My time as a councillor is over, and at a time of my own choosing. That puts me in a better frame of mind than those members who lost their seats at the hands of their own party, or the Ferry electorate. I wish them well.
It may seem harsh. but no-one has the right to stay in public office forever. It's important to let new people through. Back in 2008, Cllr Andy Dawson stepped aside as the SNP's housing spokesman and made space for me. In time I stepped aside, and John Alexander took over the role. If political groups are to avoid damaging internal conflicts, that's the way it has to work.
What happens in Dundee City Council now? Over the next few days and weeks some significant decisions will be made. There are powerful convenerships to be decided, and those positions carry salaries. There is a limited pot of money to be shared out between the senior councillors. The Leader's salary of roughly £34,000 is fixed by statute. The Administration then has to choose whether to give a lot to a small number of busy councillors, or share the money as widely as possible to top up the basic councillors' rate of £16,500.
Doing any of the major Convenerships properly involves a huge time commitment. Whoever gets those jobs will find it hard to work for any kind of normal employer, as there are so many daytime meetings, papers to read and people to see. Even with some extra cash from the "pot", Conveners on around £22,500 will still be earning much less than the median weekly wage. That means people who are retired, or have private incomes, or have no family commitments, are in the best position to take these busy jobs. In practice, many councillors work for MPs or MSPs who can be very flexible about working time. The Lord Provost, on just over £25,000, could spend every waking minute at meetings or at functions, leaving no time for any other paid work.
There are some other "pots". The Chair of the Tayside Valuation Joint Board gets about the same as a Committee Convener. That post could be filled by a councillor from Angus, Perth or Dundee. The Chair and Vice Chair of the Tay Road Bridge Joint Board also get paid. I was Vice Chair and the £3,000 or so which I received topped my councillor's pay up to just under £20,000 a year.
Councillors who sit on the Tayside Health Board get between £5,000 and £10,000 a year (the NHS accounts only show bands, not actual amounts). The Health Board is a big commitment and the fee is appropriate for anyone ready to put in a shift and attend their famously long meetings.
In case anyone should misunderstand, I'm not against these payments. If you believe in democracy, then elected office should be open to everyone, regardless of income. But now comes the hard part. Who gets the jobs?
At the last election it was fairly straightforward. The SNP had an overall majority and so the Group Leader and the Whip made suggestions, put them to the Group at a private meeting and most of them were accepted. Then the Council effectively rubber stamped them.
This time things are not so clear. It is very likely that the SNP will form the Administration, as there will be strong resistance within Labour to any pact with the Tories. If the SNP can do a deal with even one other councillor, Cllr Alexander and his group will get their way.
If, on the other hand, all the opposition councillors unite around a single position ... say Convener of Development Management, or Lord Provost, there could be difficulties for Cllr Alexander and his team.
One thing is mistily clear. All of these decisions will be made in private meetings. The Standing Orders of the Council forbid any debate over these positions. So the candidates for Neighbourhood Services will not be made to stand up at a public meeting of the council and say what they would do if elected, and why they would be good. Equally, they will not be subjected to forensic questioning by other councillors.
These rules were written at a time when there was no Freedom of Information Act and a strong culture of secrecy in council corridors. The only reasons for them are to get the meeting over swiftly, and avoid incompetent candidates exposing their inadequacies.When there are powerful, salaried positions at stake, the public should be able to see who they're getting.
For the nerdy folks like me who read these things, here are the actual rules covering the first meeting of the new Council ...
SO 33(1) In the filling of vacancies and making of appointments, the following provisions as to
voting shall apply:-
(a) Nominations for vacancies or appointments shall be moved and seconded
without discussion and shall forthwith be put to the meeting.
SO 8(3) For the avoidance of doubt the appointment of Conveners and Depute Conveners of
the Standing Committees and representatives on outside bodies shall be dealt with as
a single item of business, ie a block.
SO 33(2) Vacancies and Appointments (Single Block Nominations)
(2) In the case of appointments being made in terms of Standing Order 8(3), members
shall vote for a single block nomination.
https://www.dundeecity.gov.uk/sites/default/files/publications/standingorders6mar17.pdf
Sunday, May 7, 2017
Sunday, February 12, 2017
Regional Sports Centre ... some learning points?
