Minutes:
This matter was considered as an item of urgent business.
The Planning Policy Manager referred to Minute 17 of the minutes of the meeting held on 19 August, where it had been resolved to establish a North Walsham Delivery Group comprising three Members who had been nominated by the Working Party. Subsequent to the Working Party’s resolution, he had accepted nominations from other Members and the group now comprised five Members. He had anticipated that the Group would comprise a mix of Members and Officers as a steering group for the specific purpose of the preparation of the North Walsham Development Brief.
The first meeting had taken place as an informal briefing session, attended by the developer, and some of the workstreams had been outlined.
Subsequently, the Planning Policy Manager had been advised that the group had not been lawfully constituted. There were tensions around whether the group was a formally constituted working party or similar, in which case it would need to be Member led and formally minuted or, as he had anticipated, an Officer-led task and finish group on which he was anxious to have Member engagement for oversight purposes. He had requested nominations from North Walsham Members and was keen for a twin-hatter to provide County Council representation. The terms of reference of the group meant that the Working Party was in effect making recommendations to itself and had unintentionally created an administratively heavy and political process.
Further discussion was needed with the Monitoring Officer and Democratic Services Manager to find a way to have meaningful Member representation on the group without the full administrative burden of a formal Working Party. He sought Members’ views on this matter for further consideration, and a further report would be brought to the Working Party to modify the group’s terms of reference.
The Chairman stated that he had had a discussion with the Monitoring Officer and it had been decided that the Leader of the Council could appoint additional Members to the Delivery Group. Councillor E Seward had been nominated.
The Democratic Services Manager explained that the difficulty had arisen as it was a mixed Officer and Member group. A group which involved Members had to be treated as a Committee under the Council’s Constitution, and Working Parties were treated as Committees. The group would have to operate as a Working Party or Sub-Committee comprising only Members, with Officers in a purely advisory role, and make formal recommendations through the Planning Policy and Built Heritage Working Party. She suggested that Members could be involved through a pre-meeting, or Officers could meet and report back to the Working Party. Members made decisions and as constituted, Officers could not also sit on the group and make decisions.
Councillor N Dixon stated that Task and Finish groups were standard practice and reported to the Committees which established them. He supported the principle of the group but there was a need to find a mechanism to deliver what was required. There needed to be a degree of confidence that when the group reported back there could be further discussion, with assurance that the work that had been done was sound.
Councillor Ms V Gay supported Councillor Dixon’s views. She considered that the first meeting had been very enlightening and clearly conducted and that the process should continue, but there was a need to find a constitutionally sound description of the group.
Councillor Mrs P Grove-Jones stated that Licensing and Appeals Committee had established task and finish groups which fed into the Committee. She considered that they worked efficiently.
Councillor Dixon added that task and finish groups were a very effective and efficient way of engaging Members and reporting back.