Agenda and minutes

The notes of the last meeting held on 6 April 2009 are attached.

That the notes of the last meeting of the Panel, held on 6 April 2009, be agreed subject to Councillor R Morgan be entered as having been present at the meeting.

(Assistant to the Chief Executive). To declare interests in any items on the agenda.

In considering whether to declare a personal or a prejudicial interest under the Code of Conduct, Overview & Scrutiny members are asked pay particular attention to paragraph 11 of the Code in addition to the more familiar requirements.

This requires the declaration of a personal and prejudicial interest in any matter before an OS Committee which relates to a decision of or action by another Committee or Sub Committee of the Council, a Joint Committee or Joint Sub Committee in which the Council is involved and of which the Councillor is also a member.

Paragraph 11 does not refer to Cabinet decisions or attendance at an OS meeting purely for the purpose of answering questions or providing information on such a matter.

No declarations of interests were made pursuant to the Member Code of Conduct.

(Chairman/Lead Officer) The Overview and Scrutiny Committee has agreed the Terms of Reference of this Panel and associated Work Programme. This is attached. The Panel are asked at each meeting to review both documents.

The OSC is about to formulate next years OS work plan incorporating a programme for this Panel. In view of this, the Panel may wish to bring forward suggestions/ideas on topics for inclusion in its work programme for next year.

The Panel was advised of the following:

• Item 3 Planning Applications – Comments by Parish Councils, awaiting completion later at this meeting;

• Item 9 Review of Internal Audit Report – External Partner Organisations, was due for review by the Panel in September 2009; and

• Item 10 Local Democracy – Review of Petitions Procedure and Electronic Systems was due at the Panel in September 2009 depending on Government legislation.

(Assistant to the Chief Executive). Overview and Scrutiny has been subject to regular review since its inception. This year the review contains a number of issues which can be broken down into a number of distinct elements:

(i)         Current legislative provisions that require us to review our constitutional arrangements;

(ii)        A forward look to forthcoming legislation and its efforts on the operation of Overview and Scrutiny;

(iii)       A discussion on points raised by members and officers this year; and

(iv)       Issues arising from (iii) that might require changes to the Constitution and/or operational arrangements for Overview and Scrutiny.

Current Legislative Changes

(1)        Councillor Call for Action (Review undertaken by this Panel on 6 April 2009).

(2)        Police and Justice Act 2006 – Community Safety Committees (Review undertaken by this Panel on 6 April 2009).

Forthcoming Legislation

(3)        Briefing on Local Democracy, Economic Development and Construction Bill (Review undertaken by Panel on 6 April 2009).

Issues Raised by Members and Officers

(4)        Operation Review of Overview and Scrutiny 2009. (Review by Panel partially completed on 6 April 2009. The next section for discussion, following the last meeting of the Panel, is “Reports by Chairmen of Panels” on page 25 of the agenda).

At the last meeting of the Panel, the Members had discussed part of the Overview and Scrutiny Review. The Panel’s discussion of the review was continued from where the last meeting had ended.

(a)        Reports of Chairmen of Panels – Streamlining Procedures

Members requested fuller details of forthcoming items at Overview and Scrutiny meetings. Officers advised that this would be done through the Bulletin.

The review suggested scrutiny panels extend their pro-activity by visiting and holding meetings at external locations. It was suggested that enquiring of other councils about their scrutiny processes would assist the District Council. It was felt that Overview and Scrutiny was officer led and needed more Member input. Members were interested in investigating other scrutiny methods practised by local authorities. They asked officers to collate a list of Council websites to help them study other scrutiny systems.

AGREED:

That S Hill, Senior Democratic Services Officer, collate a list of Council websites to be put before the Panel.

(b)        Reports

Members felt that officer reports to Panels had mistakes on them and there was an inconsistency in the style of notes taken. Officers advised that errors on Panel reports were sometimes due to officer workloads and time constraints in preparing reports. Notes could be briefer, perhaps starting with a two line preamble and continuing with a bullet point note taking style. The Panel, which felt that Portfolio Holders sometimes attended scrutiny without adequate preparation, they should receive better information on the subjects that they were likely to be asked about.

RECOMMENDATION:

(1)        That a bullet point note style be used in all Scrutiny Panel notes.

(2)        That Portfolio Holders attending Scrutiny Panel meetings be fully briefed on the subject they are speaking on.

(c)        Overview and Scrutiny – Improved Profile

Members felt that Overview and Scrutiny needed a distinct identity within and outside the Council because it had proved difficult to generate sufficient interest in its work outside the Council. Although the District Council’s Public Relations Team attended OSC meetings it was difficult to generate sufficient media interest. Wider notice could be given of forthcoming speakers although it was acknowledged that the local press might not provide adequate space for publishing OSC business. Members requested information on the publicity activities of other councils.

AGREED:

That officers collate information on Council publicity activities.

(Assistant to the Chief Executive). To consider the attached report.

The Assistant to the Chief Executive, Mr I Willett, presented a report to the Panel regarding Officer Delegation – Planning Applications: Comments by Town and Parish Councils.

This matter had been considered by the Panel on 6 April 2009, there had, since then, been a request by the Council for a further opportunity for discussion to clarify the issue.

Councillor J Knapman had requested that the Panel consider the following proposal:

“Delegated powers should not be used if the Director of Planning and Economic Development intends to refuse a planning application where a local council has indicated a measure of support in its response and that such cases should stand referred to the relevant Area Plans Sub-Committee.”

