SUFFOLK ASSOCIATION OF LOCAL COUNCILS

SUFFOLK COASTAL AREA MEETING

Date: Monday 18 March 2013 7.00 – 9.00 pm latest

Venue: Riverside Centre, Stratford St Andrew, Saxmundham, Suffolk, IP17 1LN

A G E N D A

1.

Welcome and Apologies

7.00

2. Speaker : Broadband Project, Jonathan Chown, SCC Questions

7.05

3.

Speaker: Sizewell C, Tom McGarry, EDF, information officer Questions

7.35

4. Approval of previous Minutes

8.05

5. Matters arising from the Minutes

8.10

6.

Neighbourhood Planning Feedback from councils

8.15

7. SALC Training

8.25

8. Members Information Exchange and questions.

8.30

9. Issues to go to the SALC Executive and motions (NALC & SALC) An opportunity for members to raise issues

9.00

10. Paper Reports from various Bodies, inc: (a) SALC’s Report (attached) (b) Area Chairman’s Report (Ron Bailey) (c) Suffolk Coastal Local Strategic Partnership (Jenny Friend) (d) Sizewell ‘A’ & ‘B’ Stakeholder Group (Terry Hodgson) (e) Greenprint Environmental Forum (Liz Mark) (f) Suffolk Coast and Heaths AONB (Neil Winship) (g) East Suffolk Partnership (Michael Hart)

9.10

11. Items for next agenda (a) Speaker – The role of parish councils in managing local flood risk &

Climate change – SCC – speaker confirmed

9.30

Dates for 2013 meetings 17 June, 16 September and 9 December All at the Riverside Centre, Stratford St Andrew, Main Hall

Area Meeting dates in other Districts are given below. You are welcome to attend as an observer. Forest Heath 13 March Mid Suffolk North 11 March Babergh 4 March Mid Suffolk South 21 March St Edmundsbury 7 March Waveney 5 March Please speak to this office for further details.

CLERKS – PLEASE PASS A COPY OF AGENDA & MINUTES MPC(13)P22.02(g) TO YOUR CHAIRMAN & SALC REPRESENTATIVE, ASAP.

1

Suffolk Coastal Area Meeting 10 December 2012 Stratford St Andrew Riverside Centre

Present

Ron Bailey (Leiston-cum-Sizewell)(Chair) Geof Butterwick (Melton)

Tony Fryatt (Debach) Terry Hodgson (Leiston-cum-Sizewell)

Kevin Coe (Framlingham) Colin Moore (Martlesham)

John Ridd (Wickham Market) Edna Salmon (Wickham Market)

Pat Pryke (Levington & Stratton Hall) Ian Angus (Levington & Stratton Hall) Gordon Laing (Rushmere St Andrew) John Withey (Rushmere St Endrew)

Alan Simpson (Friston) Peter Watkins (Friston)

Julie Harrison (Knodishall) J Mercer (Alderton) V Mercer (Bawdsey)

Peter Carr (Little Bealings) Ferial Evans Rogers (Little Bealings)

Annette Gray (Parham) Roger Coates Smith (Darsham)

Geoff Abell (Dunwich) Derek Jacobs (Kirton & Falkenham)

Colin Jacobs (Trimley St Mary) Neil Winship (Waldringfield)

Steve Tuckwell (Cretingham, Hoo, Monewden) Leo Brome (Martlesham)

Colin Moore (Martlesham) Kay Nash (Rendlesham)

John Owen (Easton) Nigel Suckling (Blaxhall)

Bryan Hall (Wickham Market & SCDC Member) Shona Bendix (SALC CEO)

Apologies John Lightfoot (Swilland & Witnesham)

Farnham with Stratford St Andrew Liz Mark (Bawdsey)

Keith Dickerson (Kelsale-cum-Carlton) Jenny Friend (Hollesley)

2

Andrew Paige (Westleton)

1. Welcome The Chairman welcomed the meeting and introduced the speakers from Suffolk County

Council.

