Agenda item

Report to Follow

The Democratic Services Manager introduced the report which sought the views of the Regulatory Committee in relation to member comments in the review of member allowances in 2019-20 which suggested that the Regulatory Committee should be formally reconstituted as two separate committees – a Planning Committee and a Licensing Committee. It was explained that this had been considered by the Standards Committee in November 2020 and the merits and disadvantages of this option were discussed. The discussion at the Standards Committee meeting had focused on licensing and it had been enquired whether it was possible to have one Licensing Sub-Committee, rather than two, in order to reduce costs. It was noted that the Standards Committee would be further considering this issue at its meeting on 25 January 2021 and was seeking the views of the Regulatory Committee.

The Democratic Services Manager noted that most boroughs in London had separate committees for planning and licensing, with a separate committee to consider other planning functions. It was explained that the report outlined four options in relation to the structure for planning and licensing functions and the Regulatory Committee was asked to comment on these options. It was commented that, if any changes were requested and put forward by the Standards Committee, they would be presented to the annual Council meeting in May 2021.

Members of the Committee raised the following matters:

·         The Regulatory Committee currently discussed more planning issues than licensing issues; it would be useful either to receive service updates at the Regulatory Committee or to have a separate Licensing Committee that could focus on licensing issues.

·         The Regulatory Committee provided important feedback on planning and licensing issues and this had resulted in positive changes, such as the introduction of apprentices in Building Control; there were concerns that this role would be lost if the Regulatory Committee was divided into a Planning Committee and a Licensing Committee.

·         It was considered that any changes should aim to reduce the workload of councillors who were currently attending a lot of meetings of the Regulatory Committee, Planning Sub-Committee, and Licensing Sub-Committee.

·         It was noted that Regulatory Committee was the only committee where a Vice-Chair received a Special Responsibility Allowance (SRA) and that it was useful to have consistency. It was also noted that, if the Regulatory Committee was divided, there would still be the same number of SRAs – the Planning Committee Chair would receive the same SRA as the Regulatory Committee Chair and the Licensing Committee Chair would receive the same SRA as the Regulatory Committee Vice-Chair.

·         Generally, the Committee believed that it would be easier to have one Planning Committee that considered planning applications and matters of planning policy and one Licensing Committee that considered licensing applications, matters of licensing policy, and the statutory licensing functions. It was suggested that policy and statutory issues could be considered quarterly by each committee. Some members expressed concerns that this may not result in a reduced workload for councillors.

·         It was considered that it would be inconvenient for Council to be the parent committee for the Planning Committee as this would require all Council members to be trained in planning matters. Although, it was noted that it was very unlikely that the Planning Committee would refer any applications to the parent committee.

·         It was noted that, under the Licensing Act 2003, a Licensing Committee must have at least 13 members. Some members considered that this would involve an increase in the number of councillors sitting on committees for planning and licensing compared to the current arrangements for the Regulatory Committee. Other members considered that some councillors could sit on the Planning Committee and the Licensing Committee and that there may not be an increase in workload. It was also noted that, if there was a parent Planning Committee and Licensing Committee, these would meet infrequently.

·         It was commented that some existing committees could benefit from a reduction in size and it would be useful to consider the impact of splitting the Regulatory Committee on committee memberships and meeting frequency, including the impact on other committees, such as the Corporate Committee.

·         Some members noted that the planning and licensing functions had been joined about 10 years’ ago, creating the Regulatory Committee, and this was designed to reduce costs. It had been considered that one, core committee for planning and licensing was a better approach.

The Chair noted that the discussion had raised a number of important points and that further discussion may be required. It was suggested that some members of the Regulatory Committee could meet informally as a smaller group to consider their views and the potential options in greater detail. It was agreed that a smaller group would meet informally to discuss the issue and that any interested members should contact the Chair, Vice-Chair, and Democratic Services Manager. It was noted that any conclusions and proposals would need to be considered by the Regulatory Committee and the Standards Committee before any proposals were recommended for adoption at the annual Council meeting on 24 May 2021.

The Chair stated that, although the Regulatory Committee had not reached a conclusion or selected one of the options in the report, the initial comments made should be passed on to the Standards Committee for consideration at the meeting on 25 January 2021.

RESOLVED

1.    To note the information contained in the report.

2.    To pass the initial comments of the Regulatory Committee to the Standards Committee for consideration at the meeting on 25 January 2021.

3.    For a smaller group of Regulatory Committee members to meet informally to discuss the issue of reconstituting the Regulatory Committee as a separate Planning Committee and Licensing Committee in more detail.