Where do community councils fit in the new Localities community planning structures? That was the subject for discussion at a round table meeting of North West councillors and community council representatives last month.
While Community Councils have a clear role within Neighbourhood Partnerships, they do not fit neatly into the new Localities model. To address this, Forth Conservative Councillor Jim Campbell put forward a proposal for an ideas session for elected members and community councillors at a recent North West Localities committee meeting.
Cllr Campbell’s ititative was agreed by the NW Localities Committee, which is made up of all elected members across the Forth, Inverleith, Almond and Western council wards and the joint meeting took place on 31 July.
There was an excellent turnout at the discussion, which was organised by the local North West Localities team. Thirty people attended the session, with reresentatives from all of North West’s community councils and thirteen of the area’s 18 city councillors taking part,
The dialogue will continue: individual community councils will discuss community planning at forthcoming monthly meetings and it’s likely further joint round-table sessions will take place.
The Edinburgh Partnership’s consultation on the city’s community planning structures runs until 7 September and the draft document will be the main agenda item on the agenda at this evening’s Forth Neighbourhood Partnership meeting, which takes place at North Local Office at 6.30pm.
NW Localities Lifelong Learning Development Officer Elaine Lennon’s notes are included below:
Comments from joint meeting of Locality Committee & Community Councils – 31/7/18
Abbreviations:,
CC – Community Council, LC – Locality Committee, LIP – Locality Improvement Plan, NP – Neighbourhood Partnership.
General comments
Desire for CCs to maintain independence yet have some clout – so disappointment that they won’t be able to take financial decisions. The ambition is that financial decision making will be transparent, and that cc’s will be able to influence them in a way that is open and understood by all
Will party politics affect the way in which councillors behave/vote at LC, taking them away from what community want? LC attempts to be collegiate and non-party political, and in any case councillors who don’t deliver local wishes can get voted out at next election….
View that LIP needs to be less strategic and offer something more specific for CCs which has interest and relevance for local people – similar to the Local Action Plans
View that CCs can provide more detailed local knowledge to help LC in decisions and discussions on local issues, as the locality covers a large area
Recognise that through time, Elected members and potentially Community Councillors will understand the nuances and very local issues across different parts of the locality. LC will then be better placed to understand the local issues and this will assist to then help decision making within the arrangements of the LC – Moving on, where there are potentially more delegated powers/decision making, elected members will be more familiar within the context of the wider locality of how and where to prioritise;
CCs continue to have a vital role in determining issues relevant to local communities therefore the role of recommender to the LC should not be underestimated especially around Neighbourhood Environment Programme (NEP) and Community Grants Fund (CGF);
Questions discussed:
- Do you think Localities Committees could help to deliver better Council Services?
Three tables said YES, with one table UNDECIDED
Comments:
‘Could’ is the important part here
Lots of routes to be heard and deputations are a good one
Yes, with clarity on how LIP will meet the needs of all communities in the locality.
It’s Council services like refuse collection and parking/traffic management which mostly affect their residents. If LC can take proactive action, cut through the bureaucracy, clear blockages and make officials take action then it will be a great help (noting the collegiate, non-party political approach at LC).
Benefit of NP influence on services at a more localised level NP is a better forum to discuss issues of importance to CC
General acceptance that any devolved decision making must be a good thing. The Barnton Junction example provided was highlighted by new CC members as a positive way in which to bring to life a local issue that other parts of the Locality may not be aware of but it can have an impact across the whole locality therefore elected members would be making decisions or recommendations based on how a local issue can affect the wider area.
Suggested that the timetable of the meetings perhaps isn’t quite right and there needs to be a lot more done to promote the meetings and the value to a much wider audience.
Depends on variety of factors including their implementation.
North West LC should not just be another meeting for the sake of another meeting /rubber stamping.
In favour of having ability to feed into decision making process and influence big decisions. Being the committee that makes a recommendation of a report to an executive committee.