The reason for this proposal was that local councils stated “no objection” to applications which had appeared to be interpreted by Planning Officers as taking a neutral stance on these applications. This gave authority to make a delegated decision for granting or refusing consent. Officer delegation provided for such comments to be taken into account in deciding whether reference to a Sub-Committee should take place.

Members noted that the issue raised by Councillor J Knapman was already covered in clause P4 (I) of the Planning Protocol. Determination under delegated powers was not reliant upon whether the local council had used or not used the term “Support” or “No Objection” but whether there were overriding reasons for refusing the application in any event.

It was recommended that officers use discretion in holding expressions of support from local councils by providing guidance on planning issues to local councils through the Member Training Programme and council meetings. Reassurance on this issue would be passed to parish clerks via letter and at the Local Council Liaison Committee.

Mr N Richardson, Principal Planning Officer, felt that single storey rear extensions were causing concern with some local councils. This had resulted in some applications of this nature being referred to Area Plans Sub-Committees when granting og consent at officer level was the norm. He said that P4 (g) of the Planning Protocol covered this area. Members requested that N Richardson monitor single storey rear extension applications, that came before committee, until March 2010.

RECOMMENDATION:

(1) That no change be made to the terms of delegation to the Director of Planning and Economic Development regarding reference of planning applications to Area Plans Sub Committees;

(2) That new guidance be given to Parish Councils regarding how to frame their consultation responses and, in particular, the use of the terms ‘support’, ‘oppose’ ‘no objection’ and ‘no comment’ and that if necessary the matter be raised at a meeting of the Local Councils' Liaison Committee;

(3) That the Director of Planning and Economic Development be asked to use his discretion on how Parish Council responses are handled and whether any case should be referred to an Area Plans Sub Committee in the light of those responses;

(4) That the possibility of extending delegation to officers to approve routine applications in respect of single  ...  view the full minutes text for item 6.

(Returning Officer). Report to follow.

The Returning Officer, Mr I Willett, presented a report regarding the Elections in June 2009.

The following elections were held on 4 June 2009:

(a)               Seven County electoral divisions;

(b)               One District Council by-election for the District ward of Waltham Abbey Honey Lane;

(c)               One Parish Council by-election for the Parish ward of Buckhurst Hill (East); and

(d)               Election of seven members of the European Parliament for the eastern region of the UK.

Electoral Statistics

• Voter turnout in the district, at the various elections, reached 46%.

• 8,167 postal votes were issued.

• 70% of postal votes issued were returned.

Polling Stations

Although the majority of polling stations used were those which had been established for many years, there were some changes this year:

• Field Station at Gunpowder Park, Waltham Abbey

The polling station for the Sewardstone area had been Sewardstone Village Hall. Because of the building’s poor state this had been changed to Lee Valley Caravan Park. However building alterations had led to the new polling station being at the Gunpowder Park.

• Sheering

In the 2008 election the Sheering polling station was situated in the local public house. However there were issues concerning adequate screening from the rest of the public house. There would be further discussions with the owners regarding screening arrangements.

• Theydon Bois

The polling station had been in Theydon Bois Village Hall. However in 2009 the hall was booked by a group and could not be used as a polling station. As a result the polling station was transferred to St. Mary’s Church Hall, Theydon Bois.

• Buckhurst Hill

The polling station at Roding Valley Centre was moved to St. Stephen’s Church Hall because of a transfer of ownership.

• Bobbingworth

Representations had been received concerning the provision of a polling station in Bobbingworth. Because of previous difficulties in finding a suitable site within Bobbingworth, voters had been directed to a joint polling station in Moreton. It was subsequently suggested that the local church in Bobbingworth be used as a polling station. However there were only 215 voters registered for Bobbingworth, it was felt that for such a relatively small number of voters it was not correct to spend additional money on a separate polling station.

Spoilt Ballot Papers

• Votes rejected in the European election totalled 280.

Complaints and Queries received in the Elections Office

·         The majority of calls made to the Elections Office were from electors complaining of not having received a poll card or not being on the electoral register. These queries recurred at every election and most were explained by voters losing their poll cards and forgetting to update their register entries at the appropriate time.

Count – Theydon Bois Village Hall (5 and 7 June 2009)

·         It had been decided to hold the count in Theydon Bois Village Hall because of its location, car parking space and IT links.

·         The Regional Returning Officer had stipulated that verification of the European ballot needed to be notified to him by 1p.m. on 5 June 2009.  ...  view the full minutes text for item 7.

To consider which reports are ready to be submitted to the Overview and Scrutiny Committee at its next meeting.

The reports regarding Officer Delegation and Election Review were being put before the Overview and Scrutiny Committee.

The next programmed meeting of the Panel will be held on 14 September 2009 at 7.30p.m. in Committee Room 1 and then on:

2 November 2009;

11 January 2010; and

22 March 2010

The next meeting of the Panel was scheduled for Monday 14 September 2009 at 7.30p.m. and then on the following:

Monday 2 November 2009 at 7.30p.m.;

Monday 11 January 2010 at 7.30p.m.; and

Monday 22 March 2010 at 7.30p.m.

(Assistant to the Chief Executive)  To report the appointment of any substitute members for the meeting.

There were no substitute members at the meeting.