Issue - items at meetings - Localism Bill Update

Report of the Strategic Director, Resources (copy attached).

RESOLVED -

(1)         That the Committee notes the report and requests further updates as the Bill progresses, including proposals for implementation for Brighton & Hove.

(2)         That Members of the Committee receive an update on the latest position regarding the timing of changes to governance arrangements.

(3)         That DCLG be requested to produce guidance to the Bill for use by Members in dealing with enquiries from constituents and that a letter requesting this be signed by the three Group Leaders.

11.1         The Committee considered a report of the Strategic Director, Resources concerning progress of the Localism Bill and highlighting the key amendments that have been made to the Bill.

11.2         Councillor Oxley asked whether any more information was available regarding the provisions that would allow the council to move back to a ‘committee system’ of governance and suggested that the Members of the Committee receive regular updates in relation to this.

11.3         Councillor Morgan welcomed the increase in the number of members required to establish a Neighbourhood Forum (NF), but raised a number of concerns about the Bill, including the impact of reverting back to the committee system on effective scrutiny, the abolition of the Standards Board, and powers for individual LAs to develop their own social housing allocations policies with no national or regional guidelines.

11.4         Councillor Kennedy welcomed with caution the commitment to financial assistance for neighbourhood planning as council’s would be unable to bear the cost on their own. She reported that residents were in favour of the neighbourhood planning provisions, but was concerned that they were not aware of the full facts. She suggested that Group Leaders write to the Department for Communities and Local Government to request that robust guidance be produced for Members when dealing with queries from residents.

11.5         Councillor G Theobald stated that he was supportive of the proposal to abolish the Standards Board. He requested more information of how NFs would be established.

11.6         Councillor A Norman reported that residents had begun asking about the implications of the Bill and welcomed further updates as it progressed. She noted that, although the Standards Board would be abolished, the council kept the Code of Conduct for Members under review and that checks and balances would be maintained through the Standards Committee.

11.7         Councillor Randall announced that work had begun in relation to NFs, but acknowledged that not all areas would welcome such an approach. He raised concerns about the provisions relating to homelessness and stated that people wanted access to registered social housing, rather than allowing LAs to rely on the private rented sector.

11.8         Councillor Mitchell stated that the Bill would make it difficult for the city to tackle its housing needs. She asked whether NFs would set up neighbourhood planning frameworks and whether the council could offer support in areas that were unlikely to take advantage of the opportunities without assistance.

11.9         In response to comments from the Committee, the Acting Assistant Head of Law made the following points:

§         No changes had been made to the provisions relating to changing governance arrangements, and she was not aware of any particular lobby in respect of this.

§         LAs would have to consider applications for NFs based on specific criteria, which was outline in paragraph 3.12 of the report; if a proposal did not reflect the character of the area, the LA would have the power to refuse an application.

§         There was nothing to prevent the council from promoting the idea of NFs or providing assistance in areas that required support.

11.10    The Head of Planning Strategy explained that it would be for the council to decide whether the NF approach was appropriate in part of an area; it was necessary for designated areas to be adjoining, but there would be significant resource implications if NFs where established across the whole of the city.

11.11    Councillor Oxley noted the wide scope of the Bill and suggested that a range of comprehensive guides would be required.

11.12    Councillor J Kitcat reported that he had been contacted by residents in relation to the planning provisions, but noted that many residents’ association would not fit the criteria for a NF. He suggested that one option could be to use ward boundaries, but acknowledged that the Bill could change further prior to enactment.

11.13    The Chair noted that two amendments to the recommendations had been suggested, and that the Committee was supportive of receiving further updates about the timing of changes to governance arrangement, and also to asking DCLG to produce guidance on the Bill for Members.

11.14    RESOLVED -

(1)         That the Committee notes the report and requests further updates as the Bill progresses, including proposals for implementation for Brighton & Hove.

(2)         That Members of the Committee receive an update on the latest position regarding the timing of changes to governance arrangements.

(3)         That DCLG be requested to produce guidance to the Bill for use by Members in dealing with enquiries from constituents and that a letter requesting this be signed by the three Group Leaders.