenes row among Conservatives over plans to cut the number of community liasion managers appears to have been the trigger for the leadership contest now underway within the county council's ruling group.

But what is the “official” line on these posts which were to have been axed?

Asked to explain the background to the decision - a blatant political U-turn - this is what the council had to say:

"It has been decided to increase the number of community engagement officers from 7 to 12. These posts support county and district councillors in the growing localism agenda. As the scope for a meaningful localism agenda increases, it has been decided that each of the districts in Kent should have a dedicated support officer to ensure that the many benefits which can be realised from effective and efficient locality boards are realised.”

I suppose it was too much to expect the council to say there had been a huge political row and the leadership had backed down after a revolt by backbenchers.

Reminds me of George Orwell’s 1984 and the concept of doublethink.

Given that the coalition government has decided that we have too many MPs, it seems logical to ask whether we have too many councillors. The question may be one council taxpayers will ask when they see how much they are paying for KCC's 84 elected representatives in figures for allowances and expenses published today.

How much county councillors claimed last year>>>

The overall sum claimed by county councillors in 2010-2011 was £1.85million - pretty much in line with previous years but about £42,000 more than last year.

I think many councillors work pretty hard and do a decent job for their constituents but I've often sat at meetings at County Hall - especially full council meetings - and wondered exactly why we have so many (notwithstanding the fact that Kent is a large county).

Like it or not, the facts of cabinet government mean that only a select few are involved in the important decision making stuff. If you're a backbencher, you're pretty much sidelined from the decision-making process and when it comes to scrutiny, have only a minimal amount - actually pretty negligible - of influence.

Which makes it all the more surprising that there are, despite this concentration of power within the cabinet, that there are currently 106 county council committees and forums established by KCC. That's more than one committee/board/forum per member.

List of KCC committees here

So do we get value for money and would KCC be any different if it was represented by say, 60 county councillors, rather than 84? Democracy needs strong political advocates and it is vital that there are strong checks and balances in the system but I do sometimes sense that County Hall would get along just as well with fewer politicians.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Not for the first time, I'm struck by the fact that many county councillors appear to be devoted petrol heads when it comes to going about their official business.

Despite espousing more use of public transport, many councillors prefer to let the car rather than the train - or bus - take the strain. It can be tricky getting to County Hall from some of Kent's furthest flung corners but it is not as if County Hall is miles away from a train station (you can see Maidstone East from the entrance to Sessions House).

It's worth pointing out that councillors' milage rates have recently increased from 40 pence to 45 pence a mile.

County councillors have, after much hand-wringing, agreed to take a pay cut. It's a small gesture in every way. The 1.5 per cent cut in their basic yearly allowance will lop a modest £200 off their £13,000 they get.

If you want an illustration of why it is fairly small beer, I've worked out that it accounts for 0.017 per cent of the £95m of savings the council is making this year. 

But there's another issue here. Namely that the £16,400 that the 1.5 per cent cut will achieve represents a fraction of the £200,000 savings package the council has agreed for members' services. Once you've accounted for the other measures - such as a reduction in special responsibility allowances for cabinet members - our elected politicians together will be saving the taxpayer the grand sum of £80,000. And the rest? That is to come from cutting jobs in the staff who support members.

Opposition parties argued at this week's full council meeting that the cut should be greater. Labour and the Lib Dems pushed for an eight per cent cut, taking them back to the annual levels of allowances that they had before 2009, which is when the independent panel last set them.

Of course, there was - as Conservative leader Paul Carter pointed out - an element of political posturing going on here. (The race to be holier than thou is never more intense than when politicians are involved.) 

But he forgot - until he was reminded by departing Labour group leader Les Christie - that it was the Conservative administration who decided to make a virtue of the original plans for a pay cut when it first unveiled its budget plans in January.

I don't believe that county councillors should have to go around wearing hair shirts. They deserve some financial compensation for the work they put in. But these are uniquely challenging times for councils wrestling with the impact of austerity measures forced on them by the government.

In a week they unveil proposals to raise care charges for elderly and vulnerable people, their decision to agree a fairly miniscule reduction in their own pay does look a little selfish. Was it too much  to expect them to take a bigger hit - even if only for a year or two?