- What would you like to see as the top three priorities of the NWLC? (Difficult to total as some gave votes and other tables only comments)
1st= Working directly with CC
on strategic issues, rather than overloading LCs)
1st= Oversight (priority setting and scrutinising performance preferred) of Council services, including roads & transport desire to break down powerful Council departments eg Roads
3rd Allocating and overseeing grant funding in NW 4th Engaging community and partners
5th Taking decisions on Planning matters
has huge emotional local impact and interest eg Granton harbour meeting, and Pinkhill development in Corstorphine, but acknowledged that quasi-judicial role of Council makes it difficult
Some agreement for this, however should this be fully retained at Council level? A more devolved function could lead to harassment or pressure being put upon members of the LC. The issues around Planning are at times incredibly complex and require detailed and lengthy discussion.
6th Developing PB
if CCs had devolved budgets and spending powers as parish councils in England
One CC member suggested PB should be high on the LC agenda. Councillors agreed but with the caveat that the budgets currently promoted are not the right budgets. Similarly, a fully developed process and means of engagement must be developed. This in itself could form a key aspect of the agenda item. We must get it right before it becomes anything bigger. We must develop something that can’t be hijacked.
Comments:
Parking enforcement provided as an example of where discussions can begin to take place around devolved powers. Suggested that this could potentially go further where e.g. parking could be devolved to CCs and the income remains in the community.
A wider discussion took place around the principle of devolving other functions that could benefit communities.
- Would you value a regular round table meeting, such as tonight’s, to share views and ideas?
Unanimous – all tables said YES
Comments:
No more frequently than quarterly
Only if it covers issues of importance to CCs, possibly on a themed basis, and if officers attending have power to make decisions
Need to find a way to reach out to groups not represented by CCs.
Meeting would need to be structured and everyone given equal opportunities to be heard.
This evening’s session was felt to be very worthwhile and should be developed further, perhaps as a means to provide information or support around specific topics.
Though not just another meeting. Should be a correct balance of time, context, and relevance.
- If yes, would you see such a meeting as additional to Neighbourhood Partnership/Locality Community Planning Partnership or replacing them?
Three tables said ADDITIONAL, with one table REPLACING Comments:
Additional, because locality wide too big to have meaningful local discussion – need NPs for this. There was no discussion around what the other existing arenas were or the resource implications.
Perhaps sub-groups needed with varied membership – public involvement is important. Some meetings are too council centric. Replacing, but only if there’s still local budget decision making at NP level
It’s about blending the different meetings
Some discussion about not needing a traditional face to face meeting – could some things eg grant decisions be done virtually?
Some CC reps wanted more time to consider the implications of the question, but generally a consensus that they didn’t want too many meetings.
- Please rank where you would most value Councillors attendance?
1st At Community Council meetings
2nd At NP/Locality Community Planning Partnership meetings
3rd At North West round table (similar to this evenings meeting)
Comments:
Not every councillor had to attend every meeting, as long as they’re working collegiately
Those in attendance indicated that the value was at CC meetings as it provided opportunities for others in attendance to raise other issues or approach elected members with individual issues.
No specific ranking took place and it was agreed that this could be discussed more with the wider membership of the CC.
- Please rank where you would most value Council officers support:
Only two tables ranked:
1st Individual Community Councils (by invitation / exception)
2nd= Neighbourhood Partnership/Locality Community Planning Partnership meetings
2nd= Locality sub groups eg community safety forum/StrongerNorth, Youth Engagement Partnership, Granton Waterfront Development Group
4th North West round table.
Comments:
Need clarity on where Officers have power to make decisions eg operational, and to have this shared with all What is commitment and responsibility of CCs to Officers and vice versa?
CC meetings tend not to be attended by officers – if they did attend they could avoid flak at other fora by explaining reasons for decisions/actions/inaction
Officers attending any meetings need to be accountable for their promises
Need to be pragmatic – depends how important a subject is and also whether councillors will be there too Don’t need as many officers at NPs as currently attend
Some new CC members felt they couldn’t offer up a specific occasion where they felt officers would help provide most value. They did however feel that it would be good if from time to time officers could attend CC meetings. Elected members indicated that officers are very good at attending but it’s really a case of knowing who to invite. This was identified as an issue as the wider communications around roles and functions was then raised by CC members and elected members.