2. Speaker: Jane Storey (Suffolk County Council)

Suffolk County Council Budget Conversation 2012

The presentation is held at the SALC office. The context of reduced funds was described along

with the challenges caused, for example, by an aging population. In 2012-13 the council is

making savings of £26.2m. For 2013-14 and 2014-15 forecast savings of £52 million will be

required. The County Council priorities announced by Mark Bee are:

Jobs and growth

Education

Localism and the our place agenda (examples include Haverhill and Brandon)

Protecting the most vulnerable

Building on Suffolk’s strengths (e.g. building on the Greenest County, community spirit,

cooperation between the tiers of local government and other key bodies)

Some practical examples of the positive work underway include the efforts to deliver broadband

and the educational work- Raising the Bar. The latter involves encouraging those that are able

to be more aspirational about their lives. Suffolk County Council has taken in aspects of public

health work and is working with other bodies to ensure that, where appropriate, services are co-

located. The sources of Suffolk County Council income were explained and a breakdown of the

£1bn expenditure was provided. Excluding schools, the expenditure is £680m. The budget is

subject to scrutiny on 26 November, goes to Cabinet on 29 January and to full council on 14

February. SCC has taken a variety of efficiency and improvement measures including reducing

the number of managers, rationalising office accommodation, working with CSD to reduce

overheads and making procurement savings.

During a question and answer session, some of the points included:

A tenth of County Council staff are at Landmark House. They used to have 10,000 not

including schools but they have reduced this by thousands. They will have about 1,000

staff at Endeavour House on an ongoing basis. People have to hot desk there. The cost

per person has gone down. They will retain Endeavour House as a headquarters

building.

Comments were made from the meeting that budgets are being cut year on year which

cannot carry on as it means good staff are being cut. In Highways there has been a

reorganisation but Cllr Storey hoped that with that service and others, the changes,

introduced by the spanners and tiers restructuring, would be settling down. Ultimately

a policy decision has to be made on whether to put up council tax or cut services. Cllr

Storey reassured the meeting that, despite an extra 2% of cuts, good staff remained and

were adapting service.

3

The services were being reviewed. Where services were not a statutory duty, there

might be cuts but this would be looked at through Scrutiny.

Reserves are £130m approx and some are ear-marked. Geof Dobson, Head of Strategic

Finance, is the officer who recommends reserves. Reserves vary depending on need.

Education is a high priority and improving schools but in future it might not be possible

to have an improvement programme e.g. for those schools that SCC are no longer

responsible for.

The comment was made that there is less parish transport and yet SCC professes to be

trying to be the Greenest County. The Demand Responsive Transport is not allowed to

compete with the commercial operators (in Levington this is First Bus) which means it

cannot cover the service needed properly. SCC indicated that some routes are too

expensive and were highly subsidised and there is low usage, meaning buses were

running empty. Although rural people pay the same council tax, urban buses do not

have to be subsidised. The comment was made that many parishes are suffering.

The presentation slides are available through the We Are Listening part of the Suffolk County

Council website.

Speaker: Philip Ridley (Head of Planning of Suffolk Coastal District Council), Cllr Philip

Dunnett (Chair of Suffolk Coastal District Council Scrutiny Committee) and Cllr Andy Smith

(Suffolk Coastal District Council)

The Chair of the Scrutiny Committee apologised for the delay in feeding back to councils that

had submitted views as part of the planning scrutiny process. He said that it is best for local

councils to write constructively to the planning authority. He was asked whether the 13

recommendations made by the Scrutiny Committee had been implemented. As there have

been staff changes, there has been some difficulty with implementation. It was noted that

enforcement can be an area of frustration and there might be a need to conduct further work

here. The Scrutiny Committee will be conducting a review again but there will be new software

introduced and this needs to be bedded in prior to the review.

Cllr Smith noted the resource problems that affected the planning department. It was

important that local councils and local authorities focus on planning matters that are

controlled. He noted that local councils will be aware that there is now more development

which is permitted and the planning portal can be helpful in providing guidance on this. Cllr

Smith considered that ¾ of planning work involved matters which were not controlled by

planning law. Where cases went to court, there was a frustratingly slow process but this could

not be avoided. The new software system will make a significant difference and Mr Ridley

recommended that local councils worked with officers to keep dialogue effective and focussed

on planning matters. There is one full-time enforcement officer and all the planning officers

work on enforcement too. There are a relatively few cases that require specialist enforcement.

