Agenda item

To consider any reports from Scrutiny Committee.

Councillor Gregory provided a report on behalf of the Scrutiny Committee, including details on both the Committee and the Stansted Airport Task and Finish Group, which had both met twice since the previous Cabinet meeting.

Councillor Gregory said the Committee had considered Blueprint Uttlesford, a presentation regarding the Council moving forward from the Chief Executive, and they had been impressed with the vision for the district. Whilst discussing the Cabinet Forward Plan, Members had also proposed repeating the previous discretionary Council Tax Rebate Scheme in view of the current pressure on individual and household budgets.

The Monitoring Officer and Councillor LeCount were thanked for their work on the Stansted Airport Review and noted that the report was available on the public website and would be considered at Scrutiny Committee on 14 July 2022.

On planning policy matters, he said the Local Plan was proceeding well and that he was impressed with the progress that had been made. However, there was a need for an extensive public relations plan to explain the Local Plan to residents, and he questioned whether this task was suited to professional planners.

He added that the use of the word “delay” should be limited to where appropriate as the word “paused” was more accurate to describe the current status whilst the further site that had been identified was properly considered. He concluded that a letter had been sent to the Department for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities reporting the detailed progress to date. He said that the Local Plan and New Communities Manager had had telephone conversations with relevant officials to keep them appraised of the situation.

Councillor Gregory said that there had been a robust conversation with Councillor Evans regarding the performance of the Planning Department. Members were struggling to understand why residents’ emails and calls to the Planning Department were not receiving responses in good time and that customer service should be improved in this area. Furthermore, he said he did not understand why performance indicators regarding minor planning applications were not included in performance reports. He concluded by thanking Councillor Evans who had engaged with a number of aggrieved residents and who had promised to report back with detailed statistics.

In response to a question from Councillor Reeve, the Chair said that Council would engage appropriately with residents in relation to the Local Plan.

Councillor Evans said that he was keen to communicate to residents the merits and demerits of the Plan, and how they would be overcome, in plain English. He acknowledged that Planning was a complicated area, particularly in relation to policy and that further work would be undertaken with the Director of Planning to produce digestible guidance. In addition, he said that he and the Director of Planning had already received an interesting presentation from a third party provider who had described more modern ways of communicating information to encourage engagement with the younger generations and those that favour the use of smart phones. He said that this would compliment the formal requirements of consultation.

The Director of Planning said that they were considering contemporary methods of engagement alongside statutory requirements.