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Social services chief Malcolm Newsam is to be commended for deciding that transparency is the best  policy when it comes to dealing with the challenges of turning around Kent's troubled children's services.

One of the greatest problems KCC had over recent years is what one county councillor described as "the culture of fear" that existed as things started to unravel - staff knowing that things were going badly wrong but finding it impossible to tell anyone.

For years, KCC basked in the glow of independent inspection reports that suggested it was a five-star service. When it commissioned internal reports assessing the resilience of children's social services, they came back saying everything was more or less OK - with the odd caveat about workload pressure.

At last, the politicians have grasped that they cannot take these things for granted. Too late for some but better late than never.

It is indisputably good news that east Kent is to get high speed trains although there will be some who do not think local councils - in this case KCC - should be subsidising the costs.

KCC has some form in this area, having been involved in a few spectacularly unsuccessful ventures subsidising various initiatives with airlines at Manston airport that cost the taxpayer a considerable sum.

It is on rather more secure ground with its decision to pay £151,000 subsidy to get the High Speed services running to Sandwich and Deal and is on balance, probably right to do so - especially given the fact that it is clearly a service that could genuinely enhance the prospects for the Pfizer plant after it closes in 2012.

The tricky issue is whether there is enough commuter demand from the two areas to make the planned rush-hour services commercially viable. Clearly, Southeastern hadn't thought so otherwise it would have introduced them itself. But the rail operator is fully on board and not just because KCC is underwriting the service.

It has one eye on the next franchise and its willingness to give the idea a try is good PR, particularly given the justified hammering it has had from disgruntled passengers across Kent over the winter. (Indeed, at the KCC rail summit at County Hall, I was struck by just how co-operative a tone Southeastern was adopting to suggestions about how it might improve things).

But the message from all involved is a familiar one: use it or lose it. If insufficient numbers are travelling on these trains from October, neither Southeastern or KCC will want to make open-ended commitments given that the former cannot be seen to be propping up services that don't make enough money for shareholders; the latter because hard-pressed council taxpayers will inevitably begin to question whether it is the sort of thing the authority should be paying for.

But both KCC and Southeastern deserve some credit for taking a calculated gamble.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Mind you, I was intrigued by the  timing of the announcement. KCC is not having an election so it is perhaps not bound by the purdah strictures quite as tightly as those councils who are. (Purdah effectively prevents councils announcing anything in the run-up to an election that could be construed as politically helpful to any party).

Thanet and Dover councils are having elections and they are both areas likely to benefit most from this news. Both are currently Conservative controlled and facing a challenge by Labour, which has hopes of wresting control. No wonder some Conservative councillors and the area's MPs appeared so delighted by the news.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

I had never heard of Payan Tamiz until yesterday and I'm prepared to bet that not many voters in Thanet had either.

But Payan became the centre of attention for 24 hours after postings he put on Facebook landed him in trouble with party chiefs because of their derogatory and offensive nature. He won't be the last would-be politician to unwittingly land in trouble over unguarded comments on a social networking site.

Having seen the comments, I can see why he chose to quit the Conservative party. There's no doubt that he would have been pushed had he not done so. I also understand why those who masterminded the sting chose to release the incriminating evidence now rather than after May 5 - there was no real prospect of him getting elected.

Will it make any real difference to the results next week? Labour evidently hope so but I'm not so sure. There are bad apples in every party and every now and then, they get found out and it is good that they are.

But while undeniably an acute embarrassment for the Conservatives, I doubt it will swing many votes.

IS employing interim managers cost-effective? KCC has a few on its books at the moment as it continues with a rather complex re-organisation that has seen several experienced senior officers recently depart and, if the opposition Liberal Democrat leader Trudy Dean is to be believed, sinking morale at Invicta House.

Some of the costs associated with the appointment of four "external interim directors" currently in post were revealed this week after opposition parties tabled questions seeking the information at a full council meeting. It follows our report recently that the man overseeing the shake-up, Jeffrey Hawkins, was costing the authority £165,000 for his services over ten months.

According to an answer provided by the council leader, the monthly costs in March - including a fee  to the agency KCC used to recruit them - was £69,825, a not insignificant sum. The daily rate ranged over the month from £750 a day to £1,250 a day.

