The Times reports on new power for the public to record council meetings

Journalists and members of the public will be free to film, record or tweet during local authority meetings under new rules that take effect this week.

The Department for Communities and Local Government has made it illegal for councils to ban filming after concerns that some local bureaucrats had ignored calls to be more transparent.

Some councils had flouted guidance from the department urging them to open up their meetings to modern technology, by blocking filming or tweeting and in some cases even calling the police to evict people who tried to record proceedings, officials said.

From Wednesday, councils and other local government bodies, such as fire authorities and Transport for London, will have to allow members of the public and press to film, record, photograph or use social media to report on their meetings.

Eric Pickles, the local government secretary, said: “We live in a digital age, where people tweet, blog and share video clips on a daily basis. So it is fitting that these important changes will ensure local democracy can shine, as local journalists and taxpayers can report on the good work of their council in a modern way and in real time.”

The move has been welcomed by newspaper publishers, who have warned that local authorities are increasingly stifling their attempts to report on potentially contentious matters such as planning decisions. At a time when many regional newspapers have had to cut back on reporting staff because of financial pressures, that is undermining their ability to hold local government to account, they argue.

Lynne Anderson, a spokeswoman for the Newspaper Society, said: “We’ve been seeing a worrying trend of increased secrecy among public bodies, making it harder for local newspapers to perform their vital scrutinising role on behalf of their readers. We hope these new rules will help to open up councils and ensure greater transparency over how taxpayers’ money is spent.”

Jonathan Isaby, chief executive of the TaxPayers’ Alliance, said: “Most people, working nine to five, can’t give up their time to attend council hearings and procedures, so they must be given a chance to play their part in the democratic process.”

A ministerial aide said that all local authorities had been warned about the changes in recent weeks. The authorities are required to provide “reasonable facilities” for journalists, bloggers or members of the public to film, photograph and tweet, such as space to view and hear the meeting, seats and desks.

Some councils resisted allowing filming because of concerns that it would be disruptive or too expensive. Some even cited health and safety legislation or the risk of “reputational damage” as a reason.
Source: The Times, Media News, 4 August 2014

And still we have to pay for Skypark …

http://www.publicfinance.co.uk/news/2014/08/council-spending-cut-by-nearly-one-third-since-2010/

Developers’ offer of a surgery ‘not so sweet’

That’s how the Sidmouth Herald summed up Gill Cameron-Webb’s letter (Opinion, 1st August, 2014) about EDDC planning procedure at Newton Poppleford.
Thank you to Gill for sending the text of her letter, as follows:

‘Developers make such massive profits from housing developments that they’re often willing to sacrifice some profit to provide ‘sweeteners’ to persuade councils to look favourably on their application. This can result in corruption, so planning laws prevent developers from ‘buying planning permission’. These demand that any ‘sweeteners’ provided by developers must be in proportion to their development. As the Doctors Surgery promised as part of the KAW development could service a population of 5300 (3 times the population of Newton Pop) it’s massively disproportionate to the KAW development.
When EDDC councillors first demanded that the doctors surgery be made a condition of the KAW development, Planning Officers failed to advise them that this was unlawful and that the developers can never be forced to deliver it. Although residents repeatedly warned EDDC of this illegality over 5 months, EDDC persistently refused to acknowledge it until a Judicial Review forced them to quash the planning permission.
The key benefit of the Judicial Review was to ensure councillors were properly advised of planning law next time they considered the KAW application in May 2014. At this stage EDDC officers and councillors should have treated KAW as a major development of 40 houses in an AONB which had received 382 formal objections from the public. They should have dealt with it exactly the same as the Badger Close development and rejected it for the same reasons they rejected Badger Close. Instead they chose to authorise KAW in the hope that the developers might keep their ‘promise’ to deliver a Doctors Surgery that they can never legally enforce.
If Newton Poppleford ends up with 40 houses and no Doctors Surgery, the blame will lie entirely with EDDC planning officers and Councillors for accepting the word of a developer on a hope and a prayer.’

EDDC’s double standards at Newton Poppleford?

Local residents continue to expose serious flaws in EDDC’s conduct regarding plans for Newton Poppleford. For the record, one is described in this letter from Lorna Dalton, recently published in the Sidmouth Herald (July, 2014).

‘In Sept 2013, EDDC authorised a major development at King Alfred Way in Newton Poppleford without considering whether the environmental impact should be assessed, despite being legally obliged to do so. For five months they ignored residents who pointed out their error until a Judicial Review at last forced them to reconsider their approach.
In May 2014 EDDC wrote a report which acknowledged:
– “The site lies within the East Devon Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty
– on best and most versatile agricultural land
– the Pebblebed Heaths SAC/SPA and SSSI are located within 700m.
– this environment constitutes a highly sensitive receptor to impacts arising from pollution and recreation
– it has the potential to be viewed from across the village and from a wider area given the natural topography the proposed development rising beyond the
boundary of the existing built form.”

