| Kingsbarns Community Council - General
Information Community Consultation back to Kingsbarns Community Council more Extracts This is an extract from a report which was prepared for the Commission on Local Government and the Scottish Parliament by the Scottish Office Central Research Unit in June 1999. The Role and Effectiveness of Community Councils with Regard to Community Consultation 4. The role of community councils Introduction This chapter reports findings about how the role of community councils is perceived and interpreted, the range of the activities they engage in, the ways in which community councils and public bodies relate to each other, and the ways in which community councils fit into wider mechanisms of public consultation. Statutory role and status The meaning of the statutory role of community councils causes some confusion and difficulty to local authorities and community councils. Many interviewees, whether seeing a positive role for community councils or not, observe that their role and purpose is unclear. Four issues emerged as relevant: · whether community councils are corporate bodies
and the consequences of this uncertainty; The exact legal status of community councils is an issue seen as problematic by some local authorities' legal officers and by some community councils as a consequence. Community councils do not appear to be corporate bodies with the advantages of limited liability for their members enjoyed by local authorities, trusts and limited liability companies, for example. This is seen as having an inhibiting effect in the minds of some local authority legal officers who are reluctant to see community councils taking action such as incurring legal expenses, holding assets and employing staff, for example. There could be no protection from the consequences of any reckless action condoned within a corporate body with limited liability. The legal status of community councils is closely related to their function, and there is also uncertainty over this. The statutory base of community councils appears - and is often interpreted - to grant a power of general competence 'to take such action in the interests of that community as appears to it to be expedient and practicable'. However, legal officers immersed in the traditions of ultra vires are sometimes inclined to take the view that unless a power is spelt out specifically in law, community councils have no authority to enter into contracts, to engage in minor construction projects (for example to erect an aerial to improve television reception in a rural area) or to employ staff, for example. The breadth of their potential role seems to be at odds with the informality of their legal status. Community councils have some of the characteristics of the voluntary sector. Although provided for in statute, their existence is not prescribed. In addition, their members predominantly see them as a voluntary activity, requiring participation without reimbursement for time or any lost income arising. However, many community councils feel they are excluded from benefits available to voluntary organisations (for example, in one case study area, a subsidised council flat to use as a base in a council scheme), participation in civic affairs (for example the Scottish Civic Forum, established to represent civil society to the Scottish Parliament) or charitable and other funding. In response to this, some community councils have set up community development trusts on other charitable arms to access charitable funds. They are, therefore, highly dependent on their local council for financial resources - or on any fund-raising capacity they may have locally - in order to take some of the 'action in the interests of that community as appears to it to be expedient'. The final issue to emerge is the extent to which it would be desirable or legal for local authorities to delegate functions or services to community councils. A few examples were reported of community councils being resourced by local authorities to provide services that the local authority has discretion to provide (see Chapter 3). However, no council has delegated statutory services or duties, nor was there any evidence of community councils being considered as appropriate bodies to contract with for the delivery of services. While a few interviewees saw this as a direction in which they would like community councils to go, many also saw practical difficulties in achieving it. Activities To a great extent community councils are what they do. The breadth of their statutory purpose is reflected in a wide range of activities which contribute to a variety of roles. One way of describing community councils’ main activity is that they hold meetings at regular, often monthly, intervals. However, the activities undertaken by community councils between meetings are important in determining their effectiveness as community consultees. There is great variety between and within community councils and the most active will regularly: - write several letters following a meeting of the community