How does this compare with the costs of permanent appointments? Direct comparisons are a little tricky but Cllr Carter revealed that the weekly costs - I emphasise weekly - of KCC's former children's services director Rosalind Turner was £5,300 while the weekly cost of the interim  corporate director in the same job, Malcolm Newsam, is £3,900.

There are various arguments in favour of interim directors. KCC doesn't have to make any pension payments; they don't get sick pay and any leave is unpaid. They come in with a specific brief; do the job and then move on. They don't come with any cultural baggage and can offer fresh perspectives. If they don't do a good job as a short-term troubleshooter, it may make it more difficult to get work elsewhere in a similar capacity. The other side of the coin is that they don't necessarily have any knowledge of Kent, they have no long term commitment and if things do go awry, they can deflect the blame on to the authority.

So, there's a case for interim directors to be made. But the real test of whether they represent value for money will be the results they deliver. Not whether they are cheaper than having permanent appointments in place.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Ever poked a stick at a wasps' nest? Senior Lib Dem county councillor Martin Vye did the political equivalent when he ventured to suggest that if Kent was serious about tackling pollution and poor air quality, it perhaps ought to consider a county-wide congestion charge. Cue outrage and frothy indignation from motorists and his political opponents.

It was a brave call, if not exactly the most judicious moment to try and trigger a debate (especially so close to council elections). You could argue that while we have seen an exponential increase in car use in recent years, the spiralling costs of motoring are in any case having an impact by compelling people to find alternative ways of travelling to work. Kent is not a county that would be well-suited to such a policy in any case, with large numbers travelling to towns to work from rural areas where public transport connections make commuter journeys on trains and buses next to impossible.

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Meanwhile, Kent County Council wants us all to say no to AV. Why? Well, county councillors held a debate at this week's full council and the Conservatives, with their comfortable majority, succeeded in adopting a policy that the council is formally opposed to AV and is encouraging residents to just say no, too. There was even an official pres release issued about it, too which struck me as slightly odd.

Is it any of KCC's business, you might ask? (The opposition parties didn't think so - saying that such a debate was an abuse of power and nothing to do with KCC but cleverly managing to weave in to their anger comments articulating precisely why they thought AV was actually a rather good idea).

I wasn't too bothered about the fact that councillors had a debate although I have to say that it was a fairly pedestrian one with both sides trotting out the well-rehearsed arguments from either side.

And I'm inclined to think that when it comes to putting their crosses on the ballot paper on May, the last thing voters will have on their mind is the fact that KCC doesn't want to abandon first-past-the-post.

It would have been a shock had Southeastern not been awarded a two-year extension to its contract to run Kent's rail services until 2014.

Why? Well, notwithstanding the legitimate complaints about their performance - especially over the winter - and the anger over hefy fare increases, the government was tied into contractual arrangements agreed by its predecessor that made it virtually impossible to do anything but give the company the nod til 2014.

For all the pressure brought to bear, transport secretary Theresa Villiers really had little alternative and you sensed her frustration in a statement announcing the decision which alluded to her having no other option.

The issue now is to ensure that Kent commuters get a much better deal when the franchise is retendered and being relatively close to a general election, I anticipate that our MPs will be bringing all their influence to bear on the government to do just that. MPs have been able to deflect the blame on to the previous government until now but that won't be available as an excuse next time around.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

I had an interesting insight into how Kent County Council dealt with a recent Freedom of Information request of mine today.

The request  was based around some questions I had made about recent invoice transactions that are now being published monthly on KCC's website. As it turned out - not for the first time - the transactions I had queried were entirely innocent but because no context is provided on them other than the most basic of details, you can't tell from the website. (Which reinforces the important distinction between data and information and that Mr Pickles' crusade to increase transparency, though welcome, is not without its flaws.)

Anyway, it appears the response needed signing off by no less than two cabinet members and the acting head of the press office and was copied to several senior officers before it could be dispatched. It also appears someone was requested to estimate how much time was spent drafting the response to the request.

I don't have any problem with any of this - every council has similar arrangements and protocols for dealing with FOI requests but it is worth making the point that the Act does not permit any authority to treat requests from the media any differently from anyone else - and to be fair, in terms of my own experience, I've no reason to believe KCC does when it comes to providing information.