Having listed numerous reasons which should’ve demanded an Environmental Impact Assessment, EDDC instead came to the conclusion that none was required! So when EDDC told last weeks Herald that they had ‘corrected their error, what they actually did was to abandon a highly sensitive environment to a major development without any assessment of the destruction.

Although EDDC decided not to assess the environmental impact of KAW, one of their reasons for rejecting the Badger Close proposal was because it had not carried out an assessment. I have to question why EDDC dealt with these two developments so differently when the two sites are within 200 yards of each other and share the same environmental attributes?

EDDC stated that they would defend their approach and they believe they’ve corrected their error. As another 2 hectares of beautiful countryside looks set for destruction, I suspect that the majority of Newton Pop residents would not agree with them.’

And now another possible consequence of our Local Plan omnishambles

As well as having no Local Plan EDDC also has no Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL)as the Planning Inspector threw out EDDC’s plan for this at the sMe time.

Now, in a rather lawyerly article, is seems that this will cause major problems for infrastructure in East Devon if we do not have a charging schedule by April 2015.

… “These provisions [CIL] present a real and significant restriction on the use of s106 agreements to secure infrastructure payments or provision, and therefore a serious risk of funding gaps becoming an issue (if they are not already), particularly in relation to the pooling provisions, which may be a concern from ‘day one’ as authorities will need to look back to all planning obligations given since 2010.

If CIL is being charged, and a Reg 123 list has been published, then authorities may feel more in control of the situation but if not they may find themselves determining applications for development proposals which will have significant infrastructure demands and finding that they cannot rely on developer covenants in order to mitigate those impacts.” …

Source: http://www.localgovernmentlawyer.co.uk/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=19349:cil–a-reminder-on-s106-and-s278-restrictions&catid=63&Itemid=31

EDDC Ministry of Magic

It seems that EDDC may have its own Minister of Magic (or maybe Dolores Umbridge) as two officers seem to have magically disappeared and one has magically appeared.

Deputy Chief Executive and Monitoring Officer Denise Lyon slipped away quietly after the last full council meeting.

Economic Development Officer and former Hon Sec of East Devon Business Forum Nigel Harrison seems to have been airbrushed out of all responsibilities (when he was such a busy officer commenting on all major planning applications (including those of EDBF members) now we hear nothing from him.

Just as magically we seem to have immediately conjured up a new Monitoring Officer – Ian Clarke – fresh from South Somerset where his boss is – EDDC’s shared Chief Executive Mark Williams.

Now all we need is to find out that Skypark is really Hogwarts. Well, they are doing their best to keep it a secret from us Muggles!

Argos director appointed new Chairman of Planning Inspectorate

2 days a month for £20,000 a year:

“Sara has considerable experience from her executive and non-executive career to date that is directly relevant to the Inspectorate and its strategic goals. She has an extensive background leading successful, customer focused, private sector organisations, culminating in 7 years as Managing Director of Argos, where she led the expansion of the company’s business on the high street and online. She now holds a number of directorships across the private and public sector, including being on the Board at Lloyds Banking Group and United Utilities.

Sara is also the Lead Non-Executive Director at the Department of Communities and Local Government. This gives her an excellent understanding of the context in which the Inspectorate operates.

The Planning Inspectorate’s Chief Executive, Simon Ridley, said: “I’m delighted that Sara Weller has agreed to join the Inspectorate as its first ever independent Chairman of the Board. Sara brings a wealth of relevant experience to our organization. Having an independent Chairman provides an important line of separation between my role as Chief Executive, in which I am accountable to DCLG, and independent support and challenge to our strategic direction.”

One has to wonder how independent she can be given that she also works for the Department of Communities and Local Government … and puts “economic growth” as her main priority.

Source: https://www.gov.uk/government/news/planning-inspectorate-appoints-first-ever-independent-chairman-of-the-board

5 year land supply for dummies

Just in case some of our councillors or officers were “away” when this blew up or perhaps haven’t read their papers on the subject:

http://www.pas.gov.uk/local-planning/-/journal_content/56/332612/3757749/ARTICLE

Local Independent councillors share their views on “localism”

http://www.westernmorningnews.co.uk/Housing-minister-s-survey-spin-angers-campaigners/story-22066840-detail/story.html

Background to EDDC v Information Commissioner, Exeter Magistrates Court, 28 August, 10 am

http://futuresforumvgs.blogspot.co.uk/2014/07/knowle-relocation-project-foi-request.html