Skip to main content

Agenda item

Recommendations from the Constitution Working Group

Purpose

To present recommendations from the Constitution Working Group related to delegations for regulatory matters, a review of the planning committee process and Member Questions.

 

Recommendations

That Council resolves to:

1.            Approve the updates to Part 4E: Functions in Relation to Regulatory Matters, as shown in Annex A.

2.            Agree to rename the Development Control Committee to “Strategic Planning Committee”, with effect from the start of the 2026/27 civic year.

3.            Agree to combine the two area planning sub-committees (Lowlands and Uplands) into a single, district-wide 12-Member “Development Management Sub-Committee” (quorum 3), with effect from the start of the 2026/27 civic year.

4.            Agree to amend Part 3C: Committee Functions, as shown in Annex C, from the start of the 2026/27 civic year to give effect to recommendations 2 and 3.

5.            Agree that the new Development Management Sub-Committee will meet on the Lowlands meeting dates in 2026/27, with the Uplands dates held for overspill meetings, should the sub-committee need to adjourn and reconvene.

6.            Request that the Council’s Independent Remuneration Panel meets to consider the implications of changing the planning committee structure for the Members’ Allowances Scheme 2023-27 and formally report back to the May Council meeting with any recommendations.

7.            Agree that the Process for Determining Planning Applications (Annex D) and Roles and Responsibilities on Planning Committees (Annex E) be included in the Constitution as appendices to Part 6Q: Members Planning Code of Good Practice.

8.            Agree to amend the rules for Member Questions, as shown in Annex F, Part 5A Council Procedure Rules to:

a)            Introduce a word limit of 250 words on Member Questions.

b)            Introduce a time limit of 1 minute for supplementary Member Questions.

c)            Rotate the order of Member Questions by political group, in the same way that Motions rotate.

Minutes:

Councillor Alaric Smith, as the Chair of the Constitution Working Group (CWG), introduced the report. The purpose of the report was to present recommendations from the Constitution Working Group related to delegations for regulatory matters, a review of the planning committee process and Member Questions.

 

Councillor Smith stated that the report contained recommendations on three  different matters.

  • Recommendation one was related to regulatory functions, which ensured that the delegations relied upon by the Environmental and Regulatory Service Team are explicitly codified in the Constitution as opposed to needing to rely on general delegations
  • Recommendations two to seven arose following a review of the Council’s planning arrangements by the Planning Advisory Service (PAS). The review focused on what is going well, identifying barriers to success and areas for improvement. It resulted in a number of recommendations which had been considered by an officer working group and the Constitution Working Group. These included; changing the name of the committees, merging the area-based planning sub-committee to a single sub-committee and the subsequent changes to the Constitution and meeting schedule. There were a number of other low level, administrative changes which were included for transparency, but that Council were not being asked to formally consider, as they either did not meet the threshold to require a Council decision or they had not been taken forward by the CWG.
  • The final recommendation was related to strengthening the rules around member questions, including; a word limit of 250 words, a time limit of 1 minute for supplementary questions, and a requirement to rotate member questions on the agenda in a similar fashion to motions.

 

Members debated the proposed changes to the planning committees, raising the following points;

  • The existing requirements in the Council’s Constitution mandated a vote on the item which was under discussion to be taken after three hours, and that this was not suitable for planning meetings. It was suggested this be looked at.
  • The proposal to combine the area-based sub-committees into one sub-committee did not sufficiently take into consideration local knowledge nor the distinction between the Uplands and Lowlands areas.
  • The timeliness of the proposals was challenged in light of upcoming changes to the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF). It was stated that any changes should not pre-empt this and should instead be reactive. In particular, concerns about some meetings being very long, and with a very high workload for members were raised.
  • Why some of the documents did not show tracked changes. Officers explained that they were new documents.
  • Other members stated that the CWG and PAS had taken into consideration the arguments about local views, which were important but that the changes would ensure greater consistency of decision making. It was also re-iterated that PAS was an independent body, and that the CWG took the view, though not unanimously, to agree with the recommendations.
  • Changes in national policy were expected to be introduced.
  • The proposals should have been referred to the Development Control Committee prior to the recommendations being considered by Full Council.
  • The combined committees would improve efficiencies and ensure consistent decision making. It would also make it easier to arrange substitute members.
  • Communications to parish council would need to be considered as proposed government changes to the national scheme of delegations would also be affecting them.
  • One Councillor with experience of working at a different authority stated that two separate sub-committees were the source of inconsistency which developers could exploit.
  • Neighbouring authorities with similar geographies all operated a single planning committee, and the changes would align with preparation for local government reorganisation.

 

In summing up, Councillor Smith stated that the changes to the committee structures would not fix the frustrations with the planning system that some raised, but that it would ensure the consistency of decision making. He also explained that while the changes would result in politically proportional committees, as per the requirements in the Local Government and Housing Act 1989, he did not think the changes would add a political element to decision making, as Councillors would still be required to act apolitically.

 

Council voted on the recommendations in three parts.

 

Council resolved to:

  1.  Approve the updates to Part 4E: Functions in Relation to Regulatory Matters, as shown in Annex A.

 

Voting record – For 42, abstentions 1, against 0

 

Council resolved to:

 

8. Agree to amend the rules for Member Questions, as shown in Annex F, Part 5A Council Procedure Rules to:

a)                   Introduce a word limit of 250 words on Member Questions.

b)                  Introduce a time limit of 1 minute for supplementary Member Questions.

c)                   Rotate the order of Member Questions by political group, in the same way that Motions rotate.

[AB1] 

Council resolved to:

  1. Agree to rename the Development Control Committee to “Strategic Planning Committee”, with effect from the start of the 2026/27 civic year.
  2. Agree to combine the two area planning sub-committees (Lowlands and Uplands) into a single, district-wide 12-Member “Development Management Sub-Committee” (quorum 3), with effect from the start of the 2026/27 civic year.
  3. Agree to amend Part 3C: Committee Functions, as shown in Annex C, from the start of the 2026/27 civic year to give effect to recommendations 2 and 3.
  4. Agree that the new Development Management Sub-Committee will meet on the Lowlands meeting dates in 2026/27, with the Uplands dates held for overspill meetings, should the sub-committee need to adjourn and reconvene.
  5. Request that the Council’s Independent Remuneration Panel meets to consider the implications of changing the planning committee structure for the Members’ Allowances Scheme 2023-27 and formally report back to the May Council meeting with any recommendations.
  6. Agree that the Process for Determining Planning Applications (Annex D) and Roles and Responsibilities on Planning Committees (Annex E) be included in the Constitution as appendices to Part 6Q: Members Planning Code of Good Practice.

 

 

For 22, against 17, abstentions 4.

 

Councillor Andrew Beaney requested that his vote against the recommendations be recorded in the minutes of the meeting. 

 

There was a brief adjournment, with the meeting recommencing at 3:25pm.

 

 [AB1]Voting record for resolution 8.

Supporting documents:

 

Related Pages