So, perhaps the request to estimate how much time was spent on the request was connected to a drive to make sure, as this indeed was, that my request was dealt with promptly and within the statutory 20 working day limit.

On the other hand,  there may be some other explanation of which I am unaware.

This March blog is all about Guess Who?

An American Woman, namely Jessica Lynn Young, 26 from San Jose, California  USA.

Jessica may be a US citizen and not a Kent resident but she has a very special tie in Maidstone which has made her visit our beautiful county at least twice a year for the last two years.

I am that said special tie (If I do say so myself).

Jess has spent the past 3 months in Maidstone with me and asked if I would interview her.  I know that she is not a citizen of our county but I thought it would be a very interesting twist to see what an outsider would think.  It's good English - American relations as well.

Despite spending the previous two years studying towards her California Teaching Degree, Jess thought that taking time out to reconsider her options was a good idea.  An idea I totally support.  I believe and always will believe that you need to follow what you know is right and do what makes you happy.  That is why I write this blog, it enables me to do something I love.

Although Jess has not ventured out of Maidstone as much as she would like to discover more in our county, she is still extremely complimentary of Kent and it's people.

"I can say that I find Kent a very charming place compared to various areas in America. While my country has its own history and beauty, Kent's history goes much farther back and with that comes a unique feeling and appearance. I adore the old buildings: the churches, the castles and the roads made from cobblestones."

But her appraisal of Kent doesn't stop there and why should it. Kent rocks!

"Of course, there is also the beauty of the countryside and gardens and of course the proximity to London but everyone seems to say that so I don't want to make anyone have to read that again. Although I suppose I just did make everyone read it again." She laughs.

For 2011, I have added a new part to my blog which helps Kent's reputation grow and gives the interviewee a chance to boast about all things Kentish. I want to know as many facts or specific pieces of information that are interesting about the county.

"I don't live here so I think I would benefit more from others telling me facts or information about Kent as opposed to the vice-versa.  Off the top of my head though, I know that Kent is named 'The Garden of England' and I know some of the history surrounding the White Cliffs of Dover and Canterbury.  I also love Leeds Castle and the cool fact the Henry VIII visited there."

She would love to know more about Kent and has specific parts she would like to learn about.

"I would love to learn more about the history of the county but more specifically, I would love to find out why Maidstone is called Maidstone because no one seems to know!"

A very good question.  I will try to find out and post it on the blog as part of my new: Interesting fact about Kent of the week!  Don't worry, it is not replacing the random question of the week.

I try to take Jess to as many nice places for food as I can and of the ones I have taken her to for meals, she prefers our snack spot.

"I am a big fan of the Cornish Kitchen on Week Street, Maidstone. I don't pretend to be a great fan of traditional English food but once I was introduced to pasties, I was immediately hooked.  I am perfectly happy sitting eating a pasty.  They are warm and filling which is good for something that is relatively cheap."

That would be pastry!  It's so good.

When I have time off work, Jess and I like to travel and Jess explained to me what she loved doing in our free time together.

"During my time in England I have been lucky enough to visit London and Old Trafford, Manchester, Hastings, Bath, Cambridge and Stonehenge.  In Kent I have been to Canterbury, Dover, Leeds Castle and Tunbridge Wells.  Outside of England, I have travelled to Ireland, Scotland, Italy, Greece and Egypt.  At home, I have been all over California and other parts of the US."

Lucky lady, her boyfriend must really love her!

"On a more everyday basis, I like to watch movies and go on walks.  Additionally, I like spending time with my family and friends."

Now for a story that sums Jess up, this one is perfect.  Yet at the same time, it was a shared experience with moi that will stay with me until I die.  It was the moment in my life that I have been the most terrified and I think Jess handled herself much better than I did.

In Jess' words "This story shows how unlucky yet comical events seem to follow me around.  In 2009, I went to Yosemite National Park with my boyfriend.  We stayed in a tent cabin which is basically a simple, wooden frame covered in a canvas.  Reviews on a website said that bears were frequent visitors to the camp site but that information really didn't bother me because I had seen bears before."

I pretended not too be either but I was bricking it.