The comment was made from the floor that in terms of the Scrutiny Committee, the issue that

arises is the need for collaboration between local councils and the planning authority and

culturally there have been problems with this. Suffolk Coastal mentioned that local councils

4

would be best-advised to be involved with developers at pre-application stage and to notify the

planning authority at the earliest time if there were enforcement or other issues. Councils

should be receiving information from Suffolk Coastal about whether or not their

recommendations have been agreed with as all that information is now readily available. It was

suggested that the planning authority should be making more effort and accepting that councils

will not always be able to put in comments that are akin to those that would be provided by

planning professionals owing to the fact that, for example, they do not always have full-time

staff. Suffolk Coastal suggested that councils need to adjust to the fact that the planning

authority will become exclusively online in the future. The parish council forums run by Coastal

will start up again in spring. Broadband is a problem as some parishes will not be able to

download information in large files. The comment was made that communication is key and

the planning authority stated that they want to work with local councils. The district council

said they would struggle with neighbourhood plans in terms of resources. There will be some

support and Government has provided funding but it could cost about £40,000. Some councils

might just wish to have a community plan but these had no statutory weight and no mandatory

effect. Rendlesham noted that they were struggling to get the support from the district council

although recognising that this was not deliberate obstruction and a resource problem. The

Inspector has written to say in terms of the Core Strategy they can go ahead with the next part

of the process. The letter is on their website. A comment was made from the floor that there

will be a need to look at site specifications in 2014 and that these might be acceptable to some

councils. However, it was noted that this approach could leave councils that had not

proactively created a plan vulnerable to whatever decision the planning authority chose to

take.

The Chairman thanked the speakers for attending. After they had left, the meeting then

continued to discuss this and related issues.

3. Minutes The minutes of the meeting of 17 September 2012 were approved.

4. Information Exchange

Wickham Market had attended a Scrutiny Committee about housing. Affordable housing is

about 80% of the market rate which is still a considerable cost. Flagship Housing did not seem

to have a way of addressing this fully. There is a lack of money and little can be done. Suffolk

Coastal might potentially develop a stronger policy but there is a second Scrutiny Committee

before the policy will be decided. SALC has a policy supporting affordable housing and a

relevant motion passed at its AGM has been sent to NALC to initiate national lobbying. SALC

will consider how to further help address this problem at its next Executive.

Waldringfield noted that quiet lanes information had been sent to SALC and that it was hoped

information would be going out to councils.

5

Framlingham is wanting to progress neighbourhood plans as Framlingham has not had the right

mix of development. The meeting noted that Sizewell C will have a major impact on Suffolk and

there needs to be careful future planning. Concern was expressed that the little towns and

villages were vulnerable and youngsters need accommodation. It was suggested that if there

were appropriate liaison on the Core Strategy and framework documents, there might be less

need for neighbourhood planning. Potentially Supplementary Planning Documents can be

constructed off the back of parish plans but this is a decision for the planning authority and will

be a material consideration but not binding like neighbourhood plans.

The meeting requested a greater strategic steer from SALC on neighbourhood planning.

Comments were made that councils must carry on with their neighbourhood plans and not be

deterred by the negativity of the district council that had been heard in this meeting.

Developers are picking up site-specific plans and identifying land that can be picked off.

5. Issues to go to the SALC Executive

Neighbourhood planning and proportionate neighbourhood plans for smaller parishes:

SALC strategy and policy for dealing with neighbourhood planning. Knowing the process to

follow for neighbourhood planning was important, noting that there was no expectation

that SALC could resource all the support needed without funds.

Affordable housing. To look at what can be done to ensure that there is a higher chance of

affordable housing being built in rural areas.

6. Reports

SALC Report A copy was provided in advance to local councils.

Chairman’s Report

There is a proposal that town and parish councils should be able to raise proposals under the

Sustainable Communities Act. The Local Government Association is apparently lobbying against

this as parishes might raise issues which are different from the other tiers of local government.