Councillors have been bombarded with material from objectors to the Regional Performance Sports Centre, planned for Caird Park.
Tempting though it is to dismiss this as grievance driven rubbish from obsessive people who will not listen to reason, I can't. Their arguments make a lot of sense. The problem is that everything revolves around process, and no-one's interested in that. Except, perhaps, the courts; and naive souls who think everything should be done properly.
A planning application for the Caird Park development very nearly reached the Committee in November 2016. It was withdrawn at the last minute, and the reason given was the objection from Historic Scotland. A large sports building was to be sited close to historic Mains Castle, an A listed building.
This objection had been around for months and was included in the report submitted to Committee with a recommendation for approval. Other factors cited in public were the objectors' call for a Pre-Determination Hearing, and the withdrawal of Dundee Football Club (announced in public in December).
Whatever the reason for the last minute withdrawal, it has become clear to me that many things about this application were wrong. My opinion is that we did the right thing by withdrawing it. At Monday's P&R Committee we have the opportunity to start again.
Here are the things we need to sort.
Pre Application Consultation
Consultation with the community was minimal and I cannot find any report which tells me what the community said.
Environmental Impact
Council Planning Officers decided an Environmental Impact Assessment was unnecessary. As it turned out, they were wrong. Objectors asked the Scottish Government to rule on this, and the answer from Government (in December 2016) leaves no-one in any doubt. There should have been an Environmental Impact Assessment.
Biodiversity
We have a duty to protect and enhance biodiversity when considering planning applications. We also have a legal duty to produce a biodiversity report every three years and publish it. We have not done so. Without that report, it is difficult to assess the effects on biodiversity of the Caird Park application.
It was only at the last minute ... 7 November 2016 ... that we published a Landscape Statement acknowledging the recent presence of otters close to the sports centre site. This was one of 45 documents connected to the planning application, and there was no reference to it in the report to Committee. Officers may have intended to point this out at the Committee.
Oak Ward Wood
The Scottish Woodland Trust call it "Ancient woodland" ... the Council called it "old trees" ... it may be that the new application will not affect Oak Ward Wood, but given the dispute over its status and value, I think we need more information.
A Pre Determination Hearing
Objectors have asked for a Predetermination Hearing, so that the issues can be more fully explored. The Scottish Government encourages this in major applications like Caird Park. Dundee has never had a predetermination hearing and has no set procedure for this. I see it as an opportunity to allow more evidence to be presented in a less rigid and stressful way than current procedures permit; and for councillors to be given time to consider that information before they take a final decision, perhaps two weeks later.
If we had had pre determination hearings on applications such as NEXT, Sports Direct and Aldi at Myrekirk, the public might have understood our decisions.
There is a view that the current system gives plenty of time and easy access for objectors and others to put their views and that no pre determination hearing is necessary. I disagree with that view.
Finance
I have been assured that the cost of the amended Regional Sports Centre will be reasonably close to the budget set out in the Capital Plan (approx £19.3 million) and that the new method of procurement ("SCAPE") will ensure that all is well. That's the capital cost.
As for revenue cost, I want to know that the city council is not exposing itself to unreasonable risk, and that the running costs of the centre will be covered. Leisure & Culture will run the Regional Sports Centre, and back in 2015 a business plan was included in the application to Sports Scotland for grant aid. I asked to see the business plan at least three times. My request was declined, apparently because it was a confidential document belonging to Leisure & Culture. I am grateful to the objectors for obtaining this plan via Freedom of Information legislation, and for letting me see it.
The Centre is projected to have a deficit of around £40,000 a year. This causes me no concern ... sports centres run at a loss ... but when the council is taking decisions involving long term financial commitments, we need to know the facts.
In conclusion
I think we, collectively, have messed up this planning application, and as Depute Convener of Development Management that causes me pain. I say collectively because there is an all party Project Board (I am not a member) which has overseen the process so far. That Board has a duty to get answers to the kind of questions which the objectors have posed, and there is still time. They should also be given full information at every stage.
I will support the report going forward on Monday night, but I will be arguing for a proper pre determination hearing to be held. I will also be seeking assurances that all of our processes will be robust and that councillors will be given the financial information they require to make good decisions.
And I thank the objectors for their painstaking work on this. I still support the idea of a Regional Sports Centre, but let's get the processes right. They exist for good reasons.
