Rother Association of Local Councils (RALC)
Minutes of the Meeting held on
The
Watch Oak,
Present: Valerie Bennett (Whatlington), Cllr Pat
Brazier (Camber), Cllr Charles Bronsdon (Icklesham), Cllr Richard Comotto (RALC Executive Officer), Cllr Ann Cook
(Ticehurst), Richard Farhall (Rye) (RALC
Clerk), Cllr M Getley (Iden), Cllr Paula Glew (Sedlescombe), Cllr Colin
Harmer (Mountfield), Cllr G Hensher (Fairlight), Cllr C Merricks (Icklesham),
Cllr M Miller (Iden), Karen Ripley (Salehurst & Robertsbridge), Cllr Alan
Stainsby (Crowhurst), Cllr J Taylor (Northiam), Cllr Mary Varrall (Etchingham) (RALC Chair), Cllr David Young
(Ewhurst) (RALC Treasurer)
Michael
Chater (NALC Vice-Chairman), Trevor Leggo (SALC Director), Derek Stevens (RDC
CEO)
2.31 The
meeting commenced.
Minutes taken by Richard Farhall.
1 Apologies
Cllr Jim
Hobbs (Playden), Cllr Graham Peters (Bodiam), Cllr Pat Wood (Ticehurst)
2 Accuracy of Minutes -
The Minutes
were approved subject to the amendments following:
Page 1
1 Apologies for absence – those absent insert Cllr Corke (Udimore)
1 Apologies for absence – those present, line 2 delete Cllr Bennett insert Mrs Bennett
1 Apologies for absence – those present, line 4 insert Cllr Peters
(Bodiam)
1 Apologies for absence – those present, line 6 delete Cllr Turner insert Mrs Turner
Page 2
8a) Reports from RALC representatives –
8a) Reports from RALC representatives –
Page 4
8e) Reports from RALC representatives – WARR, line 4 delete ‘Defra . . . rules.’ insert ‘GOSE would direct the programme
under guidance from DEFRA.’
3 Matters arising -
Page 2
5 Auditing RALC’s accounts: a proposal for future scrutiny (Cllr Harmer
approaching suitable individual to examine RALC’s accounts) Cllr
Harmer advised that he would be meeting the individual concerned later in the
week and would report back. Cllr Harmer
7 Appointment of a clerk (further advertising) The
Chairman advised that there had been no response to the latest efforts to
recruit a Clerk. At the previous Executive Committee meeting Richard Farhall
had agreed to take on the role as a ‘last resort’, subject to his Council’s
approval and to the situation being reviewed should he no longer be one of
RESOLVED
That Mr Farhall be appointed Clerk with immediate effect.
Page 5
13 Clean Neighbourhood & Environment Act 2005 (seeking extension of
proposed Dog Control Order consultation deadline) It was
confirmed that RDC had obliged.
17 Parish Comparison exercise (update) The
Executive Officer advised that he had thus far received copies of 2006-07
budgets from 10 parishes/towns but would appreciate more.
4 Financial report
The
Treasurer advised that the current bank balance was £2,671.92 – with around
£200 of bills awaiting payment.
Four
parishes had still not paid their 2006 subscriptions but two of these were
believed to be ‘imminent’ – the other two being considered to have effectively
withdrawn from the Association.
5 Urgent items
The Chairman
had not been notified of any urgent items.
6 Presentation: SALC – value for money
The Director
of the Sussex & Surrey Associations of Local Councils, Trevor Leggo (TL)
highlighted the activities of the SALC, the benefits of membership, and
outlined its structure and staffing (see
Appendix).
He spends
much time resolving tensions – at any time there are around 6 ‘disputes’
involving councillors only or councillor/s and the clerk.
In response
to a question asking if it was a good use of resources to be running training
courses 3 months prior to full elections, TL stated that one course was aimed
at new clerks and suggested that it was important to ensure members and clerks
had access to continued professional development.
