To discuss the following matters raised by Local Council’s:
i) Quality Councils
At the Local Council’s Liaison Committee meeting on 7 March 2007, Councillor Ed Borton (Nazeing Parish Council) asked that the issue of Quality Councils be raised at this meeting. They would like to know how Quality Councils would affect local councils and how the delegated functions would affect them.
As this was very much a political issue, they asked that the Leader and the Cabinet be invited to participate in the debate.
(ii) Community Involvement in Section 106 Planning Gain Decisions on Applications
(iii) Update on Proposed Return Visit of Councillor Norman Hume Highways Portfolio Holder for Essex County Council
(iv) Police Liaison Issues
Minutes:
(a) Quality Councils
This item was raised by Councillor E Borton of Nazeing Parish Council. It concerned how the Quality Councils criteria affected local councils. The Leader of the District Council, Councillor Mrs D Collins, had been invited to the meeting to speak on this. The committee was informed that Essex had more Quality Councils than any other county in England. However despite the enhanced status that the Quality Councils’ title gave, there were still substantial problems facing local councils. In particular was the public’s perception of crime. Often residents did not feel safe, despite the District being a comparatively safe place to live. Therefore Councillors, particularly at Parish and District level, had an important role to play in being the eyes and ears of the community. They could report graffiti and rubbish and be an important point of contact for the public.
Councillor Mrs D Collins spoke of the Council’s record on recycling, up by 42%, and, with the introduction of the new waste management contract with fortnightly collections, there should be a better waste collection service.
Members of the Committee were concerned whether being a Quality Council was meaningful. It was unclear as to how far it changed the way they worked and their involvement with the public. It was felt that there needed to be devolution of power to local councils. An example was given of streets having their names changed and local councils not being consulted. Mrs Collins advised that the District Council would consult local councillors in future if a street was having its name changed.
The Deputy Chief Executive, Derek MacNab, advised the Committee that further work was needed in clarifying the role of Quality Councils and the Government was currently reviewing the policy. A further progress report would be made at a future meeting of the Local Councils Liaison Committee.
RESOLVED:
That, a progress report concerning Quality Councils be made for a future meeting of the Local Council’s Liaison Committee in 2008.
(b) Community Involvement in Section 106 Planning Gain Decisions on Applications
This item was brought to the Committee by Councillor Brian Surtees of Ongar Town Council. It concerned the level of community involvement in Section 106 planning agreements. It was felt that opportunities were being missed if Section 106 Agreements were not discussed with Parish and Town Councils as they were in touch with local need. They asked to be consulted about the potential for an agreement. The Assistant Director of Planning Services, Paul Sutton, informed the Committee that the Section 106 agreements were a planning obligation and not simply a way of obtaining funding from developers. It was about making developments acceptable in planning terms. Any agreements drawn up needed to be relevant to planning, fair, reasonable and related in scale.
The County Council had set out it’s policy regarding development over a certain size and was aiming for similar objectives with planning agreements. Parish Councils played an important role during the agreement phase, as in some cases they had access to information that the District Council did not have.
The Committee felt that officers could have been more forthright in developing Section 106 Agreements to the benefit of local residents. As well as this, local councils were not always being consulted about the agreements. A planning protocol was needed and Paul Sutton agreed that these points should be included in the planning process. Finally, it was requested that a draft policy should be circulated to Parish and Town Councils which should, at a later stage, be included in the Parish Charter.
RESOLVED:
That, a draft policy concerning community involvement in Section 106 agreements, be circulated to Parish and Town Councils for comment.
(c) Update on Proposed Return Visit of Councillor Norman Hume, Highways Portfolio Holder for Essex County Council
This item was raised by Councillor Brian Surtees of Ongar Town Council. It was agreed that Councillor Norman Hume be invited to the first Local Council’s Liaison Committee in the new Council year.
RESOLVED:
That, Councillor Norman Hume of Essex County Council, be invited to the first Local Council’s Liaison Committee in the new Council year.
(d) Police Liaison Issues
This item was raised by Councillor Brian Surtees of Ongar Town Council. The issue concerned liaison between the District Council, local councils, and the police. It was felt that local councils could provide important information to the police because they often received information from residents concerning local crime problems. They had a good local knowledge and therefore, should be kept up to date regarding police issues. It was argued that there was poor feedback from the police. For example the Neighbourhood Action Panels (NAPS) were not public meetings and were poorly attended by senior police figures. It was requested that an annual public meeting would help facilitate a useful dialogue between councillors and the police. It was felt that a regular update on crime statistics in the District was also needed.
The Community Wellbeing Portfolio Holder, Councillor Ms S Stavrou, had been invited to the meeting. She argued that local councillors were being provided with information by the District and currently they were better informed than ever before. The Safer Communities Co-Ordinator, Mrs C Wiggins, stated that from April 2008 a strategic assessment was being made annually as a result of the Police and Justice Act 2006. The Crime and Disorder Reduction Partnership statistics were currently available and were only for the District as a whole and could not be broken down to parish level. Some Councillors complained that they could not get access to the Joint Action Group (JAG) minutes. Councils who wished to receive these minutes were advised to contact Mrs C Wiggins who would notify the JAG and they would put them on their emailing list, only electronic copies were available. Councillor Ms S Stavrou concluded by saying that the police had some resource issues within Essex. She also referred to the problem of younger criminals being more mobile due to free fares on public transport and the fact that the District bordered three London boroughs, thereby causing difficulties for the police.