Agenda item

Purpose: To scrutinise the planning performance data reported for quarter one 2012/13.

Jason Teal introduced a report considering the quarter one key accountable measures and activities for 2012/13. Jason Teal informed the Commission that further contextual information had been included for the 2012/13 reports in order to provide further background and narrative to the Council’s performance figures. The additional information included contextual data for West Berkshire provided by other agencies (such as unemployment levels and crime data), and information relating to the volume of work being undertaken by the Council.

There were 49 measures in total compared to 39 in 2011/12. 11 measures were reported on an annual basis as they were only available at a single point in the year. Of the remaining 38, 28 were reported as green (on track to be achieved by the end of the year); 7 measures were being reported as amber (behind schedule, but still expected to be achieved by the end of the year). None were reported red. Data was unavailable for 3 measures at the time of print. Supporting commentary had been provided for the amber measures in the main report.

Jason Teal confirmed that the targets related to the annual or year end figure and that an amber outturn indicated that the activity was behind schedule but was still anticipated to be completed by the year end.

Jason Teal advised the Commission that the figure presented for the rate of change for the repeat instances of domestic abuse had been reported incorrectly and should read -1.1% against a Thames Valley Police Force average of +1.1%. This measure should therefore be green.

Councillor Rendel requested that the performance information be updated in time for each meeting of the Commission. Jason Teal responded that the purpose of the report was to provide a snapshot of activity for quarter one, and that it was outside the parameters of the report to provide real time updates. The Chairman reminded the Commission that the purpose of bringing the performance report to the Commission was to provide an indication of the level of performance in order that the Commission could judge whether further investigation would be needed in any particular area.

Councillor Goff acknowledged the increase in the number of adult learners, but questioned why the use of libraries had reduced over the last year. Jason Teal advised that the rise in adult learners had come about due to the introduction of a particular programme. The Chairman advised the Commission of national reports that library use had reduced and that this had been partially attributed to the ease of access to information from the internet.

Councillor Franks requested that the information relating to planning appeals be broken down into those being decided by Committee and those not.

Councillor Rendel commented that not all of the amber indicators included a commentary of what action was being taken to address the issue. Jason Teal responded that this information was requested as part of a template in the preparation of the report, but was not always forthcoming. The information presented was that provided by service areas at the time of going to print. Jason Teal further advised that this point had been raised by Councillor Rendel at a recent Executive meeting and that he was preparing a written response. The Chairman requested that the response be circulated to all members of the Commission.

Councillor Rendel requested clarification of the supporting commentary for the activity ‘To reduce the proportion of children becoming the subject of a child protection plan for a second or subsequent time’, and in particular the phrase ‘..when it is clearly in their best interests.’

Councillor Rendel was concerned that the Performance Monitoring Task Group had not met following its initial meeting, and had not had sight of the proposed target for the 2012/13 reporting. Councillor Rendel queried why this task group had not been reconvened.

Councillor Franks asked how many owners of empty homes had been identified.

Councillor Franks further asked how many planning applications were rejected as invalid within a short time of the decision date.

Councillor Johnston asked whether the National Planning Performance Framework (NPPF) could be used in appeal retrospectively and requested that the appeal figures be broken down to illustrate this.

Resolved that:

·        The Head of Planning and Countryside to provide a break down of the number of upheld planning appeals decided by a Planning Committee and those not;

·        Jason Teal to circulate the written response to an Executive question posed by Councillor Rendel regarding the activity being undertaken to address amber indicators, to all members of the Commission;

·        Clarification to be provided of the supporting commentary for the activity ‘To reduce the proportion of children becoming the subject of a child protection plan for a second or subsequent time’, and in particular the phrase ‘..when it is clearly in their best interests.’;

·        Jason Teal to clarify why the Performance Monitoring Task Group had not been reconvened following its initial meeting;

·        The Head of Planning and Countryside to inform the Commission of the number of empty home owners that had been identified;

·        The Head of Planning and Countryside to inform the Commission of how many planning applications were rejected as invalid within a short time of the decision date;

·        The Head of Planning and Countryside to inform the Commission of whether the NPPF could be used in appeal retrospectively and to provide a breakdown of appeal figures to illustrate this.