Meeting documents
- Meeting of Bucks Strategic Partnership Board, Tuesday 31st March 2009 2.30 pm (Item 7.)
· Comprehensive Area Assessment – draft self-evaluation
· Review of Sustainable Community Strategies
Presentation on results of Consultation and proposals for Sustainable Community Strategies outcomes, followed by table exercise focusing on SCS key outcomes.
Decisions to be taken:
· Note the draft CAA self-evaluation and obtain views from individual organisations to feed into the next draft.
· Comment on the outcomes proposals for the family of Sustainable Community Strategies.
· Comment on the proposal for a common strapline across the family of SCS of "Promoting Prosperity – Tackling Inequalities, in a changing Bucks" and agree a common strapline.
Minutes:
Sarah Ashmead told members that the CAA Self-evaluation document had been included in the Agenda pack. Any comments on the document should be fed back to Sarah Ashmead. The aim of the self-evaluation document was to put Buckinghamshire’s case forward to the Audit Commission.
Review of the Sustainable Community Strategies
Page 87 onwards set out the five agreed themes of the Countywide Sustainable Communities Strategy. The themes were Safe Communities, Sustainable Environment, Thriving Economy, Health and Wellbeing and Cohesive Communities. The BSP and the four Local Strategic Partnerships are developing their community strategies collaboratively, with a view to producing an integrated family of sustainable community strategies.
Each table was allocated one of the five themes and asked to debate whether the outcomes stated in the papers were correct.
The points made are summarised below. In general, members said that more clarity was needed about how the outcomes would be measured.
Safe Communities
· ‘Reduced Crime’ and ‘Fear of crime’ should be separated as two separate outcomes.
· ‘People are safer’ – this could be changed to ‘people should feel safer. ‘
· More evidence regarding prevention was needed.
· Better information needed on self-help and personal risks.
· Need to use VCS and other partners better.
· More information can mean more fear of crime.
· Use of paid adverts/texts/radio etc. for self-help advice.
Sustainable Environment
· Needs to be made more relevant – clarify the benefits as an incentive (e.g. saves money/health benefits/saving time)
· Changing attitudes by legal and fiscal incentives.
· Managing congestion – this outcome needs to be enhanced. Free-flowing traffic creates lower emissions.
· Make it easier not to drive – car-sharing/cycle lanes/cheaper and better public transport
· Turn out the lights!
· Make it easier to reduce energy use.
Thriving Economy
· The language needs to reflect the language in the Economic Development Strategy.
· The Economic Development Strategy needs to be tested against the District Strategies.
· Strategic infrastructure requirements should include broadband and transport.
Health and Wellbeing
· Emphasise mental health issues and linked problems (alcohol, drugs abuse, crime etc.)
· Reduce homelessness – need to distinguish between different types of homelessness.
· Links between themes not necessarily securely made.
Cohesive Communities
· ‘Thriving voluntary sector’ – should be changed to either ‘thriving third sector’ or ‘thriving Voluntary and community sector.’ This should be based on empowerment. Need to engage the VCS more in service delivery.
· More people to be involved in the VCS too.
A member asked about the timescale for the community strategies and said that transport/access and LTP3 should be included in these strategies.
Sarah Ashmead said that there would be an annual refresh and that the strategies would evolve. They would be published in summer 2009.
Chris Williams said that they would also feed into the local plans and the Local Development Framework.
It was noted that all these strands needed to be joined up and that the Countywide Strategy needed to be aligned with what was happening on the ground.
Sarah Ashmead said that the strategies were being developed as a family.
Members discussed the strapline on page 87 and it was suggested that the ‘Changing Bucks’ part was not necessary. It was also suggested that there was no need for a common strapline, and that each District could develop its own.
The BSP Board asked for the draft Sustainable Communities Strategies to be brought to the next meeting.
The BSP Board noted the draft CAA self-evaluation and would obtain views from individual organisations to feed into the next draft.
The BSP Board commented on the outcomes proposals for the family of Sustainable Community Strategies.
Supporting documents: