Agenda item

Context:

To present the findings and recommendations of the draft Community Engagement Review for scrutiny, requesting Members consider:

•      the findings of the Review and associated conclusions / recommendations; and

•      the proposed ‘Way Forward’ for a newly defined Community and Partnership        Development Team (Appendix B).

Recommendations:

The Select Committee scrutinises the findings of the review, making recommendations as appropriate.

Key issues:

In October 2015, a review of community governance was undertaken to analyse the role of local decision making within Area Committees and to understand the Authority’s level and type of community engagement and its direct relationship to how local needs and solutions are identified, developed and delivered. 

Monmouthshire has four area committees; Bryn y Cwm; Severnside; Lower Wye and Central Monmouthshire.  Their purpose is to:

•           engage the community in area working to help the council shape major proposals affecting specific areas advising the Authority of the associated implications for the area;

•           lead the community planning process;

•           ensure services are properly co-ordinated on a local level;

•           encourage effective cross sector collaboration; and

•           provide a forum for community debate and to make Executive decisions on matters within areas provided they are within the Council’s policies and budgetary allocations and do not adversely affect other areas.

In October 2016, there was a recognition that in light of the Well-Being of Future Generations Act and the Authority’s evolving Future Monmouthshire programme, there was a need to extend the review to address the following objectives:

•           Clarification of the strategic direction required to meet legislative requirements and enable asset and place based delivery;

•           Repurposing of the Authority’s Whole Place team;

•           Identification of joint working opportunities internally to enable a streamlined approach;

•           Assessment of new roles in the provision of impartial advice across the county’s five strategic settlements – Abergavenny, Monmouth, Caldicot,    Chepstow and Usk;

•           Understand how Section 106, the proposed Community Infrastructure Levy and Area Committee Grants can be used strategically to address resource implications for a sustainable, place and asset based approach; and

•           Reconfiguration of the community governance model to preserve the leadership role of Council Members and encourage wider community participation.

Following presentation of the Community Engagement Review, its length and complexity were acknowledged and questions, and requests for more detail, were welcomed:

Member Scrutiny:

A Member recognised that there is a lot to do in terms of community engagement and asked if there were any examples of best practice encountered in members’ wards and their engagement with the public, in clusters and area committees.  It was responded that there are pockets of good practice e.g. Llangybi which has put forward community led plans by focusing on what’s important to residents.  Here, the work of the people involved was vital in achieving a high return of surveys. It is hoped that its plans going forward will align with the Public Service Board and our partners so more assistance can be provided.

Secondly, it was asked how lack of awareness in other areas will be addressed. It was explained that cluster work is in progress, where representatives of town and community councils are brought together to discuss their priorities.  Currently, work is being completed with Gwent Association of Voluntary Organisations (GAVO) using a Rural Development Plan bid to produce a toolkit to enable community groups, with the support of their town and community councils, to undertake asset based community development plans.  There will be a Community Leadership Award that will offer funding for training to fill skills gaps within community groups.

A Member asked what the difference between consultation and engagement is. It was responded that consultation is where there is a definitive proposal, with recommendations.  Engagement is where there are no pre-drawn conclusions, and the opportunity is provided to develop and co-produce solutions. Historically, councils undertook more consultation but there are now more complex challenges and a wealth of experts in communities to engage with and involve as enshrined in the Wellbeing of Future Generations Act. 

The Member promoted the need to listen (not just talk) to communities to develop a relationship of trust and respect. Examples of good practice and engagement by Trellech United Community Council were provided.  It was queried how success in developing an engaged culture in Monmouthshire will be identified.  It was responded that there would be reduced demand on council services, a community will take pride in itself and will progress its own future plans. It was added that there would be changes noted in the responses in the National Survey for Wales to questions such as ability to influence decisions and assessing sense of belonging in a community. 

A question was asked about level of engagement and engagement improvement and how these aspects are assessed, citing the example of Monmouth Town Council changing its way of engaging with the community (using e.g. Twitter and Facebook).  It was queried if there are any toolkits to enable improvements in engagement.  It was explained that, the last Democratic Services Committee had representation from a person involved in Monmouth Town Council’s campaign which provides an opportunity to explore what can be learnt from the Town Council’s experience.    It was asked if it was likely that there will be engagement facilitators in the team and responded that all the teams are familiar with facilitating engagement, and will be available to assist with  key projects by continuing to work very closely with clerks to town and community councils.

A Member commented that the report had a lot of detail and repetition, and expressed concern that it can be perceived as difficult for people to attend area committee meetings. It was noted that cluster working worked for a while and the opinion was expressed that this approach should have been further developed.  It was explained that dates have been circulated for cluster meetings to consider priorities in September. These meetings are open to the public.  Work has been undertaken to explore and address reasons why there was poor attendance at meetings previously.  The Committee were advised of good work in identifying priorities in Usk and narrowing the list to the top 3 items.   

A Member queried if the reason for the report was because of the Wellbeing of Future Generations Act, if it was for the future of our Council and the cost of the report.  A diary note of all meetings in future for town and community council meetings, cluster meetings etc. was requested.  It was confirmed that the Act was not the main driver for the proposals but was timely as a review of community engagement had been identified as a priority for the council. The complexity of the report was recognised but noted that the covering report highlights the key points and recommendations.  In response to a request, a sheet of definition of terms mean will be circulated.

A Member questioned who leads the communication between various committees and observed that a simpler report with key messages and timelines should be available to seek views from town and community councils (via their websites), and Monmouthshire residents.  This could assist the work of the Public Service Board. It was agreed that an easy read version could be produced with glossary and updates to assist wider future engagement.

The Chair referred to the quoted 63% of residents involved in volunteer activities and asked how the figure was determined.  It was confirmed that the figures were obtained from a national survey that had a small sample size and whilst it is possible that it is a high estimate, it is accepted that volunteering in Monmouthshire is amongst the highest in Wales. 

Also raised was the need to address the effectiveness of area committees which can become “talking shops” that don’t address strategic and long-term planning, preferring to concentrate on smaller issues.  It was suggested that the newly appointed Cabinet Member for Governance will want to develop area committees to align with proposed changes.  The cost of area committees was also queried and assurance sought that the public receive value for money. It was explained that, to an extent, it depends on the attendance of officers and if attendance is out of office hours. 

The Cabinet Member for Social Justice and Community Development acknowledged the comments and questions asked stating that they will be helpful when considering streamlining objectives.   It was added that it will be important to define how to measure success and to report progress.  It was recognised that ongoing engagement is a key driver and it will be important to identify, and engage with, other groups and individuals who feel isolated and disenfranchised from the process.  The key role of volunteering was recognised and it was suggested that it should be the subject of a future meeting or Member seminar.  Production of a summarised version of the report was welcomed.  The Cabinet Member appreciated the discussion to support her strategies on social and economic inclusion, and helping children have the best start in life.

A Member observed that awareness of what is being done is paramount and praised the work of the Communications Team in promoting the Council as one that wishes to engage, particularly through the use of social media platforms.  It was also suggested that online access amongst residents should not be assumed and that consideration should be given to publication of a biannual newsletter.