TL suggested
that RALC could be likened to an ‘electoral college’.
The
personnel following are funded from member subscriptions: Christine Swan (remit
mainly
TL received
positive feedback from a number of the councils present. SALC’s advice and
support had been appreciated particularly by Mountfield and Icklesham.
TL suggested
that, in relation to legal advice (via NALC) alone, the average SALC membership
fee of £70pa represented very good value when compared against firms of
solicitors charging typically c£180/hr.
Clerks appreciate generally the importance of SALC membership and advise their
members accordingly – but new clerks may not be aware of the benefits of
membership.
Responding
to an observation that some members see little documentation/guidance produced
by SALC, TL suggested that this was largely in the hand of clerks who are sent
regular mailings and invited to attend an annual Networking Day (note: in 2007 this event may be divided
between eastern and western venues).
TL accepted
the validity of a comment from Whatlington that the service provided by SALC to
its members had been particularly poor following immediately the retirement of
TL’s predecessor – SALC had been under-resourced for a good 3 months.
The Chairman
suggested that SALC membership provided its members with a kind of ‘insurance’.
7 Presentation: SALC – SEERA
representation
Note: for more
information on SEERA visit www.southeast-ra.gov.uk.
SALC’s
representative on the South-East Regional Assembly (SEERA) – also Vice Chairman
of NALC – Michael Chater (MC), explained the purpose and structure of SEERA,
and also his role within it. His comprehensive presentation included reference
to:
The South-East Region
·
8.1m population stretching from
Milton Keynes to the IOW and New Forest to the
·
Generally prosperous with pockets of
deprivation on south coast strip,
·
High value attached to environmental
protection (35% ‘designated landscape’)
Infrastructure
·
£37-£47 billion needed to support
growth over next 20 years
·
3-year debate on SE Plan
·
70 members of the Assembly are
county councils
·
30 members represent universities
and interest groups
·
‘Representative Model’ – members are
unelected (recruited from an electoral college)
·
SE region pivotal to national
economy
·
Challenge: to maintain quality of
life
Membership
·
3 town/parish councils reps
·
74 local authority
·
17 social and environmental
organisations
·
17 ‘economic partners’
·
1
·
Rewarding to work closely with
social and environmental partners
Scope of business
·
Advocacy
·
Accountability
·
Regional planning
·
Regional transport
·
Regional housing
·
‘Joining up’ regional policies
Implementation
·
SE Plan should be approved by the
year end
Working methods
·
Constitution
·
Rules of procedure and debate
·
Full Assembly meeting
·
Executive Committee
·
Regional Planning Committee and sub
groups
·
Leadership Group
·
Select Committees
·
Partnership Boards
·
Liaison meetings
Parish/Town Council involvement
·
Active participation in Assembly
meetings
·
Reps on EC and Regional Planning
Committee
·
Involvement in scrutiny ‘select
committees’
·
Support from Assembly Partner Support
Unit
·
Invitations to Assembly Membership
Induction Sessions
·
Respond to Assembly consultations
The key
piece of work to date is the SE Plan – a 20-year vision.
MC briefs
SALC on SEERA matters – which then decides what information to disseminate.
Addressing a
question from Cllr Young on the importance of road planning – especially in
respect of the A21 – MC advised that such matters were considered within the
Planning Committee. Councillors/Councils with such concerns should brief him so
that he could pursue them through the appropriate channels.
MC advised
that ‘political groups’ within SEERA had ‘weighted voting’. Consequently, the 3
local council reps had 1 vote.
Cllr Harmer
advised that he had lost confidence in SEERA’s CEO after he had heard him suggest
that it was acceptable for waste generated in
Cllr Harmer
suggested that, if RALC had known that MC chaired SEERA’s Poverty Select
Committee, it could have provided him with information on rural poverty in the
area. MC advised that the Select Committee consisted of all relevant
stakeholders and that its work – and data requirements - had been publicised
and sourced.
