Contrasts

I went to the North Area committee last week.

The council has three area committees. They comprise all the councillors in each of the areas and meet monthly. They have no major decision making powers – although they look after the allocation of the small grant schemes such as the Community chest (link). But they provide a forum for the public and organisations like parish or town councils to raise things in public directly with councillors either by questions or through petitions. It’s one of the few places where this sort of interaction can take place and where the public can encourage, or embarrass councillors and the council into doing things.

A lot of the issues raised seem to stem from frustration about a lack of communication, simply the fact that an email or a phone call isn’t answered which leads to uncertainty about whether a problem is being addressed or, if not, whether there’s a good reason for delay or no action.

About half the (relatively few) things that have been raised with me so far have been resolved quickly and easily; unfortunately the other half have taken time simply because people don’t respond without being chased. I understand the pressures front line staff are under but life for all concerned is so much easier when people respond quickly. This is a cultural issue senior management are well aware of; it’s up to us as councillors to continually press for a prompt reply. It’s only polite, and most people are happy to wait for a solution once they know someone is taking them seriously – or even to accept something can’t be done if they are told why.

The issues raised at the area committee were obviously important to those people. But they were an interesting contrast to the excellent induction presentation the previous week from the Children’s Services team. Youth unemployment, addictions, teenage pregnancy, under-performing schools are serious. The team seemed to be motivated and committed and has produced overall award winning standards of service across the county.

Lord Acton's quote *

When I used to occasionally visit County Hall I was always slightly offended by the reserved spaces for Councillors which were nearest to the entrance. What gave them the right to have better spaces than the Council tax payers? Now, as I sweep in and park, I feel it is no more than I am due. One month in and already the trappings of power insidiously corrupt…

Not of course that I’ve had that much power so far, and such that I have is reduced by the unfamiliarity of the role. But last week was the start of exercising influence if not power: I had three committee meetings (audit, licensing and N Area planning) and went on a planning application site visit.

The audit committee reviewed the internal audit programme, something that doesn’t sound that interesting but which is actually very important: it’s a critical part of the process of controlling how the Council works and how it manages its money. The internal audit function is shared with N Tyneside which means we both benefit from each other’s experiences. I thought the programme seemed good and importantly the Council is disciplined in following up issues raised by the function.

The planning committee more obviously impacted on people’s lives. We had five applications to consider; they only come to the committee because they are controversial in that there have been objections to officer’s recommendations. A lot of residents had come to watch one of the most controversial applications which had to balance the need for more affordable housing in the County, the pressure on local drainage infrastructure and the impact on the environment, and they were unhappy with the outcome. Generally I believe in planning decisions being made at as local a level as possible but they have to be in line with the County’s overall framework.

The number of issues people raise with me is slowly increasing, with a couple of particularly intractable ones last week that will require some careful working with relevant officials.

*  If there is any presumption it is the other way, against the holders of power, increasing as the power increases. Historic responsibility has to make up for the want of legal responsibility. Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely. Great men are almost always bad men, even when they exercise influence and not authority, still more when you superadd the tendency or the certainty of corruption by authority. There is no worse heresy than that the office sanctifies the holder of it.

Interestingly, in the context of this Council, he is also the author of this phrase:

“The one pervading evil of democracy is the tyranny of the majority, or rather of that party, not always the majority, that succeeds, by force or fraud, in carrying elections”.

The lessons start here

It’s all still a learning process; the main lesson this week was about the planning process.

Planning is tricky: if a matter comes to a planning committee then by definition it’s contentious and someone – often more than one – will be disappointed by the outcome.

For this reason, there are some tight rules to make sure that decisions are made fairly. Members of the planning committee can be lobbied, can take part in pre-decision discussions, but they must ensure their decision take place transparently. It must be clear that at the meeting they approach the decision with an open mind and considering all the facts. It is a quasi-judicial decision and has to be made in accordance with planning law and guidance – hence the need for specific training.

Planning officers make recommendations to accept or reject applications. Planning committees don’t have to follow that recommendation, but we need to have good reasons under planning law if we disagree. This is both to be fair to all parties and also because if we didn’t have reasonable planning grounds then on any appeal costs could be awarded against the Council.

The Government has set the framework for planning authorities. There’s a presumption in favour of growth, of “sustainable development”, whatever that is. Authorities must prepare a local plan which sets out the main priorities and objectives for the area and decisions would normally reflect the plan. At the moment Northumberland uses the plans prepared by the previous six District Councils but is currently drafting such a plan, which after consultation is due for completion next year. As the plan is still at an early draft stage the emerging policies can only be accorded limited weight in planning decisions although some weight can be given to the recent evidence base work supporting the emerging plan. As the draft plan progresses further towards formal adoption we will be able to give greater weight to the draft policies.

Other things that should be taken into account are the views of statutory consultees, like the Highways Authority, English Heritage and Parish Councils, and others eg local groups or residents. Issus like design, noise, safety are relevant; property values, prospects of better alternatives and restrictive covenants are not.

What does this mean for a Councillor who is on a planning committee? I’m on the North Area Committee, one of three area committees in the County; it hears anything in North Northumberland where there are is a dispute about the outcome and is not covered by the central committee. The central committee covers big stuff – things like major energy or infrastructure projects (eg wind farms), applications which have implications outside the area or applications made by the Council itself.

If the application is covered by the central committee then I can behave like any other councillor: listen, form a view and present that opinion (if desirable) at the committee. If it’s covered by the North Area I need to decide whether I should be part of the decision process or should step aside. I would normally prefer to be part of the decision process, unless I had some form of conflict of interest, and therefore would need to behave carefully beforehand. I would listen but not contribute to planning discussions at Parish Councils; any lobbying or fact finding would need to include one of the Council’s planning officials. This means I can show an open mind when it comes to the planning committee.

The planning authorities’ discretion to make decisions has recently been restricted by the Government. It thinks that planning processes have hurt economic growth and if it allows people to, for example, put up extensions or change planning uses on retail units then a thousand flowers will bloom and our economic problems will be reduced. I suspect this is overly optimistic and also forgets the fact that planning frameworks exist for a reason. For any one person who wants an extension, there sometimes will be neighbours who are badly impacted. Equally, a high street may not need a string of betting shops. We will see if this change is beneficial overall.

But despite this restriction, I hope and expect planning will be one of the most interesting parts of the role, even if also the most contentious.

 

Elsewhere, I had a discussion about parking problems in Bamburgh in particular as part of a general briefing about the AONB; this was prompted by a report in the local paper that I wanted to arrange a meeting to cover bank holiday and parking issues in the area. It covered the long term project to improve the highway design and management, focusing on de-cluttering, parking and traffic flow. The lessons from this apply to the other coastal villages.

And the sunshine continues. It brings parking problems but also money!