council Few community councils will do all these things regularly but several of the case study community councils did most of them. The main activities are discussed under six headings. Community council meetings Community council meetings are held in public halls, schools, hotels, community flats, members’ homes and community centres. Some community councils report difficulties in locating suitable or affordable premises. Some but not all community councils publicise the location and time of meetings. Most case study community councils typically have few members of the public present at ordinary meetings (all are open to the public) but most organise public meetings on a regular or occasional basis. The largest attendances at public meetings are generated by controversial issues including planning proposals, crime and traffic management issues. Some community councils hold public meetings routinely, for example every year or six months, some rarely or never hold public meetings and some hold meeting when issues of concern or strong public interest arise. Attendance varies from half a dozen to over 100 with attendances over 200 reported in relation to highly controversial issues. Public officials frequently attend community council meetings or public meetings called by community councils. Councillors also attend many such meetings. Other meetings Members of most case study community councils were involved in meetings additional to the regular meetings of the community council. These included meetings of consultative groups such as regeneration partnerships or area committees, meetings with other community councils, meetings with public bodies and, exceptionally, private companies, called at the request of either party and meetings with local groups or individuals within the area of the community council. Some of this required no regular commitment of time while others required as much or greater commitment of time and effort as the community council itself, including, for example, reading papers in advance of meetings. Many community councils perceived an increase in the expectations on them to attend meetings called by other bodies. Commenting on draft policies or issues of concern Community councils vary in the way they deal with controversial issues and with draft statements of public policy from local authorities and other public bodies. Typically several policy reports will be put to each meeting of the community council. The reaction of community councillors to this correspondence varied from appreciation at receiving it ‘we would rather have it than not’ to dismay at the waste of paper and cynicism about whether a response is really sought, especially if very little time is available to frame one. Some community councils would appreciate more effort from local authorities to co-ordinate the sending out of draft policy statements or other requests to comment, so that a steady trickle is achieved rather than the ‘feast or famine’ that was alleged. Community councils are selective in the policy reports they respond to, making a judgement either about their relevance to the local community or about the possibility of framing a response in time to meet the stated deadline. Sometimes members of a community council build up an interest in a particular topic or already have a professional or lay involvement in an issue such as planning or transport and in these cases draft policies or proposals are often entrusted to such individuals or sub-committees, sometimes in advance of community council meetings, to frame a draft response. Sometimes secretaries or other office-bearers are left to respond and sometimes – relatively rarely – community councils organise a public meeting or public opinion survey before framing a response, an issue considered further in the next chapter. Letter writing For some community councils, letter writing is the main activity apart from meetings. Letters may be written in response to correspondence received (up to 30 items were observed on the agenda of community council meetings) or in response to issues raised by community councillors or members of the public at the community council meeting. The correspondence received by community councils includes a few items from public bodies apart from local authorities, although local authority headed notepaper dominates. Correspondence from public bodies includes requests for comments on draft policy reports, invitations to participate in public meetings, public information leaflets and requests to assist with recruiting volunteers for public service, for example as prison visitors. Letters from community councils to council departments are copied by some community councils routinely to the local elected member of the council and sometimes to the MP. Letters are written to public authorities such as the Police, the water authority, the Scottish Office and health agencies as well as to the local council. Letters may be written to make enquiries, to comment on proposals, to lodge complaints, to seek meetings and for other reasons. Generally, community councils are satisfied that their letters generate a response within reasonable time scales, but are not always satisfied with the content of that response, not surprisingly. Publicity and promotion Community councils vary in the extent to which they see publicity about their role and activities as a priority. Efforts made by case study community councils include newsletters; public meetings; securing coverage in local newspapers; posters and notices on dedicated noticeboards or in shops, public libraries or community centres, for example; and social events or activities. Some of these methods of publicity serve other functions, such as in providing a service to isolated older people or in providing a forum at a public meeting for the airing of views. Handling enquiries from the public The visibility of community councils appears to vary a lot. Most case study community councillors report that they receive letters, visits or phone calls from members of the public. In some cases this may be restricted largely to occasional encounters in the street, while in others the correspondence placed before a community council meeting may include several letters from members of the public. Some community councils – very few of the case studies – maintain their own premises or use other premises as a base for meeting members of the public who wish to bring problems or comments to the community council. This provides a community information service which at its best will recognise its own limitations by directing some people to alternative sources of advice, including councillors and MPs. It has other