Agenda and minutes

(Director of Governance)  To report the appointment of any substitute members for the meeting.

There were no substitute members at the meeting.

(Director of Governance) To agree the notes of the meeting of the Select Committee held on 3 October 2017.

            RESOLVED:

That the notes of the last meeting of the Select Committee held on 3 October 2017 be agreed as a correct record.

(Director of Governance). To declare interests in any items on the agenda.

In considering whether to declare a pecuniary or a non-pecuniary interest under the Code of Conduct, Overview & Scrutiny members are asked pay particular attention to paragraph 9 of the Code in addition to the more familiar requirements.

This requires the declaration of a non-pecuniary 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 9 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.

There were no declarations of interest made pursuant to the Member’s Code of Conduct.

(Chairman / Lead Officer) The Overview and Scrutiny Committee has agreed the Terms of Reference of this Committee. This is attached along with an ongoing work

programme. Members are asked at each meeting to review both documents.

The Select Committee received a report from the Assistant Director (Development Management) regarding the Governance Select Committee’s Terms of Reference and Work Programme 2017/18.

            RESOLVED:

That the Terms of Reference and the Work Programme of the Select Committee for 2017/18 be noted.

(Director of Governance) To consider the attached report.

The Select Committee received a report from S Hill, Assistant Director, Governance regarding the Parliamentary Boundary Review which was being carried out in England. He advised that the Boundary Commission for England (BCE) had been tasked to carry out a review of constituencies and report to Parliament in September 2018. The brief from Parliament was to reduce the number of constituencies and therefore MPs in England from 650 to 600. The aim for the new constituencies in England was to ensure that every new constituency had approximately the same number of electors, with no fewer that 71,031 and no higher than 78,507.

On 17 October 2017 the BCE had published their revised proposals and all of the representations received during the secondary consultation. The final consultation on the revised proposals would end on the 11 December 2017, this was the final consultation before the BCE report to Parliament in September 2018. The changes would not take effect until the next General Election in 2022.

Essex

In the County of Essex the BCE proposed changes across the County, in particular to the constituencies in South Essex. The BCE had made revisions to seven of the seventeen constituencies in the County and an additional change of name to one further constituency. The existing constituencies of Chelmsford, Epping Forest and Thurrock remain unchanged as in the initial proposal.

Epping Forest

Epping Forest remained unchanged.

Harlow and Brentwood and Ongar

In order to meet the new equitable elector numbers, the seats of Harlow and Brentwood and Ongar had been suggested to change and the new constituency would include the Epping Forest wards of Hastingwood, Matching and Sheering Village, Moreton and Fyfield, North Weald Bassett, Roydon, Lower Sheering and Lower Nazeing.

Members were asked to consider if they would:

(i)         support the proposals for no change to the Epping Forest Constituency;

(ii)        wish to submit any other observations on the proposals affecting residents; and

(iii)       authorise officers to submit comments to the BCE before the deadline. The BCE have specifically asked that where proposals were supported that those representations were made to the BCE.

Councillor Stallan stated that these changes were very confusing to residents as in 1997 North Weald Bassett (NWB) was a part of the Epping Forest parliamentary constituency, then in 2010 the parliamentary boundary changed and NWB then  became a part of Brentwood and Ongar, now it would seem there are proposals for another boundary change and North Weald Bassett would be a part of the parliamentary constituency of Harlow even though the district was in Epping Forest.

            RESOLVED:

(1)        That the Assistant Director, Governance be authorised to submit the following comments to the Boundary Commission for England, supporting the no change proposals relating to the Epping Forest Parliamentary Constituency:

“That the proposals seek to transfer an area which currently sits in the Ongar and Brentwood constituency to the Harlow constituency. This area includes North Weald Bassett. Residents of this area were subject to change during the last boundary review  ...  view the full minutes text for item 31.

(Director of Governance) To consider the attached report.

The Select Committee received a report form N Richardson, Assistant Director (Development Management) who advised that at the last meeting of the Select Committee on the 3 October, the Committee received a report regarding the Key Performance Indicators 2017/18 – Quarter 1, in respect of planning application turnaround times, which showed that the targets set were being achieved

Councillor Knapman, who was a substitute at the meeting of the Governance Select Committee on the 3 October, asked if these statistics were accurate, as he understood more to be instances of applications getting near to the 8 week deadline, withdrawn then re-submitted a few weeks later and the 8 week deadline would start again.

The Committee asked for a report to be brought to this meeting with further detail from Officers, as the Assistant Director of Governance (Development Management) was not present at the meeting on the 3 October.

Mr Richardson advised that there were 1,714 planning application decisions issued over the last year and it was noted that 40 of these had been withdrawn by the applicant with no resubmission made, 24 had been refused planning permission and 32 had been withdrawn and then a revised/new planning application had been submitted which represented just over 1.4% of the total. Therefore the instances of applications getting near to the 8 week deadline, withdrawn and then resubmitted were very low.

However, running through all the planning applications in this time period, the grounds for refusal, some of which have been committee reversals made by members, have then been the subject of negotiation with officers and in most cases a more positive decision on a resubmission was made through a fresh planning application.

