Dear Members,
I am bringing this motion to you tonight after several instances where I have been let down by the planning department of West Lindsey District Council where there appears to be a disregard for the views of Ward Councillors.
If you recall, I have brought this matter up before, as misunderstandings between the Councillor role and the role of planning was evident - planning believing that their role is black and white and ALL judgments should be made on planning grounds alone. If this were the case then there would be no need whatsoever for a Planning Committee consisting of Members. It is now clear to me that this confusion still remains and decisions are being made without listening to the local democratic voice. If you recall I received a public apology on this matter.
The last straw came for me recently when, despite at least 17 email interactions between myself and other objectors, Parish Councillors, Executive level officers and Planning Officers; a delegated decision was made. I was only informed after the event had completed. It did not go to committee as requested previously and I was not communicated with, despite several requests to be updated so that I could check whether the committee option had been taken. This was an application, virtually identical to others, which had been previously refused.
Unfortunately, this is not the first time this has happened to me and all Councillors should be concerned that decisions are being made on controversial applications without Members being able to present the local perspective to committee. We are all aware that this is the essential democratic counter measure to what may be inappropriate decisions.
I therefore move that in the forthcoming audit of development management the issue of how the planning department communicates with ward councillors is included within the scope of that audit and that the training given to officers around political awareness is reviewed and strengthened.
Meanwhile I await the outcome of an investigation regarding a separate complaint about how the processing of the application I referred to was handled.
Cllr Reg Shore
Minutes:
Councillor Shore had submitted the following motion:
Dear Members,
I am bringing this motion to you tonight after several instances where I have been let down by the planning department of West Lindsey District Council where there appears to be a disregard for the views of Ward Councillors.
If you recall, I have brought this matter up before, as misunderstandings between the Councillor role and the role of planning was evident - planning believing that their role is black and white and ALL judgments should be made on planning grounds alone. If this were the case then there would be no need whatsoever for a Planning Committee consisting of Members. It is now clear to me that this confusion still remains and decisions are being made without listening to the local democratic voice. If you recall I received a public apology on this matter.
The last straw came for me recently when, despite at least 17 email interactions between myself and other objectors, Parish Councillors, Executive level officers and Planning Officers; a delegated decision was made. I was only informed after the event had completed. It did not go to committee as requested previously and I was not communicated with, despite several requests to be updated so that I could check whether the committee option had been taken. This was an application, virtually identical to others, which had been previously refused.
Unfortunately, this is not the first time this has happened to me and all Councillors should be concerned that decisions are being made on controversial applications without Members being able to present the local perspective to committee. We are all aware that this is the essential democratic counter measure to what may be inappropriate decisions.
I therefore move that in the forthcoming audit of development management the issue of how the planning department communicates with ward councillors is included within the scope of that audit and that the training given to officers around political awareness is reviewed and strengthened.
Meanwhile I await the outcome of an investigation regarding a separate complaint about how the processing of the application I referred to was handled.
Cllr Reg Shore
Note: Councillor White joined the meeting at 19.38.
Councillor Giles McNeill, Chairman of the Governance and Audit Committee responded to the motion and set out the scope of the forthcoming audit to be undertaken by the Committee. The scope was to include communications with the public and Councillors and invitations would be issued for interviews with Councillors from 2 May 2017. The Chairman had met with the Chairman and Vice Chairman of the Planning Committee and the Chief Operating Officer. The purpose of the audit was to undertake a full review of the efficiency and effectiveness of the planning and enforcement services. Twenty audit days were being dedicated to the work, as there were different issues being experienced to those of two years ago.
Councillor McNeill then seconded the motion.
The Chief Executive then informed Members that whilst normal practice was to wait for the improvement actions following the audit, she would be sending a table to all Members to enable cases to be listed to record issues of concern, to establish the trends and causes. In this way there could be improvement prior to the outcome of the audit, in September.
Having been moved and seconded, the motion was voted upon. It was then RESOLVED that the content of the motion be included within the scope of the Governance and Audit Committee’s audit of the Planning Service.