advantages, however, in enhancing the visibility of the community council and in providing insights into the problems and priorities of some local residents. Surveying local opinion Community councils are expected to ‘ascertain’ the views of the community. Case studies provided a variety of examples of ways in which community councils survey local opinion: - surgeries and advice services Community councils vary from those who rarely use any of these methods to those who use several simultaneously. Several of these activities, such as holding public meetings and producing newsletters, have a very clear and direct bearing on the effectiveness of community councils as community consultees and require resources and skills that some community councils say they have not got. The evidence suggests that none could respond within the time and resources available to them to the volume of expectations implied by the correspondence most receive. To an extent, the activities each one engages in is a measure of the reservoir of active citizenship which the community council idea and specific issues generate within a locality. However, this must be qualified by the evidence that suggests that in some areas most citizens will remain ignorant of the activities or existence of a community council. Liaison and consultation Some of the activities of community councils are intended to influence local authorities. The nature of the relationship community councils have with local authorities is, therefore, crucial in defining the role of community councils. This part of their role is created as much by the policies and practices of local authority elected members and officers as it is by community councils themselves. Although community councils have contact with many other public bodies, they generally perceive their most important relationship as being with the local authority and they are dependent on it to provide information if they are to play any role in community consultation. A large majority of local authorities (72%) report that they have a code of practice for the conduct of relations with community councils and some others are found to cover some of the possible ground in their schemes for community councils. Schemes and codes of practice set out the responsibilities of both councils and community councils with regard to consultation procedures. They establish local authorities’ obligations with regard to types of information provided to community councils, provision of contact details, timescales and the provision of other support (administration, finance, training). They set out expectations of the duties, roles (representativeness is sometimes emphasised) and conduct of community councillors, the requirement to provide councils with minutes and accounts and the form (usually written correspondence) that community council responses should take as well as requirements such as number of meetings, access of the public to meetings, the need to encourage youth representation and the desirability of community councils taking up training opportunities. These codes of practice show a considerable improvement from the ‘notably vague’ community consultation undertakings from local authorities that Hart found (1986:1). Many of the codes include advice on ascertaining the community view, dealing with planning, organising meetings and responding effectively to consultation. Few codes of practice refer to the standards of conduct expected of community councillors, who might have been expected, for example, to declare any personal interest in issues under discussion. One scheme specifies a limit (£15) to the expenditure to be incurred by candidates in elections. Local authorities and community councils report links between community councils and many council departments, in some cases officers at area level as well as centrally having a responsibility to liaise. Most local authorities (87%) say they have a designated liaison officer in relation to community councils. The role of this officer, however, seems to vary with different degrees of emphasis placed on: - administration of the community council scheme,
monitoring of community council elections and accounts, and administration of
funding and other support; Many of these tasks are carried out by clerical or administrative staff and some by more senior professional staff. In some case study authorities, little staff time was devoted to development support for new community councils, training for community councils and policy development in relation to community consultation. These tasks require professional skills that all councils employ but some have not deployed to assist the development of community councils. In a few cases, special efforts have been made to provide an officer to act as a point of contact, as in authority D’s 'special friend' scheme and in authority C where community work staff 'support individual community councils on an area basis'. In another authority, a 'neighbourhoods resources and development' department claims that it acts as a one-stop link between community councils and council departments and in another 'all departments respond to community councils' enquiries depending on the nature of the enquiry'. There is disparity in what councils report about the arrangements for liaison with community councils. The variety of reasons why community councils and local authorities may want to contact each other helps to explain this variation. Community councils or local authorities may need to communicate in relation to the administration of the local authority's scheme for community councils, for example in relation to funding, elections, annual accounts or in relation to the office services provided to community councils by the council. A second form of contact is over matters that community councils are routinely consulted about by law or local policy or that the