However, the meeting noted that the Act was supposed to be responsive to communities and

the proposed rights for TPCs are important. The Act so far has been used to protect Post

Offices. Also when Government agreed to consider a proposal from Leiston-cum-Sizewell as if

it were a proposal under the Act, the result was that Government agreed that developers

should support communities with consideration of significant development proposals and

would attend meetings called by the local council. EDF has already agreed to pay for a

consultant who can work with the relevant local councils. With a change of Minister there is a

hope that the planning appeals bill can be progressed. This would give equality of rights to

appeal against planning decisions to both local councils and developers.

Suffolk Coastal LSP and East Suffolk Partnership

The arrangements for the LSPs are still bedding in. The future arrangements were discussed at

the LSP Forum.

Sizewell A & B Stakeholder Group

6

A copy was provided in advance to local councils and Terry Hodgson, SALC representative on

that body, was in attendance and talked through the detail of his report. The meeting

considered it would be useful if the Sizewell C Forum could be expanded to include other

parishes. Councils that wished to could exchange emails on the Sizewell consultation. There

was disquiet about the level of information on the consultation process. In particular the lack

of information in Stage 1 was of concern as councils could not comment (given the lack of

detail) which might mean they would be thought to be in agreement. SALC could consider

writing.

Suffolk Coasts and Heaths

Ron Cushing was stopping his role as SALC representative on this body and the meeting asked

that their thanks for his work were noted. Neil Winship’s offer of taking over this role was

accepted by the meeting. Nick Collinson, CEO, is stepping down from running Suffolk Coasts

and Heaths.

7. Next agenda A speaker on Sizewell C. Tom McGary is the information officer with whom initial contact

could be made. A speaker on Broadband in particular one able to say which areas would or would not

be covered. Chris Bally, SCC, was suggested.

8. Date and place of next meeting 18 March 2012 Riverside Centre

9. Chairman’s close The Chairman thanked the meeting.

1

Report to Area Meetings

February/March 2013

SALC Awards Portfolio for 2013 2013 will see a revised suite of SALC Awards. Awards are recognition of the excellent practice in local councils and communities and in future we would like to expand this recognition further to help promote the good practice that exists.

Website of the Year 2013

Websites are now a commonplace way to let local people and the wider world know about local council activities. Calls for greater transparency in local government can be disproportionate when applied to local councils which are already embedded and meeting within communities with their notices adorning every local noticeboard. Without a doubt, websites bring a new vibrancy to local council information and there are some fine examples that should be applauded. SALC intends to make sure that the best sites are showcased. Details will be provided shortly and the winner will be announced at the SALC AGM in November 2013 (date TBC).

Local Council of the Year 2013

The SALC Award for Parish Council of the Year will be launched shortly. This prestigious award will have new criteria and a new assessment process for 2013. The winner will be announced at the SALC AGM in November 2013 (date TBC).

Suffolk Village of the Year 2013

SALC is the coordinator of Suffolk Village of the Year which is sponsored by UK Power Networks and the East Anglian Daily Times. Details of the Award will be sent direct to local councils and are also available through the Awards section of the SALC website www.salc.onesuffolk.net. Prizes are awarded for 1st, 2nd and 3rd place. There are also two other awards which are incorporated into the Village

2

of the Year process: Suffolk County Council Open Space Award and the Suffolk Wildlife Trust Award. Going through the process of entering provides a healthy opportunity to review what is going on in the community. Most villages are amazed when they realise how much is on offer locally and entering the awards also raises the possibility of winning cash and other prizes. We look forward to your entry!

Policy Issues

SALC is delighted that, despite the objection from the Local Government Association, initial indications are that Government is being responsive to the requests to progress the extension of the Sustainable Communities Act to local councils. This would be a major achievement and provide an opportunity to progress grass-roots policy issues direct to Government. SALC and Suffolk local councils have been at the forefront of urging Government to progress this change which would provide badly needed good news at a time when councils have been beleaguered by a series of adverse announcements about the changes to their financial arrangements.

