Issue - meetings

Report of the Monitoring Officer

The Monitoring Officer updated the Group about the Council’s Corporate Enforcement Policy.

The Monitoring Officer explained that the Council’s Enforcement Policy was last reviewed in 2019 and as such it was appropriate to review it again now to ensure that the Council had an up to date policy which accurately reflected the Council’s corporate approach to enforcement and linked with the enforcement plans which sat below it. She thought it important for Members to have opportunity to understand the enforcement powers of the Council and the frameworks within which they operated.

The Monitoring Officer confirmed that Officers had reviewed the Enforcement Policy and had proposed amendments, some of which were required to due to changes in legislation or changes in the Council’s procedures and some of which were to add more information and context about enforcement powers and appropriate actions.

The Monitoring Officer said that information had been added to clarify the stages of enforcement undertaken by the Council. She said that stage one action was prevention, including publicity about appropriate and inappropriate activity. Stage two action involved control where appropriate, for example through licence, approval or planning conditions. She said that Officers had updated the policy to clarify that whilst individual enforcement teams had their own powers and procedures, enforcement was very much a collaborative process and teams worked together across the Council.

Councillor R Walker referred to paragraph 3.7 of the Policy relating to proportionality of action and said that he was aware of situations where residents believed that enforcement action was required but where there was a difference between their assessment of seriousness versus that of Officers. Cllr R Walker asked whether subsections of the policies could give an indication of the levels of seriousness, perhaps with a RAG rating or some examples as to what activity would constitute differing levels of breach and appropriate action.

The Monitoring Officer referred to section 3.11 of the Policy which gave example of the types of factors that would be taken into account when assessing non-compliance but said that further breakdown would be contained within the policies themselves which sat underneath this overarching policy.

Councillor Jones and Councillor R Mallender referred to planning and thought that the Council sometimes took too soft an approach to enforcement and did not give enough weight to the existing character of an area when assessing applications.

Councillor Jones suggested that wording be included in paragraph 3.7 to say that the Council ‘would also consider the impact on the character and way of life of an area’.

It was RESOLVED that Communities Scrutiny Group:

a)    Considered and commented on proposed amendments from officers in respect of the review of the Corporate Enforcement Policy and put forward any further suggestions, including adding wording to paragraph 3.7 that the Council ‘consider the impact on the character and way of life of an area’

b)    Agreed that the refreshed Corporate Enforcement Policy be presented to Cabinet.