local authority wishes to raise on an ad hoc basis. A different form of contact takes place when community councils are involved as members of council committees or working parties. These three forms of contact are considered in turn. Administration of schemes for community councils Some gaps in local authorities' records of community councils were found in the survey and case studies but generally the administration of schemes for community councils takes place effectively as a routine activity within departments such as chief executives, corporate services, central services, legal services or administration. Some councils use such departments to mail consultation papers or other correspondence to community councils. The work of the officers responsible for administration is usually overseen by a council committee or sub-committee such as general purposes or one concerned with community consultation or solely with community councils. One case study local authority provides this service from the chief executive's department if wanted but does not require that mailings go from this central point. This council has also considered the need for closer monitoring of community councils, partly to ensure a clearer view is obtained of their representativeness and effectiveness. This has not been welcomed by some community councillors who feel that their restricted budgets make it impossible for them to fulfil the council's expectations. Routine consultation Local authorities routinely send a variety of information to community councils. Planning applications must be notified and 80 per cent of councils say they also send council minutes and agenda to community councils. One-third (33%) report sending licensing or, more specifically, liquor licensing information. Three councils mention a newsletter and one sends a 100-page guide to council services and contacts, periodically updated, and another mentions invitations to functions for community councils. Other community councils’ minutes, council policies, common good policies, grant and training information and housing information were also reported as being routinely sent by some councils. One case study local authority attempts to limit the volume by sending summary sheets with contact numbers so that community councils can request the full document. Community council membership of council committees and groups Local authorities have increasingly found it helpful to invite representatives of community or client groups to serve on committees or advisory groups (which might have alternative names such as working parties). In regeneration partnerships involving local authorities and other public bodies it is commonplace to find community representation on the board. The extent to which community councils play a role in such developments is shown in Table 4.1. Most councils (83%) involve community councils on structures such as working parties, area forums and regeneration partnerships. Only four do not report such representation. Examples include environmental working parties, a community planning steering group, community forums (made up of a variety of community groups) associated with area committees (of councillors), and other local initiatives and projects. The extent of this involvement sounds considerable, but in practice this does not mean that all community councils in the area of a local authority reporting it are necessarily so involved. Around three-quarters of the case study community councils had recent or current experience of such involvement. Table 4.1 Community council representation on local authority committees and working parties Number of Local Authorities Total With Community Council Representation on Rural Inter-mediate Urban No. % Committees, sub-committees, or area committees 2 3 6 11 37 Working parties, area forums, regeneration partnerships or other structures 8 8 9 25 83 (n=) (9) (10) (11) (30) Source: Postal survey Community council representation on formal committees and sub-committees of local authorities occurs in just over one third (37%) of the local authorities overall, with a wide variation in practice between rural authorities (22%) and urban authorities (55%) (Table 4.1). One form of representation is on the central committee or sub-committee that has responsibility for community councils and perhaps more widely for community consultation. From the evidence of the decentralisation schemes and case studies, the most common form this representation takes is on area committees, some of which were set up in response to the decentralisation requirement of the 1994 Act. The table may understate the extent of this contact. For example, in case study D, community councils are not members of area committees but may attend meetings and put forward items for discussion, and regularly do so. In general, community councils had fairly positive views about their experience of serving on such committees, reporting that they are listened to and have every opportunity to raise issues and participate. Case study B illustrates a variety of forms of involvement. Community councils are represented on the council’s community councils sub-committee, on area committees, regeneration partnerships and on other committees or groups. In some cases they are the only community representatives, in other cases they serve along with other community groups. In general, any doubts about the value of this contract, by community councils, were about the limited powers or budgets of the committees rather than their involvement in them. For example, one community council felt it was more valuable to serve on the regeneration partnership than on the more formal area committee since that is where money for the neighbourhood will be channelled. Local authorities and community consultation Most community councils have a lot of contact with the local authority for their area