"Our first night we almost walked straight into an approaching bear." As the bloggist, I would like to correct my girlfriend by saying she was walking obliviously into a bear as I pulled her away.

"We were told to keep anything scented in our bear proof locker [a green steel box that is used to store all food, scented items and anything a bear may want]. We had to put everything in there down to my cherry chapstick."

I kiss a girl and I liked it!  Couldn't resist.

"I am very well organised and I was sure nothing with a scent would be left in our tent cabin.  Our last night turned out very differently than expected.  I was fast asleep in the early hours of the morning when I woke to the sound of something plastic crunching outside.  I thought nothing of it then heard something brush against the canvas starting to tear it."   

"I convinced myself that it was just someone out late walking by our tent cabin but then it happened... a loud grunting noise and I immediately knew that it was a bear.  I started poking my boyfriend and told him there was a bear outside just before it got even worse.  The wooden frame supporting the edge of the cabin began to break open under force and the canvas ripped louder than previously."

"The bear was breaking into our tent cabin!  I have never been so scared in my entire life.  Despite him being scared, my boyfriend is a quick thinker and grabbed our flashlight with a siren on it." 

Note to all Yosemite Campers - A siren or loud noise will scare a bear away

"We stood in our tent cabin in fear and I frantically looked around for a reason why a bear would want to get in.  I knew everything was locked away in the locker.  Then I saw it... the day before I had bought a magazine from the general store and guess what was in the magazine - a perfume sample!  I couldn't believe it."

"I know that was the reason but i'm mystified why the people working at the general store did not warn us about perfume samples possibly attracting bears."

"I think what was more terrifying was that the ranger told us that the bear was waiting outside when we ran out to their office after the attack in the middle of the night.  By morning, we saw the damage which was a huge hole.  It was frightening at the time but when I think back on it, I find it a very funny story to tell people." 

"I will never live down that it was my fault that the bear tried to kill us and this is probably just another reason why I have been nicknamed 'The Jinx'."

Hearing the story again... I just can't bear it!

Besides praising Kent, Jess can see like everyone where there is room for improvement.

"While I love Maidstone, I am used to living in a big city.  I think Maidstone would benefit more from shops staying open late as The Mall closes early here.  People could have time to come home from work then go out shopping late if they wanted to.  Maidstone could use more ethnic restaurants aside from Chinese and Indian.  This would create a wider variety of food options.  Options such as Persian, Japanese, Vietnamese and especially Mexican food, my favourite!  I really think people in Kent would come to appreciate and enjoy this food."

Since visiting America, I have been fortunate enough to try to these foods and I must say, I would love to have them here with us in Kent!

Jess had expressed herself for long enough so I thought I would relieve her quickly and ask my random question of the week:

If money was not an issue, what would be your ideal purchase and why?

"My ideal purchase would be my own private jet with an unlimited and free supply of fuel."

Oh god think of the Ozone Layer Jess, although she does have good reasons!

"It is very difficult to be in a long distance relationship and very expensive too.  Buying plane tickets constantly is very costly so it would be lovely to be able to hop on my own jet whenever I wanted to fly back and forth between California and England.  Just think how great it would be to hop on a jet anytime I wanted and to be with this great bloggist [Sorry, could not resist] within 10 hours.  It would also be nice to be able to fly family and friends back and forth so no one is ever missed."

A very nice purchase Jess but my ideal purchase would be a green card.  Much cheaper than a jet and we could be together all the time!

I would like to give a very special thank you to my wonderful and supportive girlfriend this week for assisting me with another Kent blog.  She always gives me positive opinions on my work and without her, I would not have a reason for pursuing my dream of becoming a respected writer.

2011 is going to be a great year so I hope you can share it with me by becoming my next interviewee.

If you live in Kent, let's talk!

If you would like to appear on my blog, all I ask is that you live in Kent and that you are willing to talk to me for 10 - 15 minutes about yourself.

If you think you'd like to give it a try, drop me an email on millendauthor@gmail.com and we will see what we can do!

It is hard to dissent from much of what the government taskforce calls for to limit the impact of the closure of Pfizer's Sandwich plant in 2012.

The key recommendations in the 21-page report published today were, in some ways, predictable - there are calls for an enterprise zone, better transport links - particularly rail - and further government support through its regional development fund.

