Meeting documents

Apologies were received from: Bill Chapple, Graham Winwright, Lin Hazell, Margaret Dewar, Valerie Letheren, Marion Clayton, Martin Tett and Dallas Banfield.

Members noted that Barbara Wallis had now left the committee. Members also noted that Pat Martin would be chairing the meeting in place of Bill Chapple.

Margaret Aston declared an interest as she was a representative of Bucks Community Action (Items 8 and 9).

of the meeting held on 12 October 2007 to be confirmed as a correct record

The minutes of the meeting held on the 12 October 2007 where agreed and signed as a correct record.

Matters arising

County, District and Parish Agreement

A member asked if the responses to the consultation document had been collated and sent out. Irene Thompson said they should have been sent out.

Irene Thompson said that Sharon Garforth had taken requests for changes. The final version had been agreed by Cabinet. Irene Thompson would send the final copy to all members for their comments. Councils who were not members of the BALC would be asked to sign the agreement separately.

Quality Status

The rules had been changed so that rather than 80% it was now 2/3 of councilors who were required. Irene Thompson said that she would clarify whether this was 2/3 or 67%.

Rural Towns Update

Malcolm Goldwin told members that the definition of a rural town was a town that had a population between 2,000 and 20,000. The town also had to be on the SEEDA list.

Kim Parfitt

The members welcomed Kim Parfitt, Consultation Officer, to the meeting.

Kim Parfitt gave members a presentation about the Children and Young People’s Residents’ Survey.

• The Survey was an amended version of the main Residents’ Survey.
• 500 interviews had been conducted with children and young people aged between 11 and 16.
• The results had been collated on a countywide basis. The number of surveys was too small to drill down any further than this.
• Satisfaction with BCC services rose as age groups rose, perhaps due to increased contact with BCC services.
• There was a lower level of satisfaction with primary schools than with secondary schools.
• 13% of those questioned had expressed dissatisfaction at the service provided in youth centres. Work was being carried out to look further into why they were dissatisfied.
• 58% of those questioned said that they did not feel that BCC kept children and young people informed about the services it provided. This would be addressed.
• When asked about how they would like to receive information about BCC, 32% of young people said that they would prefer to receive information from their school. Only 11% would like to receive this from their parents.
• Four focus groups had been set up following the Survey. Two of these groups were rural and two were based in towns.
• Kim Parfitt said that if members required any further details about the Survey, they should let her know.

A member noted that rural areas did often not have places where people could meet, as much land was used for houses, and village halls were already in use. Dean Taylor, Strategic Director, said that BCC was carrying out a major mapping exercise to engage more with young people.

A member said that it was necessary to think in a new way about activities for young people, and suggested that pubs could set aside a separate room for young people and sell coffee and soft drinks to them. If landlords felt that it was not profitable to do this, could they not be subsidised in some way?

Village churches could also be utilised.

Members also discussed the issue of sports pitches which were not being used at full capacity. It was noted that if sports pitches were used too much, they became muddy and unusable.

Chris Williams said that in the next year’s survey BCC would want to gather information that reflected the differences between the 19 GC2C areas. Chris Williams asked if District Councils and Parish Councils would be interested in using this Survey as well. The Chairman said this would be very useful.

Kim Parfitt

Kim Parfitt gave a presentation on the Community Consultation Portal.

The Portal allowed members of the public to view consultations and to take part in online surveys. It was also possible to view feedback from previous surveys.

Changes were planned to the Portal to make it easier for Parishes to work with BCC. Each Parish would have access to a specific part of the administration centre which would allow then to manage a number of functions themselves. These functions included updating contact details and users and adding locations which the Parish wished to be alerted about.

There was also the possibility of each Parish having their own web page which they could maintain on the Portal. Consultations on the Portal would be flagged by BCC internal officers if they were statutory. The main contact at each Parish would be sent an automatic email when:

·       a statutory consultation was added to the Portal

·       a non-statutory consultation was added that matched any topic flagged by the Parish

·       the Parish had not responded to a consultation

·       feedback had been published on the Portal for consultations that the Parish had responded to.

When responding to a consultation the Parish would be able to print a hard copy if required. The Portal would also enable Parishes to review responses which they had completed either offline or online prior to submission. In addition the Portal would enable Parishes to submit a document (e.g. a word document) rather than answering the questionnaire or survey directly.

The enhancements to the Portal would take about a month to complete.

A member said they thought that the Portal would raise expectations regarding feedback to consultations. Kim Parfitt said that BCC had a requirement to provide feedback within two months of the close of a consultation.

A Parish Councillor asked if there would be a facility for pre-consultation. The Councillor said that it would be helpful if Parishes could give comments on papers to save BCC having to make changes at a later date. An example was the consultation re: gravel, in which all the reports had been inaccurate. There was a need to engage Parishes earlier in the process.

Dean Taylor

The Chairman welcomed Dean Taylor, Strategic Director for Safer and Stronger Communities.

Dean Taylor told members about the Buckinghamshire Locality Strategy Consultation.

Getting closer to communities (GC2C) had been approved by BCC in July 2005. BCC had included a number of elements in the Corporate Plan regarding communities. Resources had also been agreed to implement this. The Buckinghamshire Locality Consultation had begun in February 2008 and the deadline had recently been extended. The vision was that there would be more integrated strategies. Clear leadership would be needed to achieve this.

