Agenda and minutes

To confirm and sign the minutes of the meeting of 19 September 2023.

The minutes of the meeting of 19 September 2023 were confirmed and signed.

Members to receive an update on the previous meeting’s Action Plan.

Members considered the update on previous actions.

Councillor Booth referred to the item regarding pre-application advice and there still seems to be a disconnect between Clarion and Planning and he would like to know where Clarion are getting their pre-application advice. Councillor Mrs Davis stated that enquiries can be made with Clarion and they are due to attend a future meeting of the panel.

To update Members on the annual statistics in relation to the Local Government  Ombudsman (LGO) and the Council’s corporate ‘3Cs’ procedure. This explains how we deal with the comments, compliments, correspondence and complaints we receive.

Members made comments, asked questions, and received responses as follows:

Members considered the Local Government Ombudsman- Annual Review Complaints presented by Councillor Tierney.

Members made comments, asked questions, and received responses as follows:

1.     Councillor Mrs Davis stated the website improvements have made a difference to complaints reducing. Councillor Tierney thanked Councillor Mrs Davis and commented the data is much easier to use and the information stored makes a difference to the general public’s knowledge hence complaints have been improved.

2.     Councillor Carney stated that the correspondence category has increased whilst both compliments and complaints are down by 15% each compared to last year. Is this genuinely because the nature of the correspondence received or is it to do with the triage of communications upon receipt? Councillor Tierney answered that the majority of the correspondence come from the MP office and Councillors which indicates the new Council are doing a good job.

3.     Councillor Booth stated that he would like to see a more detailed report of the sort of complaints being made to ensure details get identified. Councillor Tierney agreed the triage needs to be right to identify the odd mistake and the type of complaint being presented to be able to use the correct data to perform accordantly. Councillor Booth responded questions need to be monitored within the call centre to ensure the correct service has been given when dealing with complaints. David Wright stated the service team will push things through the corporate channel so the complaint can be dealt with in a suitable manner with the correct response.

4.     Councillor Hay asked what an IDOX web journey is? Councillor Tierney responded the IDOX web journey is a digital way of collating information and ensuring the information is sent to the right place to receive the action required.

5.     Councillor Roy asked if the system recognises if the same person has made complaints several times? David Wright stated if a pattern emerges with the same address and complaints showing up on the system an issue warning would be raised. Councillor Booth asked is there a vexatious complainant process in place? David Wright answered there is a persistent complainer system in place where some complaints have been dealt with or have gone to the Ombudsman and been addressed in the correct way, but the complainant persists. Fenland District Council would then adopt the persistent complainant procedure.

6.     Councillor Mrs Davis stated the Ombudsman report had two complaints one of which was regarding planning, which were referred back and asked for an explanation?  Councillor Tierney stated the Ombudsman is not allowed to deal with certain issues such as staff, the planning process or a function of planning itself therefore the complaint would come back to planning and it would be handled through the usual planning complaints procedure.

7.     Councillor Carney stated that he was surprised that the number of the Planning complaints is not higher given some of the controversial applications in the district and would like to see a further explanation of the 21 recorded complaints Planning has  ...  view the full minutes text for item OSC17/23

This report sets out the Council's progress in delivering the corporate objectives.

Members considered the Progress of Corporate Priority – Environment

presented by Councillor Mrs French, Councillor Murphy, Councillor Wallwork, Councillor Tierney and Carol Pilson.

Members made comments, asked questions, and received responses as follows:

1.     Councillor Carney stated Fenland District Council Waste and Recycling still seems to be going great guns and it is interesting to see how the cost-of-living crisis has affected recyclable materials collected. Is the payment made to Fenland District Council per tonne of waste governed by market forces? In other words, who pays for or sets the rate per tonne? Councillor Murphy responded that the rate of tonnage comes through Cambridgeshire County Council and Thalia which is a recycling plant in Water beach Fenland District Council negotiate every year a certain price this can fluctuate throughout the year as the value of paper and aluminium prices can change, Thalia pays Cambridgeshire County Council and Fenland District Council get paid the surplus.

