Agenda item

To consider revisions to the Planning Scheme of Delegation within the Council’s Constitution to allow delegation of authority to initiate prosecutions for non-compliance with enforcement notices to officers rather than requiring a resolution of the Planning Committee.

Members considered revisions to the Planning Scheme of Delegation within the Council's Constitution to allow the delegation of authority to initiate prosecutions for non-compliance with enforcement notices to officers, rather than requiring a resolution of the Planning Committee, presented by Councillor Mrs Laws.

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

·         Councillor Mrs French stated that she fully supports this, it was a Planning Committee request as officers spend hours writing these reports and action is delayed by several weeks, especially on the Section 215 and 216s.

·         Councillor Hoy expressed reservations about this proposal as it goes against what they have moved towards in Licensing, which is members having a say rather than officers. She stated that she understands that the Planning Committee want this change but she is unsure whether it is the committee that is the cause of the lack of 215s. Councillor Hoy made the point that there are buildings all over Wisbech that could do with being served notices and she does not think that is due to the lack of Planning Committee action. She asked how is consistency in approach going to be ensured because if there is an officer deciding the enforcement process how is it known in which way they are enforcing as some people may be being enforced against more than others and how is it going to be monitored? Councillor Mrs Laws responded that the reason that this has been put forward is because the appropriate planning actions have been looked at and it has been consistent with the officer’s recommendation. She does agree that consistency needs to be monitored, there is a Planning Enforcement team and they report into the Head of Planning so these things will be monitored by the Head of Planning and herself.

·         Councillor Booth expressed the view that the approach to enforcement in the District is not great, certain people know this and take advantage of the situation. He is frustrated as a Parish Councillor that enforcement action is not taken when it should be and he hopes that it leads to improvement in the services provided and enforcement action increases. Councillor Booth stated that he was told several years ago that only 5% of enforcement enquiries ever resulted in enforcement action, which seemed to him low at the time.

·         Councillor Tierney expressed reservations as it goes in the wrong direction in what he believes for local councillors but he has belief in the Portfolio Holder and Planning Committee and if they say this is what they want to do he will support the proposal. He hopes that it can be looked at to see if this is working and if it is not changes can be made accordingly.

·         Councillor Boden stated that the comments made by Councillors Hoy and Tierney are correct as the direction with policies is that they are more member controlled justifiably so as elected councillors responsible to the electorate and this goes against that policy but, made the point, that it is very limited in its scope as it is talking about circumstances where enforcement notices have already been served and he feels that practicality comes to the fore, with the need for speed and the lack of bureaucracy. He expressed the opinion that it will be monitored carefully and if it turns out that it does not work as expected it can be revisited and he has faith in officers that they will act appropriate and swiftly in making sure that prosecution is undertaken as appropriate.

·         Councillor Nawaz stated that he prefers there to be democratic oversight over decisions as much as possible, especially where there are implications for local communities so he does have reservations, however, he will be supporting this proposal, with the caveat of a review at a later stage.

·         Councillor Carney referred to the delegation being revisited and asked if it could be operated for a 12-month trial period? Councillor Mrs Laws responded that she can understand the reservations, the delegation is limited but she will be happy to look at it and bring it back in 12 months’ time.

·         Councillor Booth expressed the view that the recommendation should be amended so that an annual report be provided to Planning Committee. Councillor Mrs Laws stated that she would be happy with that suggestion.

·         Councillor Tierney agreed but rather than an annual report that, which commits to a report every year, that it be a report in 12 months’ time as by then it will be known whether it is working or not. Councillor Mrs Laws confirmed she was happy with this.

·         Councillor Mrs French made the point that Planning Committee is not in habit of delegating its power, but this is to speed up the Section 215 and 216 process not the actual enforcement, which would in turn save the planning team resource.

Proposed by Councillors Mrs Laws, seconded by Councillor Mrs French and AGREED that the Planning Scheme of Delegation within the Council's Constitution be revised as set out at Appendix 1 and that a report be submitted to Planning Committee in 12 months.

(Councillor Hoy requested it be recorded that she abstained from voting on this item)

(Councillor Harris left the meeting during this item and was not present for the remainder of the items on the agenda)