LGCC29
Legislation Committee No 2
Individual Response to the Consultation on the Proposed Legislative Competence Order relating to Community Councils and Councillor Recruitment, Retention and Allowance
Dave King, Community Councillor
Legislative competence - town and community councils
I make the following comments after reading the many documents.
1. Many community residents consider the community council worthless - another drain on their pocket. Reasons for this are
waste (money terms) duplication (why cannot CC do the job)
duplication with others particularly the CC
restrictions on the scope of competence and service provision from many bits of legislation and procedures
"Job for the boys”
"Talking shop” with no teeth.
2. We are like many others a small community, with a diverse background of Welsh and outsiders, Welsh speakers and non Welsh speakers. To get any useful debate the Council must have a reasonable number of members. We have been as low as 3 and it becomes very difficult to have any valued or useful discussion or debate. So this means there must be a minimum practical size in terms of membership for all or any council. Equally to get as best can some sort of representation across the community area, male female, Welsh non Welsh and other such as agricultural/ rural or urban issues need consideration and bringing to the table
3. That said, experience in the Trade Unions shows that where works constituencies are formed with reps drawn for different parts of the workforce it is not unusual to find the worse suited individuals being selected and only bringing loud and empty "noise” to the table. Success here and in community councils comes by having trained intelligent and confident people being selected who can listen understand and then consider and debate the issues. Party political selection nearly always fail and most of these criteria. The ones who would be good are clever enough to carry out the role shy away because of the systems and ineptitude that pervades local government.
4. There are suggestions to open the scope and role of Community councils. Experience shows that even in the areas where there is scope already there are many many obstructions to making progress
In a small community like ours, £1 on precept raises £300. One road sign erection costs £800? There needs to be additional funding sources other than the precept
H and S requirements (like erecting the sign) force communities to carry additional insurances at a cost, must use the County Council (and carry their overhead costs as well as our own) and comply with "Street Acts” and other legislation. They virtually preclude "local input” where real local interest and drive may be able to make real differences to a community, often with lower cost or even volunteer workforce. The costs of compliance often massively overwhelm the benefits. (see next point)
5. Engaging Community Council employees will add an additional burden on the Clerk (PAYE employment issues sick pay and all the other things). The administration costs may become out of all proportion to the potential benefits to the community. Matter 12.12 recommendation R4.1 maybe needs to think outside the box, and look at employees of the Principal Council being "requisitioned” by Community/Town councils to undertake defined tasks be they existing or devolved or proposed additional responsibilities. This also addresses the cost of compliance issue in point 4 above. The idea of R4.1 will hopefully clarify the often muddy waters of who does what.
6. There is still evidence of "Knowledge is Power” syndrome throughout local gov and other bodies. Fortunately in recent years there has been an improvement. Carm CC web site is full of almost all the important pieces of information required for a Community and it’s elected members to use to operate effectively. Internet is to be encouraged along with e-mail as a main steam source of information flow at council’s levels. There are difficulties with getting responses from Principal Council officers. Improvements in IT system such as mail tracking and logging should be introduced along with training and guidance to council staff that they are there to serve US, the community and not sit on there backside and draw a salary. There can be similar difficulties with snail mail. Likewise County Council members and staff need to move into use this technology as well. As well as training there needs to be equipment such as projectors and PC’s and phone lines and ADSL facilities. These all cost of course.
7. The public are without doubt entitled to have a totally transparent system of control and monitoring. The IT route gives easy access for those who have access. Councils should have their own web sites, but in many cases for small communities there may well be benefit in having a "true community site” run outside of council control but with a section devoted to council matters like agendas. minutes and finance reports. This will have more street credibility than a council run one. CCC county wise site has not been well supported as it’s prescriptive costly and not really "local” Local newsletters must avoid the Carmarthenshire model of "flying the flag”
8. Getting members is a problem. Ballots unheard of. It’s no good getting "anyone” For best results one needs the best people. High profile Assembly issue I feel.
9. Paying members I feel is wrong. Will almost certainly be complained about by electors and these are our neighbours - just another expense from their pockets. May attract candidates who only want the money and contribute nothing. One volunteer is worth ten pressed men! Allowances for child care and similar are ok.
10.Accreditation (R4.5) looks like Quality Assurance and masses of paper and effort for little return. This must be simple. Communities are very resource limited in manpower and money.
11. In small communities the Council elected members often form the nucleus of almost every other committee or organisation within the area. There are often conflicts of interest particularly wrt money. Simplification of the Code of conduct in this area needs to be addressed (R8.8) after all these are generally all voluntary, unpaid, and for the community benefit.
12. Demographic issues - how in a small catchments can one get this "Balanced”!
13. Most of the points suggested are heading in the right direction. However there no magic answer to devolving to the local community at all - everyone will be different.
Dave King Community Council member Henllanfallteg CC. This is my view point , not that of my CC who have made a separate submission.