However, there was significant concern that all of the policies adopted at the SALC AGM were passed to the National Association and all were rejected by their Policy Committee. This is being taken up with their Chief Executive and with NALC Council (on which SALC is represented). It took over three months for NALC to process these motions and no further information was requested by their policy officer before submitting them to the Policy Committee and the responses are not sufficiently proactive.

Motion 1: That SALC urges NALC to lobby Government to come to an arrangement with HMRC in order that small and medium sized local councils may be able to recruit Clerks on a self-employed basis, owing to the financial burdens the 2011 ruling has placed on them at a time when such councils are being encouraged to do more for the community without increasing their precepts. NALC Response: After careful consideration, the Committee rejected this motion as it believed that the principle of clerks remaining the employees of the local council should be maintained, to continue to promote professionalism within the sector.

3

Motion 2: That SALC should urge NALC to lobby Government to amend Section 15 of the Commons Act 2006 regarding the registration of village greens to prevent applications for village green status being submitted after the land has received planning permission for development, and/or implement the proposals in the 2011 DEFRA consultation on the registration of new town or village greens. NALC Response: After careful deliberation, the Committee resolved that such a motion could not be passed until after the passage of the Growth and Infrastructure Bill through Parliament (currently awaiting Report Stage in the Lords). If at that time your Association is still dissatisfied with the situation, please feel free to re-submit the motion with appendant supporting data and the Committee will be happy to re-consider it. Motion 3: In light of the recent attention that Government is giving to changing the law for using red diesel, that SALC request that NALC urgently lobbies Government to ensure that local councils are permitted to use red diesel for community purposes. NALC Response: After careful consideration, the Committee rejected the motion, stating that its principle had already been addressed in a motion adopted some years ago by the National Association. However, it sympathised with the principle of the motion and requested that it be communicated to the National Association’s Legal team to ensure that it is reflected in any amended Legal Topic Notes on the same. Motion 4: That SALC requests that NALC lobbies Government to provide clear guidance to planning authorities on Planning policies relating to renewable energy sources. NALC Response: After careful deliberation, the Committee decided to reject the motion, on the basis that it was unclear precisely what measures the Suffolk Association were asking the National Association to take. The Committee has given the Suffolk Association the option to re-draft and re-submit a longer, clearer motion on this matter to it at one of its future meetings, should this be the wish of the Suffolk Association. Motion 5: That NALC takes immediate steps to lobby Government to ensure that town and parish councils have the right to submit proposals under the Sustainable Communities Act, this being particularly important at this stage owing to the Local Government Association taking a position against the extension of this right to town and parish councils. NALC Response: After careful consideration, the Committee agreed it could not adopt this motion as it was already unofficial national policy. Rather, the National Association would be responding to Don Foster, MP’s letter to the National Association on the Act, and would forward a copy of this letter to the Suffolk Association for information.

4

SALC has requested: That NALC provides a statistical analysis to establish whether there are trends in adoption or rejection depending on the originating County Association

Detailed feedback on the points considered and conclusions reached in relation to each motion submitted by SALC to NALC in November 2012

A full list of the ‘informal policies’ and ‘principles’ that have been adopted by NALC

Reassurance that NALC will in future be adopting a fast, responsive and appropriate procedure for processing motions which shows sufficient respect and value for grass-roots policy issues as opposed to the current system which subjects them to a delay of over three months

Urgent reconsideration of the SALC motions in light of the points raised by SALC Clarification of the nature of NALC’s lobbying activity with details of the relative balance of reactive and proactive work. This is particularly requested given that NALC has indicated that it will not be influencing the passage of the Growth and Infrastructure Bill but will consider activity once it is set in stone as an Act of Parliament.

Advice about whether NALC wants clarity on the words ‘clear guidance’, ‘Planning policies’ or ‘renewable energy sources’ in the planning guidance motion which, on the face of it, appeared to be a straightforward policy set against the context of the National Planning Policy Framework and the removal of much of the detailed support material that helps local councils to reach informed recommendations.