Dean Taylor said that BCC believed that this strategy would meet the future agenda, which would include the CAA (Corporate Area Assessment), a partnership inspection. All 57 elected members at the County Council had been consulted regarding the Strategy.

Dean Taylor then told members about the five aims in the Strategy:

• Services that meet community needs – they had taken into account the residents surveys and analysis of the 19 GC2C areas. The aim was to reduce inequalities. There had been a positive response to the Local Councils’ "offer", and BCC would be working to implement that sensitively next year.
• Joined up Public Services – this would include the appointment of 19 highway technicians and 19 adult social care workers.
• Improved local access – children’s centres would be used in all areas, including fire and crime prevention. There would be at least one community access point in each of the 19 areas.
• Increased community empowerment – there would be 19 community plans containing priorities for the local areas.
• Enhanced community leadership - The consultation asked how Local Area Forums could be delivered in order to make a difference.

Dean Taylor spoke about the proposals for the Local Area Forums - there would be 19 which would replace Local Committees. Each Forum would be tailored to meet the needs of the local area. The Forums would be multi-agency. Currently the Forums were not decision-making bodies but the aim was that they would become so.

A member said that the proposals for the new structure had been discussed at BALC, who had been against a parallel bureaucracy with the Neighbourhood Actions Groups (NAGs) at the bottom. The member said that Parish Councils had been excluded from the plans. There would be potential problems when an elected member took part in decision-making for an area they had not been elected for. This could conflict with paragraph 101 of The Local Government Act.

Another member said they were very concerned that BCC were talking to local residents but not to Parish Councils. The Chairman said that this issue needed to be looked at.

Dean Taylor said that there was a need to get the balance right, and that the aim was to work with Local Councils, not to replace them. However the new proposals were about engaging more effectively with residents as well as with Councils.

The Chief Executive of BCC said that BCC also shared concerns about NAGS. The Parish and Town Councils  ...  view the full minutes text for item 6.

Malcolm Godwin

The Chairman welcomed Malcolm Godwin, Rural Towns Coordinator, to the meeting. Malcolm Godwin said that he would welcome members’ questions on the report in the agenda papers.

Two grants had been made to towns in Milton Keynes. Little Chalfont and Burnham had both engaged in the health check process. The vast majority of the 24 towns had either engaged or had done health checks.

Michael Hunt

The Chairman welcomed Michael Hunt, Executive Director of Buckinghamshire Community Action. Michael Hunt referred members to the briefing note in the agenda papers. The paper had been produced as part of the strategy for the closing of the rural social and community programme.

Funds had been sought for four main areas:

1. Affordable rural housing

2. Community development (including Parish Plan grants)

3. Supporting enterprise

4. Village halls advice

Michael Hunt said that the area that was least successful in gaining funds had been Community Development. Work would continue, but at a lower level.

A member asked if their Parish Plan, which had been written shortly after the year 2000, needed to be updated. Michael Hunt said that it did and that Best Practice was to review plans every 3-5 years.

Steve Orchard said that the Parish Plans would be building blocks for a wider community plan, and that it was important that the bottom layer of the work was supported. Another member noted that Parish Plans should be led by the community, and not by Parish Councils. Michael Hunt said that the guidance tried to manage this tension.

Michael Hunt

If you would like a paper copy of the draft Strategy, please contact the Democratic Services Team on 01296 383614.

Michael Hunt then gave members a presentation on the draft Rural Strategy, and made the following points:

The draft Rural Strategy had been prepared by BRAG (The Buckinghamshire Rural Affairs Group). BRAG had a wide range of members including representatives from the NFU and from BALC. The draft Rural Strategy had been issued on the 10 March 2008 and had been developed from consultations in 2006/07. The Strategy covered both Buckinghamshire and Milton Keynes.

The Strategy was suitable for Buckinghamshire because it was a rural county. It was the first step to ensuring that all strategies provided equal provision so that people were not disadvantaged because of where they lived.

The main response in the Consultation had been that transport should be a separate item in the Strategy. The response also showed a holistic approach was preferred in rural areas rather cross-cutting strategies.

The current consultation period for the draft Strategy would end on the 10 May 2008. The form for consultation was available online. An event would also be held in Winslow on 3 May 2008.

The final Strategy with an action plan would be published in summer 2008. The action plan would be used by BRAG to feed into the Bucks Strategic Partnership and into the Local Area Agreement.

A member noted that the Strategy would require a lot of funding. Michael Hunt agreed but said that the issues would have to be taken in stages. New ways of working would have to be used such as mobile outreach services. Another member said that there was a danger of raising expectations in people. Michael Hunt said that the aim was to get the balance right in the draft Strategy.

David Davies said that there was a problem in his area regarding heavy goods vehicles on rural roads. Heavy lorries were using C-class roads, particularly in areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty.

Another issue was that NAGS had not been rolled out efficiently in the Wycombe area. There was no consistency regarding who was able to attend. A local area coordinator said there was an ongoing problem with the NAGS which hopefully would be addressed. 

Date in October 2008 to be agreed

Tuesday 28 October 2008 at 2.30pm in the Large Dining Room, Judges Lodgings, County Hall