Scrutiny: quarterly service plan checklists

Hey now that's a groovy title for a blog entry - can see you all wanting to read this one - I am just back from a Stroud Green party meeting in Star Anise followed by pub and have to say I regret having slept earlier in the evening and having an espresso - I'm wide awake now! So well what better way than to share a little of the role of sitting on Scrutiny committee....

Photo: Randwick woods in the rain

Well you can read previous posts to get a jist of what it is about in terms of the Committee meeting regularly at Ebley Mill - here I want to talk a bit about the mini-meetings councillors have with heads of service... each councillor pairs up with another and has 2 heads to interview re their service 4 times a year - as a guide there are some questions like do the Service Objectives give a clear understanding of what the service is about and are there a good range of meaningful Key Performance Indicators and is performance on target? Part of the idea behind this is to look at ways to improve the service.

Last month I met with the Regeneration head and last week head of Planning. As this is my first time it is hard to get a full understanding of the role and how best to tackle it - having said that the other councillor I was with, Sarah Lunnon, another Green, was very helpful as she has been on scrutiny before - also both heads were great, very supportive and seemed very open to look at the issues we raised.

To give some idea of what we covered in last weeks meeting here are some of the notes which will go to the Scrutiny committee....

In terms of Service Achievements 2006/07 last year in planning there were particular achievements in customer satisfaction survey, gaining Planning Delivery Grant, dealing with several complex applications and improvements to electronic consultation/website. However I did question the annual design award which went to Stroud College - while it is by all accounts a great space to work it is nowhere near the standards of sustainability that we should be expecting.

In terms of Key Performance Indicators - otherwise known by the catchy titles of BVPI’s and LPI’s...well it was noted that national targets like BV109 for applications to be determined within 8 or 13 weeks do not seem to recognise that full consultation with community and Development Control Committee mean that targets can be missed but the results are usually better for the community. I would wholly endorse this point having been on the Development Control Committee last year.

The performance on targets is looking good with the exception of BV109(a) and one other. The Ist Qtr of that target shows 28.57% reaching target when the requirement by the Government is 60%. The reasons for this are numerous and relate to the longer consultation taken on some key sites and 106 arrangements (more about those another time). A choice will be needed as to whether huge resources are used now to try and meet the target or accept that this will mean the loss of the Planning Delivery Grant (£50,000). The loss of the grant could jeopardise crucial improvements to 106.

Many other additional points were discussed like staffing, the Services Action Plan and complaints procedures plus here are some of my other notes from the meeting:

- SPD: concern expressed that current draft does not go as far as lead Councils in terms of CO2 reduction - see previous blog discussions for much more on this.
- PR/Press releases: noted improvements in recent years by the District Council but concern that there is still a significant challenge in making public aware of what is and is not possible in planning terms for local Councils. Too often the public think we have very many more powers than we do in reality.
- Access group for on-site inspections: question raised about the social impact of disability. The Access group does by all accounts do an excellent job looking at physical disability issues, but I asked whether wider issues re the Social Model of Disability were being addressed?
- Staff/Member communication: Concern raised about how and what officers can say to members: officers views can be given but need to be balanced.
- Enforcement: has improved in recent months with several prosecution cases.
- Conservation areas: this has stood still for a long time but plans are now coming through.
- SUDS: yes I know this is one of my favorites as any one who reads this blog will know - it was noted that even when a condition is applied SUDS schemes are not taking place to the extent that is necessary or possible. SUDS is now mandatory in Scotland and Ireland but we lag behind in this country as many planners and developers are not familiar with the possibilities or the cost savings. Key to success seems to be discussion at pre-application stages. Many Councils are now looking to address this issue. A Policy Panel was suggested as one way forward. I'm also trying to put together a submission to Defra re the flooding - one of the key issues to mention will be SUDS.

Anyhow I hope this gives a flavour to anyone interested - clearly as time goes by and I get to know the services more it will hopefully be easier to find the best ways forward.