Skip to main content

Agenda and minutes

Venue: Exe Room, Phoenix House, Tiverton

Contact: Julia Stuckey 

Link: audio recording

Items
No. Item

65.

APOLOGIES AND SUBSTITUTE MEMBERS

To receive any apologies for absence and notices of appointment of Substitute Members (if any).

Minutes:

Apologies were received from Cllr C J Eginton.

66.

DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST UNDER THE CODE OF CONDUCT

Councillors are reminded of the requirement to declare any interest, including the type of interest, and reason for that interest, either at this stage of the meeting or as soon as they become aware of that interest.

 

Minutes:

Cllr Mrs F J Colthorpe declared a personal interest for agenda item 6 as she was the Chairman of the Planning Committee and Cllr F J Rosamond declared a personal interest for item 8 on the agenda as he was the Chairman of the Scrutiny Committee.

67.

PUBLIC QUESTION TIME

To receive any questions relating to items on the Agenda from members of the public and replies thereto.

 

Note:   A maximum of 30 minutes is allowed for this item.

Minutes:

With reference to item 6 on the agenda Mr N Quinn said last July, I asked you for increased support for members of the public speaking to planning applications.

 

It seems the answer is No, as Mrs Tebbey’s report proposes options which would remove the public’s constitutional rights completely or replace them with Chairman's discretion. Supporting these options will place great pressure on the Chairman and is more likely to raise tensions with the public rather than relieve them.

 

Many Planning Committee Members rely solely on the Officer report and recommendation as the basis for their decision.  The public use question time to inform Members by questioning statements made in the Officer report and pointing out material omissions or inaccuracies that Members may wish to explore.

 

Over the past year, the average Planning Committee meeting took 3 ½ hours. Public Question Time averaged only 12 minutes. However, Mrs Tebbey blames Public Question Time for the length of meetings but does not consider any other issues.

 

Question to Chairman – The Council recently had a Peer Review of Planning Service Productivity which produced some comments and recommendations specifically aimed at reducing the length of Planning Committee meetings. Have these comments and recommendations been fully implemented?

 

In para 3.5 - Mrs Tebbey states that there is “a general limit on speakers and the nomination of a spokesperson is common to many councils”.

 

However, in our local area the number of objectors who can speak is generally set higher than our one:

Taunton Deane = No Limit,

North Devon = 6,

East Devon = 2,

Torridge = 2,

Teignbridge = 2 if large and 5mins

 

Question to Chairman – In the light of these local figures, would the Standards Committee, when addressing Protocol para 9.2,please raise the number of Objectors (and Supporters) who can speak to 2?

 

In Para 4.2, Mrs Tebbey says she “raised the issue with counterparts nationally” and gives some feedback. However, the Councils quoted may not be comparable to us.

 

Question to Chairman – Where did these 6 comments come from? How many of the 200 District Councils in England were actually contacted? How many replies were received from them?

 

In the Council’s Code of Corporate Governance you use “Public Question Time at every Committee” to evidence that “the authority as a whole is open and accessible to the community….”.

 

Were Members aware that the recent Residents Satisfaction Surveyshowed that:

Only 41% of residents believe that this Council acts on their concerns and

Only 51% of residents trust this Council

 

Restricting the scope of Public Question Time at Planning Committee will lower the standing of this Council even further.

 

I urge you to leave para 9.1 of the Protocol as it currently stands.

 

Also referring to item 6 on the agenda Cllr B Warren of Willand Parish Council said Why is it that a Parish Councillor can speak for 3 minutes in objection to a small unsightly extension proposal but can still only speak for the same  ...  view the full minutes text for item 67.

68.

MINUTES pdf icon PDF 141 KB

Members to consider whether to approve the minutes of the last meeting as a correct record.

Minutes:

The Minutes of the previous meeting were approved as a true record and signed by the Chairman.

69.

CHAIRMAN'S ANNOUNCEMENTS

To receive any announcements the Chairman of the Committee may wish to make.

Minutes:

The Chairman gave her apologies for the next meeting.

70.

MOTION FROM COUNCIL 0.25 pdf icon PDF 159 KB

The following Motion has been forwarded from Council to the Standards Committee for consideration and to receive a report from the Monitoring Officer in connection with the motion and other issues.

 

Motion 541 (Councillor Mrs J Roach – 30 November 2017)

 

This Council reconsiders the time and times that it allows ward members to speak at the planning committee. The present system gives many opportunities to speak but allows the local member only one opportunity. At the very least Council should give elected Councillors the opportunity to correct incorrect statements, something that exists within standing orders but not allowed at the planning committee. At the last planning committee the situation that exists at the moment prevented me as the elected Councillor for Silverton for pointing out that the Highways advice was inconsistent with previous advice given on the same site.

 

Please note: Having considered the above Motion the Policy Development Group are asked to consider whether this Motion should either be supported or rejected. This decision will be referred back to full Council on 25 April 2018.

Additional documents:

Minutes:

The Committee had before it a Motion from Cllr Mrs J Roach which had been forwarded from Council to the Standards Committee for consideration along with a report * from the Monitoring Officer in connection with the motion and other issues.

 

Motion 541 (Councillor Mrs J Roach – 30 November 2017)

 

This Council reconsiders the time and times that it allows ward members to speak at the planning committee. The present system gives many opportunities to speak but allows the local member only one opportunity. At the very least Council should give elected Councillors the opportunity to correct incorrect statements, something that exists within standing orders but not allowed at the planning committee. At the last planning committee the situation that exists at the moment prevented me as the elected Councillor for Silverton for pointing out that the Highways advice was inconsistent with previous advice given on the same site.