Pfizer taskforce sets out key demands; read our story here>>>

They all make perfect sense. So the issue is not whether what the taskforce says is right but how the government will respond. Science minister David Willetts was a little circumspect in what he said at today's press conference in Westminster, emphasising his support for the principle of the enterprise zone and the importance of improving transport links but saying that decisions on investment in zones and rail connections were ultimately the responsibility of the Treasury.

With George Osborne's budget imminent, it might be too much to expect him to give the green light to an enterprise zone and announce handouts via the regeneration fund.

Which raises the key issue,  underlined several times by taskforce chairman Cllr Paul Carter, that timing is critical and that maintaining momentum is a priority if the Sandwich plant is not to have tumbleweed drifting through its 2.3m square feet of purpose-built office and research facilities come 2012.

The report underlines starkly the consequences of Pfizer's decision on the wider local economy: 1,600 additional jobs could go while nearly 3,000 more in the public sector are predicted to disappear from the public sector in the area by 2015. That represents a potential loss of £380m to the economy - 9 per cent of east Kent's total output.

But it also strikes a more optimistic note by pointing to success stories elsewhere, notably the former ICI R&D site in Runcorn, which was closed ten years ago and is now a flourishing multi-purpose business and techology park employing 2,000 people in 160 different businesses.

So, if the brain drain and wrecking balls are to be avoided, the government must respond quickly.

If east Kent genuinely is on the cusp of an economic opportunity, it is an opportunity the government must not allow to go begging.

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Having written extensively about Southeastern's rail fares in recent months, I ought not to have been surprised. But I confess to being taken aback when I bought my peak day High Speed return to London from Ashford to attend today's Pfizer taskforce briefing - a rather hefty £61.20. Throw in £5 for parking and that represents £1.80 a minute.

Almost makes the cost of a litre of fuel seem cheap. Almost.

So the old magician, Alan Jarrett, did wield his wand, and produce a couple of big rabbits from his hat at last week's budget meeting.

But don't be deceived.

The offer of a Freedom Pass for children to use on local buses may not be as good an offer as some would hope.

The county set have been eagerly lowering their sights to allow their children to discover what life is like without a car.

They've forked out £50 a year to then get unlimited travel on buses before 9am - and then right through the day and the weekend.

Not that there will be that many buses operating after April if KCC are chopping away at the many services it supports as I hear they are.

Medway is throwing £250,000 into a pot to provide "easy and affordable" travel on Medway's buses.

A check with the council this morning revealed that they are not sure how the scheme will operate - or whether there will be charges for the pass or the journeys.

If it is free, if the services are maintained (and that is a big imponderable), then it could help not just the scholars to get about, but also give a greater assurance to the bus operators - which would be a carrot to increased services.

The big problem for many youngsters, however, is that there are virtually no evening buses after 6pm on the peninsula (where the transport portfolio holder, Phil Filmer, is a local councillor). In the more densely populated areas of Medway there are scarcely that many more buses running.

The community needs more public transport: buses that it can rely on, at prices that are reasonable, that are quick and priced at sensible (not hyper-inflated) fares.

It may be a commercial operation, but it is still a public service that needs public support.

Meanwhile, I am delighted to learn the council is going to fund free swimming for kids and codgers once again. Not that I got my toes wet when the previous scheme was operating, but maybe I shall this time around.

***

Spare a thought for the many friends of Bob Wade, whose funeral takes place today.

The union rep was a Green Ambassador of the highest order, and the moves to commemorate him around North Kent with trees, vines and signs highlighting his work have been staggering.

They'll see him off in the way he wanted: all dressed in rugby shirts... and enjoying a last pint on him into the process.

***

Eric Pickles, the local government minister, really should wake up to the real world.

While he is eagerly expecting bloggers, tweeters and video camera crews to attend council meetings and encourage openness, he should visit Allhallows Parish Council.

It formally banned all recordings of discussions except those by its clerk.

Mind, I would have loved to have seen how the cameras would have recorded the screaming, the shouting and the stupidity that peppered the meeting.

There were some performances that would have earned Oscars if they had been on film!

Openness is not the name of the game in that area of the borough.

Roll on their next meeting.