To receive petitions, comments and questions from the public.
Decision:
Mr Robin Dartington thanked the Chairman for the opportunity to address the Committee and gave a verbal presentation regarding public consultation.
Minutes:
Audio recording – Start of Item – 2 minutes 43 seconds
Mr Robin Dartington thanked the Chairman for the opportunity to address the Committee and gave a verbal presentation regarding public consultation.
Mr Dartington advised that he wished to put forward some ideas regarding how the Council should undertake public consultation regarding significant developments such as Churchgate, Hitchin and drew attention to the following:
· He had been a Councillor some 30 years ago and was now part of the Churchgate Resurgence PB Group;
· There should be an appropriate organisation to direct the project and engage with the community;
· The public must be involved in drawing up the development brief;
· Previous schemes had been developed autocratically with decisions imposed;
· There was an opportunity to organise things differently;
· The Council would not exist if it were not for the residents.
Mr Dartington then posed several questions:
· Did the Cabinet agree that the public, Councillors and officers should work together?
· Could Cabinet consider setting up a Hitchin Town Consultation Forum which would hold public meetings and then set up joint working parties, which should be composed of residents, Councillors and officers?
· Does Cabinet agree that such a positive forum would enable the large number of active community groups in Hitchin to co-ordinate their views?
· Could such a forum be the way forward to develop the thinking on Churchgate?
· Would the announcement of such a forum be the Council’s first effective step in changing the relationship between the public and their representatives?
The Chairman thanked Mr Dartington for his presentation.
The following Members took part in the debate or asked questions:
· Councillor Ian Albert;
· Councillor Judi Billing;
· Councillor Paul Clark;
· Councillor Steve Jarvis.
Some of the main points raised were:
· Engagement with the Community was a focus;
· There were different types of consultation and whatever format is used it must be timely and relevant;
· Councillors spent a lot of time talking and listening to residents, although this could always be done better;
· Some strength in using self organised groups to help with consultation;
· The Area Committees had a role to play;
· The Council needed to find ways reach out to groups that do not engage;
· The Council needed to learn to manage the differing views of residents;
· Consequences of consultations could be different to what may be expected;
· The views expressed during a consultation may not necessarily be representative of the community as a whole;
· In some cases the result may not be as expected;
· The Council needs to be clear about what it can and can’t achieve;
· The Council needs to have a clear set of expectations so that those consulted felt empowered and not disappointed.
Mr Dartington felt that:
· The Area Committees were0 not the right format for consultation and didn’t meet often enough;
· The Community groups had factions within them;
· Public should be able to tall for however long is needed;
· That the reasoning of some presenters was incorrect or misguided;
· He expressed disappointment at the cautious views expressed by Members and that frustration came from not being heard.
The Chairman closed the debate with the following comments:
· The Council did want to listen;
· Some of the limitations had been discussed;