 

Cllr Roach introduced her Motion, explaining that it was not an attack on Planning Chairmen and put on record that she appreciated that it was a difficult job. She was critical of events but did not put blame on anyone. The context of her Motion was that people attending Planning Committee had often spent time researching and were often nervous with a lot invested in what was going to happen. It could be an emotional and scary experience. The whole system was stacked in favour of the developer, the Planning Framework did that, reports from officers did that and if rejected there was a right to appeal. It was therefore important that we did not restrict the rights of objectors who had nowhere else to go other than judicial review which was very expensive. She concluded that objectors were at an extreme disadvantage along with local Members. She continued by stating that prior to last year Ward Members could speak at any point but that was stopped and she regretted that, she considered it sad that local Members were restricted. She also pointed out that if the local Member was on the Planning Committee they could speak to the item which was an unfair advantage if other Ward Members were restricted. She further explained that the particular application she was referring to had included a report from Highways.  There were some issues with the accuracy of information given but she had been unable to speak to correct this. She considered that objectors were hampered by the time they had to speak and that Planning Officers could counter every point made by a Member. The whole process was heavily biased to the officer’s report.

 

The Monitoring Officer outlined the contents of her report and provided a short power point presentation highlighting some areas for conversation. She explained that when she was asked to look at public speaking rights she felt it would be remiss not to look at the whole section in the protocol as there was a thread that ran through the process that needed to be considered.

 

The officer  ...  view the full minutes text for item 70.

71.

MONITORING OFFICER UPDATE 2:13

To receive an update from the Monitoring Officer.

Minutes:

The Monitoring Officer provided a brief update, explaining that she was continuing to work on the Constitution and would be updating the Scheme of Delegation following recent restructures.  There was no ongoing training planned for Parish Councils but this would need to be addressed following the local elections in 2019.

72.

EFFECTIVENESS OF SCRUTINY 2:15 pdf icon PDF 503 KB

At the request of the Scrutiny Committee to consider and review the conclusions and recommendations within the attached Government paper. The Chairman of the Scrutiny Committee has provided a personal view.

Additional documents:

Minutes:

The Committee had before it and NOTED a report * from the House of Commons Communities and Local Government Committee regarding effectiveness of local authority overview and scrutiny committees,  along with a briefing note highlighting main points of the report and a personal view from the Chairman of Scrutiny.  The Scrutiny Committee had requested that the Standards Committee consider and review the conclusions and recommendations within the paper.

 

The Chairman of the Scrutiny Committee outlined the contents of the report and his briefing note, highlighting recommendations that had been put forward.  Some of these recommendations were already in place at Mid Devon, such as the recently appointed Scrutiny Officer, the use of experts, engaging with service users, Member training and digital engagement.

 

The Chief Executive informed the Committee that the Government had since responded to these recommendations and the Member Services Manager provided a brief outline of their comments.

 

It was RESOLVED that the updated recommendations from the Government be reviewed by the Scrutiny Committee and that they be asked to report their findings back to the Standards Committee.

 

(Proposed by the Chairman)

 

Note:   i) Papers * previously circulated and attached to Minutes.

 

ii) Cllr F J Rosamond declared a personal interest as Chairman of the Scrutiny Committee.

73.

INTIMIDATION OF MEMBERS 2.34 pdf icon PDF 878 KB

The Committee to consider a review by the Committee on Standards in Public Life regarding ‘Intimidation in Public Life’.

Minutes:

The Committee had before it and NOTED a review by the Committee on Standards in Public Life regarding ‘Intimidation in Public Life’.

 

The Solicitor provided a brief presentation ** which would be circulated to Members following the meeting.

 

Note: - Review * previously circulated and presentation ** attached to Minutes

review by the Committee on Standards in Public Life pdf icon PDF 878 KB

74.

COMPLAINTS 2:40

To receive an update from the Monitoring Officer with regard to any on-going complaints being dealt with.  During the discussion it may be necessary to consider passing the following resolution to protect the Members of District, Town and Parish Council’s being discussed.

 

During discussion of this item it may be necessary to pass the following resolution to exclude the press and public having reflected on Article 12 12.02(d) (a presumption in favour of openness) of the Constitution. This decision may be required because consideration of this matter in public may disclose information falling within one of the descriptions of exempt information in Schedule 12A to the Local Government Act 1972. The Committee will need to decide whether, in all the circumstances of the case, the public interest in maintaining the exemption, outweighs the public interest in disclosing the information.

 

ACCESS TO INFORMATION ACT – EXCLUSION OF THE PRESS AND PUBLIC

 

RECOMMENDED that under section 100A(4) of the Local Government Act 1972 the public be excluded from the next item of business on the grounds that it involves the likely disclosure of exempt information as defined in paragraph 1 of Part 1 of Schedule 12A of the Act, namely information relating to an individual

 

Minutes:

The Monitoring Officer provided an update regarding on-going complaints being dealt with. 

 

During the discussion it was agreed that the meeting be closed to the press and public  to allow the Monitoring Officer to inform the meeting of the detail with regard to ongoing complaints and therefore

 

It was RESOLVED that under section 100A(4) of the Local Government Act 1972 the public be excluded from the next item of business on the grounds that it involves the likely disclosure of exempt information as defined in paragraph 1 of Part 1 of Schedule 12A of the Act, namely information relating to an individual.

 

Following consideration of the Monitoring Officer’s information, the meeting returned to a public forum.

 

 

(Proposed by the Chairman)

75.

IDENTIFICATION OF ITEMS FOR THE NEXT MEETING 2.41

Members are asked to note that the following items are already identified in the work programme for the next meeting:

 

Monitoring Officers Annual Report to the Committee

Complaints

Minutes:

Effectiveness of Scrutiny

Monitoring Officers Annual Report to the Committee

Complaints