Suggested that more could be done to ensure locality staff structures / contact details are kept up to date & circulated widely.
Alongside this, more needs to be done to make decision making structures and processes understandable as there was some confusion from CC members around the different funding streams.
Overall, communication was identified as one of the biggest issues.
CCs also asked if elected members could keep them informed or present other known issues within the CC area in order that all are on the same page. Elected members indicated that they would be happy to provide this as it provides a good platform on which to encourage greater levels of participation at CC meetings.
Would be good to have regular attendance so they aren’t just another name or a stranger. They can become a direct channel for resolving issues if raised.
- Community Councils could be most influential by:
Two tables ranked – with ‘TALKING TO ELECTED MEMBERS’ highest
a talking to officers individually
b talking to Councillors individually/collectively
c everyone talking at NP/sub locality level
d everyone talking at NW locality level
e taking deputations/having reports considered at NWLC.
Comments:
Other point noted was that CCs are savvy enough to know the most influential person to approach in any given situation
CC members felt they would rather discuss with wider CC membership
Difficult to rank but definitely a mix of all – Community Councils will happily try all/any avenue.
Question raised is if locality is going to be too big/varied.
Deputations shown to be very powerful in some circumstances eg Education Committee re-considering decision about schools in SW
General feeling was that if time was invested at these levels then there would be less need for escalation/”noise” in other for a; but there needs to be feedback loop to report when things are going awry.
- My community council represents (engages with / collaborates with) a wide range of community organisations and voices:
- A lot
- A fair amount c. A little
- I don’t know
Comments:
Some said that they would like to think A or B but in reality, probably C and, from time to time, B.
CC members felt they would rather discuss with wider CC membership
Acknowledgement that although CCs can get good numbers at meetings when there’s something important or controversial going on, they don’t represent large sections of community eg young people.
Schools need to be brought on board to encourage young people’s involvement in communities –as part of curriculum? Technology can be better used to involve young people
Feeling that Council officers can discount CC views because they feel they’re not representative – placemaking exercise in Corstorphine helped combat this by widening out participation.
- What would be the one thing you would recommend the Council changes, to improve the engagement and co-operation with Community Councils?
Comments:
It was felt that some of this had already been discussed but also that it would be good to discuss with wider CC membership
Giving CCs more accountability and financial responsibility would give them more status, attract more membership and get more credibility – “if you build it they will come”
“Where to start?!” but one thing mentioned was online consultation process. Often questions seemed geared towards favouring the outcome desirable to the Council.
Participants:
- Cllr Claire Bridgman
- Cllr Ellie Bird
- Cllr Frank Ross
- Cllr George Gordon
- Cllr Gillian Gloyer
- Cllr Graham Hutchison
- Cllr Hal Osler
- Cllr Iain Whyte
- Cllr Jim Campbell
- Cllr Louise Young
- Cllr Mark Brown
- Cllr Max Mitchell
- Cllr Robert Aldridge
- Fred Marinello (Granton & District CC)
- Ian Williamson (Cramond / Barnton CC)
- James Galloway (Drylaw / Telford CC)
- John Yellowlees (Murrayfield CC)
- Judy Wightman (Ratho & District CC)
- Kenny Wright (Drum Brae / Gyle CC)
- Linda McCourt (Drylaw / Telford CC)
- Mizan Rahman (Granton & District CC)
- Rod Alexander (Davidsons Mains / Silverknowes Assoc.)
- Roy Douglas (Muirhouse / Salvesen CC)
- Steve Kerr (Corstorphine CC)
- Tim Parker (Trinity CC)
- Vicki Nicolson (Drylaw / Telford CC)
- Willie Black (West Pilton / West Granton CC)
- Elaine Lennon – CEC Lifelong Learning Dev. Officer
- Peter Strong – CEC North West Locality Manager
- Scott Donkin – CEC Lifelong Learning Service Manager
23
0
20