            RESOLVED:

(1)             That the Select Committee noted those planning applications resubmitted following a previous application being withdrawn or refused planning permission were a very small percentage of all planning decisions made; and

(2)             That the quarterly return of the three planning application type Key Performance Indicator (KPI) was accurate and in line with the KPI criteria and measures set by the Department of Communities and Local Government. 

(Director of Governance) To consider the attached report.

The Select Committee received a report from the Assistant Director (Development Management), regarding the Key Performance Indicators 2017/18 – Quarter 2 Performance.

The Local Government Act 1999 requires that the Council make arrangements to secure continuous improvement in the way in which its functions and services were exercised, having regard to a combination of economy, efficiency and effectiveness.

As part of the duty to secure continuous improvement, a range of Key Performance Indicators (KPI) relevant to the Council’s services and key objectives, were adopted each year by the Finance and Performance Management Cabinet Committee. Performance against the KPIs was monitored on a quarterly basis by Management Board and Overview and Scrutiny to drive improvement in performance and ensure corrective action was taken where necessary.

A range of thirty-two (32) Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) for 2017/18 were adopted by the Finance and Performance Management Cabinet Committee in March 2017. The KPIs are important to the improvement of the Council’s services and the achievement of its key objectives and comprised of a combination of some former statutory indicators and locally determined performance measures. The aim of the KPIs were to direct improvement effort towards services and the national priorities and local challenges arising from the social, economic and environmental context of the district, that are the focus of thekey objectives.

The overall position for all 32 KPIs at the end of Quarter 2 were as follows:

(a)         25 (78%) indicators achieved target;

(b)         3   (9%) indicators did not achieve target,

(c)         4   (13%) indicators performed within the agreed tolerance for the indicator; and

(d)         26 (82%) of indicators were currently anticipated to achieve year-end target, 3 (9%) were uncertain whether they would achieve year-end target and a further 3 (9%) were anticipated not to achieve year-end target.

There were 5 KPIs which fell within the Governance Select Committee’s areas of responsibility. The overall position with regard to the achievement of target performance at Q2 for these 5 indicators were as follows:

(a)             4 (80%) indicators achieved target;

(b)             1 (20%) indicators did not achieve target;

(c)             0 (0%) performed within the agreed tolerance for the indicator; and

(d)             4 (80%) indicators were currently anticipated to achieve year-end target and a further 1 (20%) indicator is uncertain whether it would achieve year-end target.

The ‘amber’ performance status used in the KPI report under agenda item 7, appendix 1, identified indicators that had missed the agreed target for the quarter, but where performance was within an agreed tolerance or range. The KPI tolerances were agreed by Management Board when targets for the KPIs were set in March 2017.

The Select Committee was requested to review Q2 performance for the KPIs within its areas of responsibility. The full set of KPIs was also considered by Management Board on 15 November 2017 and the Finance and Performance Management Cabinet Committee on 16 November 2017.

Councillor N Avey advised that he had concerns regarding GOV008 and the percentage of planning applications refused by Council  ...  view the full minutes text for item 33.

(Director of Governance) To consider the attached report.

The Select Committee received a report regarding the Corporate Plan Key Action Plan 2016/17 – Quarter 2 from the Assistant Director, Governance.

The Corporate Plan was the Council’s key strategic planning document, setting out its priorities over the five year period from 2015/16 to 2019/20. The priorities or Corporate Aims were supported by Key Objectives which provided a clear statement of the Council’s overall intentions for these five years.

The Key Objectives were delivered by an annual action plan with each year building upon the progress against the achievement of the Key Objectives for previous years. The annual action plans contained a range of actions designed to achieve specific outcomes and were working documents and therefore subject to change and development to ensure the actions remained relevant and appropriate and to identify opportunities to secure further progress or improvement.

The Corporate Plan Key Action Plan for 2017/18 was adopted by Council at its meeting on 27 September 2016. Progress in relation to all actions and deliverables was reviewed by the Cabinet, the Overview and Scrutiny Committee and the appropriate Select Committee on a quarterly basis.

There were 50 actions in total for which progress updates for Quarter 2 were as follows:

(a)             42 (84%) of these actions had been Achieved or were On Target;

(b)             2 (4%) of these actions were Under Control;

(c)             6 (12%) were Behind Schedule; and

(d)             0 (0%) were Pending.

There were 8 actions that fell within the areas of responsibility of the Governance Select Committee. At the end of Quarter 2 these were:

(a)             8 (100%) of these actions had been Achieved or were On Target;

(b)             0 (0%) of these actions were Under Control;

(c)             0 (0%) of these actions were Behind Schedule; and

(d)             0 (0%) of these actions were Pending.

RESOLVED:

That the Corporate Plan Key Action Plan 2017/18 Quarter 2 Progress Report be noted.

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

There were no reports for recommendation to the Overview and Scrutiny Committee.

To note the dates of future meetings of the Governance Select Committee:

06 February 2018; and

27 March 2018.

It was noted that the future meetings of the Governance Select Committee for this municipal year would be on:

            06 February 2018; and

            27 March 2018.