Quality Councils

In September 2012 the National Stakeholder Group for the Quality Parish and Town Council Scheme agreed to review the Scheme with the aim of re-launching an updated standards scheme in 2013. Since then, the National Stakeholder Group have considered the scope and content of the consultation process which will inform the review. Online survey: A short online survey is being drafted with the help of statisticians at the Department for the Environment & Rural Affairs. The survey will focus on gathering quantitative data and it will be open to anyone with an interest in the Scheme to respond. Please note that because of the nature of an online survey responses will be from individuals rather than from councils as corporate bodies.

5

The link will be made available via the SALC website www.salc.onesuffolk.net. The survey will be open for responses for about 3 weeks. Structured interviews: A small number of brief structured telephone interviews will be carried out to collect qualitative data to support the results of the survey. The interviews will be targeted both at those groups who have not historically been involved with the scheme, and are therefore unlikely to complete a survey, and at key individuals who have been nominated by sector stakeholders. There will also be an opportunity to self-nominate for a structured interview in the online survey, although due to timescales not everyone who self-nominates will be interviewed. Written submissions: A number of written submissions have already been received from County Accreditation Panels and other sector stakeholders, and these will be used in conjunction with the data from the survey and interviews. Due to time constraints in analysing the results of the consultation we will not be actively seeking further written submissions. The consultation opens early March and closes on 1st April 2013. Provisional timetable for Quality Parish and Town Council Scheme consultation

Invitations for first round of structured interviews sent out

End February 2013

Consultation launched – survey link released First 2 weeks March

Structured interviews March 2013

Reminders sent Mid-March 2013

Consultation ends 1st April 2013

Analysis of consultation results supported by DEFRA statisticians

April 2013

New Quality Parishes Scheme drafted May 2013

New Quality Parishes Scheme finalised June 2013

New Quality Parishes Scheme shared with sector July 2013

Workshops & training events for County Associations on new scheme

July – October 2013

Applications open for new Quality Parishes Scheme October 2013

End of freeze on Quality Status December 2013

6

Training: Update & New Courses

We are still leading the way in the country on the number of clerks trained in the general power of competence. Also, Suffolk is joint first in achieving the highest number of clerks passing the Certificate in Local Council Administration (CiLCA) first time. All credit to Suffolk’s excellent hard-working and intelligent clerks and the first-rate support they receive from SALC on the detailed and technical requirements of this qualification.

The intensive CiLCA course will continue to be available and will be supplemented by follow-on supported drop-in sessions for those struggling to find quality time to fast-track their portfolio submission. New sessions have been running on annual meetings, document management and employment terms and conditions and will be available in the next annual programme, which will be launched shortly. One of the new support sessions is being offered on an ongoing basis throughout the year:

Not Been Able to Complete Your CiLCA Portfolio? This supported drop-in session is aimed exclusively at those who have attended the intensive CiLCA course and would benefit from a quiet and supportive place to study to complete those last tricky modules. Feb 28, March 7, March 13 @ £25+VAT each inc light lunch (non-members £100 + VAT)

Forthcoming standard courses that you might be interested in include:

CiLCA Intensive 25 April & 1 May 10.00 - 3.00 £350 + VAT (2 days) Cllr Training 12 & 19 March 9.30 - 3.30 £98 + VAT (2 days) 20 & 27 April 9.30 - 3.30 £108 + VAT (2 Sats) 8,15, 22 & 29 May 7.00 - 9.00 £98 + VAT (4 eves) New Clerks 22 April 9.30 - 4.00 £48 + VAT Clerk’s Networking Day 23 May 10.00 - 2.00 £15 + VAT Leadership Skills 16 & 23 Mar 9.30 - 3.30 £108 +VAT (2 Sats) 17 & 24 June 9.30 - 3.30 £98 + VAT Planning Workshop 6 Mar 6.30 - 9.00 £25 + VAT 11 May 9.30 -12.00 £25 + VAT 1 July 6.30 - 9.00 £25 + VAT Notices, Agendas & Minutes 29 April 9.30 - 13.00 £25 + VAT Bookkeeping 21 May 9.30 - 13.30 £25 + VAT OneSuffolk Websites Intro 16 April 10.00 - 12.30 £20 + VAT OneSuffolk Websites Advanced16 April 13.30 - 15.30 £20 + VAT Bookings: adminsalc@btconnect.com 01473 833713