Tempting though it is to dismiss this as grievance driven rubbish from obsessive people who will not listen to reason, I can't. Their arguments make a lot of sense. The problem is that everything revolves around process, and no-one's interested in that. Except, perhaps, the courts; and naive souls who think everything should be done properly.
A planning application for the Caird Park development very nearly reached the Committee in November 2016. It was withdrawn at the last minute, and the reason given was the objection from Historic Scotland. A large sports building was to be sited close to historic Mains Castle, an A listed building.
This objection had been around for months and was included in the report submitted to Committee with a recommendation for approval. Other factors cited in public were the objectors' call for a Pre-Determination Hearing, and the withdrawal of Dundee Football Club (announced in public in December).
Whatever the reason for the last minute withdrawal, it has become clear to me that many things about this application were wrong. My opinion is that we did the right thing by withdrawing it. At Monday's P&R Committee we have the opportunity to start again.
Here are the things we need to sort.
Pre Application Consultation
Consultation with the community was minimal and I cannot find any report which tells me what the community said.
Environmental Impact
Council Planning Officers decided an Environmental Impact Assessment was unnecessary. As it turned out, they were wrong. Objectors asked the Scottish Government to rule on this, and the answer from Government (in December 2016) leaves no-one in any doubt. There should have been an Environmental Impact Assessment.
Biodiversity
We have a duty to protect and enhance biodiversity when considering planning applications. We also have a legal duty to produce a biodiversity report every three years and publish it. We have not done so. Without that report, it is difficult to assess the effects on biodiversity of the Caird Park application.
It was only at the last minute ... 7 November 2016 ... that we published a Landscape Statement acknowledging the recent presence of otters close to the sports centre site. This was one of 45 documents connected to the planning application, and there was no reference to it in the report to Committee. Officers may have intended to point this out at the Committee.
Oak Ward Wood
The Scottish Woodland Trust call it "Ancient woodland" ... the Council called it "old trees" ... it may be that the new application will not affect Oak Ward Wood, but given the dispute over its status and value, I think we need more information.
A Pre Determination Hearing
Objectors have asked for a Predetermination Hearing, so that the issues can be more fully explored. The Scottish Government encourages this in major applications like Caird Park. Dundee has never had a predetermination hearing and has no set procedure for this. I see it as an opportunity to allow more evidence to be presented in a less rigid and stressful way than current procedures permit; and for councillors to be given time to consider that information before they take a final decision, perhaps two weeks later.
If we had had pre determination hearings on applications such as NEXT, Sports Direct and Aldi at Myrekirk, the public might have understood our decisions.
There is a view that the current system gives plenty of time and easy access for objectors and others to put their views and that no pre determination hearing is necessary. I disagree with that view.
Finance
I have been assured that the cost of the amended Regional Sports Centre will be reasonably close to the budget set out in the Capital Plan (approx £19.3 million) and that the new method of procurement ("SCAPE") will ensure that all is well. That's the capital cost.
As for revenue cost, I want to know that the city council is not exposing itself to unreasonable risk, and that the running costs of the centre will be covered. Leisure & Culture will run the Regional Sports Centre, and back in 2015 a business plan was included in the application to Sports Scotland for grant aid. I asked to see the business plan at least three times. My request was declined, apparently because it was a confidential document belonging to Leisure & Culture. I am grateful to the objectors for obtaining this plan via Freedom of Information legislation, and for letting me see it.
The Centre is projected to have a deficit of around £40,000 a year. This causes me no concern ... sports centres run at a loss ... but when the council is taking decisions involving long term financial commitments, we need to know the facts.
In conclusion
I think we, collectively, have messed up this planning application, and as Depute Convener of Development Management that causes me pain. I say collectively because there is an all party Project Board (I am not a member) which has overseen the process so far. That Board has a duty to get answers to the kind of questions which the objectors have posed, and there is still time. They should also be given full information at every stage.
I will support the report going forward on Monday night, but I will be arguing for a proper pre determination hearing to be held. I will also be seeking assurances that all of our processes will be robust and that councillors will be given the financial information they require to make good decisions.
And I thank the objectors for their painstaking work on this. I still support the idea of a Regional Sports Centre, but let's get the processes right. They exist for good reasons.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