2.     Councillor Gerstner stated on the brown bin charge, there is an income of £968,000 but how is the fee calculated? Is it on last year’s costs considering what is received on recycling as there should not be a profit and should be a break even service. Councillor Murphy responded that the price is looked at from last year and Fenland District Council raise the price up by a few percent to cover the outgoings. He advised that this year the prices will have to raise due to the cost of living as this is a non-profit making service, so the cost must be weighted up every year against prices to get the balance right.  Councillor Gerstner asked if the cost is put up is there a risk of encouraging fly tipping? Councillor Murphy stated it is hard to control fly tipping and he does not feel changing the cost will made a difference to the situation of fly tipping.

3.     Councillor Gerstner congratulated Fenland District Council for a comprehensive website and the rapid response team who act quickly and efficiently to clear the fly tipping once it has been reported. Councillor Murphy stated all the fly tipping is searched once at the depot and if a contact is found that person will be fined. Councillor Tierney added that Fenland District Council benchmarks themselves against other councils and Fenland District Council are the cheapest for bin collection.

4.     Councillor Booth stated the rate of the recycling is at 26% in Fenland which is one of the lowest in the County according to the Defra figures and asked if there are there any plans to improve this recycling rate for the future. Councillor Murphy stated Defra count the figures in a different way to how the Council does. Councillor Booth stated that all the councils would be counted in the same way and he would like to know how this figure can be improved for next year. Councillor Murphy begged to differ. Councillor Tierney suggested that Overview and Scrutiny may wish to consider ways to improve the  ...  view the full minutes text for item OSC18/23

Presentation on FDC’s key achievements and performance 2022/23

Members had received the presentation from the leader and Chief Executive prior to the meeting.

Members made comments, asked questions, and received responses as follows:

1.     Councillor Hay asked if unauthorised planning developments get submitted to the Planning Committee? Councillor Boden responded the planning system works in a specific way if it is found that the development requires planning permission Fenland District Council will invite the owner/occupier to make a planning application, if the application is received then the normal application process is followed, and the decision route is determined by the Scheme of Delegation in the Constitution. He added that Fenland District Council do not invite a planning application where it does not think planning permission is likely to be forthcoming, in such circumstances the owner/occupier may remedy the breach of planning control and if not, the Council will issue an Enforcement Notice, if the notice is not complied with then the Council can moved to prosecution and the decision to prosecute is a committee matter.

2.     Councillor Hay asked who will be completing the Local Plan work now Peterborough City Council is no longer involved and when will the work be finished? Councillor Boden responded Fenland District Council are looking to recruit their own staff to continue the development of local plan, The Employment Committee agreed to the creation of two new posts at their July meeting and are about to commence a large Autumn recruitment drive across a number of vacant posts within the Planning Team. He added that the greater problem is the Government are going to make changes to the planning process, but this will not stop the Council from going ahead with its original plan.

3.     Councillor Hay asked what is meant by a less restrictive Scheme of Delegation would assist in helping meet performance goals for Planning? Councillor Boden explained reducing the number of triggers and a less restrictive Scheme of Delegation this would reduce the number of applications that need to be brought to the Planning Committee thus taking up less officer time which would free them up to prepare reports, agendas, presentations etc.

4.     Councillor Hay stated the Barclay’s building in March is due to be demolished once the regeneration workers have moved out and asked if this building could be repurposed without demolition? Councillor Seaton responded that the Barclay’s building was on the market for some time as the building was deemed unfit for purpose. He stated that Fenland District Council put in an application to use the FHSF grant to purchase the building on the understanding it was to be demolished and then a mix-use site be built in its place with the lower level for commercial use and the accommodation above for residential use. Councillor Seaton expressed the view that without this approach the beneficial cost ratio required by the Government would not have been met and the Barclay’s building would remain empty.

5.     Councillor Hay questioned what the set up will be for the Fenland Extra Care  ...  view the full minutes text for item OSC19/23

To consider the Draft Work Programme for Overview & Scrutiny Panel 2023/24

Members considered and noted the Future Work Programme.

Councillor Mrs Davis advised members that she waived the Forward Plan notice period and subsequent call-in period in relation to the Portfolio Holder decision on the forward procurement of HR/Payroll Software Contract to enable the decision to proceed to allow the appointment of a preferred supplied within specified contract timescales..