MC
considered that Cllr Harmer’s complaint about there being no recognition of
rural settlements within the SE Plan was a valid one.
Cllr Comotto
observed that one of the Assembly’s political groups had, unsuccessfully,
endeavoured to use its ‘weighted voting’ to secure SEERA’s abolition. Cllr
Comotto suggested that local/regional government was becoming too complex.
There was a general consensus that SEERA was remote, uninspiring and (probably)
‘dispensable’. MC responded that a regularly-updated 2-page summary of SEERA’s
work appeared on its web site. Cllr Comotto suggested that most people did not
have the time to visit regularly a wide range of (relevant) web sites –
including SALC’s. TL advised that the SALC site provided an effective means of
communication.
The Chairman
thanked MC for his presentation and his obvious commitment and enthusiasm on
behalf of member councils.
8 Presentation: SALC – ‘Make a
Difference’
TL advised
that he had brought two ‘Become a Councillor – Make a Difference’ (DVD) Packs
for each council to take away. The Pack had been produced because surveys
indicated that the average age of parish/town councillors was rising and that
many councils were concerned that they would not be able to attract sufficient
candidates to stand in May (closing date for nominations: 4 April).
The Pack –
funded by DEFRA – constituted a ‘resource pack’ for potential candidates. Seven
local launches had been scheduled across
9 May 2007 elections – encouraging
participation
The RALC EC
– with comments from RDC – had produced a short briefing sheet (tabled),
primarily for the use of staff in Rother’s Community Help Points fielding
enquiries from prospective candidates. However, it can be drawn on also by
clerks. The EC had also discussed producing a poster.
Rother’s
CEO, Derek Stevens advised that parish/town council poll count would take place
on Friday 4 May. Polling on 3rd would be
10 Local Government White Paper
Four
councils had responded to the Executive Officer’s questionnaire on the main
proposals contained with the White Paper. This was an opportunity to submit
members’ views to Government by way of a corporate response. Further completed
questionnaires would be welcomed.
11 Annual Parish Conference 2007
(20 March, Brede VH, 1.45-4.45)
Liaising
with Trevor Elliott, the Executive Committee had suggested two topics for
discussion: traffic management (particularly speed limits) and the new domestic
waste contract. The proposal was that nominated individuals would put
(pre-advised) challenging points to ESCC and RDC to stimulate lively debate.
Cllr Young had agreed to lead the traffic management ‘challenge’ but there was
a ‘vacancy’ for the other.
12 Reports from RALC representatives
Rother District Standards Committee
Adding to
the Chairman’s comments, TL reported that the Standards Board for
Wealden and Rother Regeneration Partnership (WARR)
In his
absence, the Executive Officer read out Cllr Peters’s report:
‘The
[current] programme is now closed to further bids but we have just unveiled a
limited Small Grants Fund. If parishes have suitable ideas please contact Anne
or Melanie at Red Barn Mews. If RALC wished, they could come and give a short
briefing at a future meeting.
For the
future, we anticipate bidding for further funding streams and will bring news
of these to RALC as soon as appropriate.’
In Cllr
Carey’s absence, the Clerk reported that the organisation was going through a
‘reflective’; stage – it’s Directors were shortly to have an ‘away day’ to
review the Partnership’s structure, activities and strategic direction.
13 SALC – appointment of RALC
representative
The Chairman
advised that former RALC Chairman and Sedlescombe representative, Cllr Valerie
Wright had decided to take a back seat and asked the Sedlescombe Clerk to convey to her good wishes and thanks from the
Association.
Cllr
Bronsdon, being the only person nominated for the SALC vacancy created by Cllr
Wright’s resignation, was duly declared appointed.
14 Standards Committee: parish
representation
The Chairman
advised that there was to be consideration after the coming elections to have a
third Town and Parish Council representative on the Standards Committee to
ensure full representation.
15 Correspondence
It was
agreed generally to dispense with this item in the future.
16 Next
meeting
Confirmed:
4.18 The meeting closed.