and many have experience of close working relationships with officers or councillors. But so far this report has not considered how the involvement of community councils fits into any wider processes of consultation conducted by local authorities with citizens or voluntary organisations. This is now discussed with reference to the general policies on community consultation developed by local authorities and by looking at how community councils fit into them. There were clear signs that many local authorities are trying to develop new mechanisms for community consultation and involvement. Almost half (45%) supplied a policy statement on community consultation and almost all (93%) supplied a copy of the Scheme for Decentralisation required under the terms of the Local Government (Scotland) Act 1994. These show a range of activity with, at one end of a spectrum, local authorities confirming that their existing arrangements for community consultation and decentralisation are adequate (from apparently very different starting points) to authorities that are developing new structures, such as area or neighbourhood committees or forums, and new processes for consultation, such as designating officers to act as the point of contact for community groups. Twenty-five council decentralisation schemes aim to maintain or establish area committees or neighbourhood forums. Nearly all the decentralisation schemes refer to two aspects of participation. Firstly, ‘individuals’ (referred to as the public, citizens, residents) are encouraged to participate. Secondly, ‘communities’ are incorporated into decision-making structures such as area committees, area or neighbourhood forums and forums that focus on one issue (see also Elrick, 1999). One or two decentralisation schemes refer only to the citizenship role of individuals or the ‘community’ representative role of local organisations. Council policy statements on community consultation also distinguish individual citizen participation from informing, consulting and working with communities. The statements highlight two broad aims for community consultation: firstly, to improve the effectiveness of service provision, including establishing priorities and needs and, secondly, to build public confidence in the ability of local democracy to deliver the requirements of local individuals and communities. The treatment of community councils in decentralisation schemes and community consultation policies reveals a degree of uncertainty amongst many local authorities about the role and legitimacy of community councils as well as a general desire by authorities to develop their relationship with community councils more positively. About half of the local authorities with policies on community consultation specify a role for community councils. This role is mainly to be exercised through area forums or, in the case of one local authority, a specific community council forum. One case authority includes the development of the relationship with community councils as one of the five key elements of its participation framework. In one rural authority, area committee membership is made up exclusively of councillors and community councils. However, the majority of community consultation statements that mention community councils see them as having no distinctive part in a community consultation process which also involves other local groups and other consultation mechanisms including citizens’ juries, questionnaires, focus groups and opinion polls. Broadly three categories of local authority emerge: - a small number of local authorities that give community
councils a distinctive role in their decentralisation schemes or community
consultation policy; The evidence available suggests there are four or five authorities in the first category. Two of these, in rural areas, see community councils as the key feature of their decentralisation scheme and of their approach to community involvement. One authority says that ‘The main thrust’ of its decentralisation scheme is ‘to recognise the statutory role and legally elected status of community councils. This status is given a high profile throughout the initiative’. The other rural authority provides the most generous funding and staffing assistance to community councils of all local authorities and expects community councils to play a role that many other local authorities see as their own, such as allocating grants to local voluntary organisations, assisting in tourist promotion and funding road improvements on private roads. The third local authority - case study C - is in a geographically diverse area and sees community councils as 'the first point of contact' with the council 'within the geographical communities' of the area. The second category of local authority sees the same role for community councils and for other voluntary and community groups. This approach is illustrated by one authority that reports six mechanisms for community consultation: 1. A ‘community initiatives committee’, a
sub-committee of the council’s policy and resources committee, contains
councillors and community representatives (not just community councillors).
This meets in various locations and finishes each meeting with an open forum
for the public. This group of local authorities contains two sub-categories. The largest group consists of councils that have carried out or intend to carry out a review of community councils, sometimes because local government re-organisation has created a need for a unified scheme and sometimes because there is a need to consider how community councils can be accommodated within consultation policy or the decentralisation scheme. Several contain implicit criticism of the role and representativeness of community councils in the past, though most of these put the point positively by saying that they seek to develop the role of community councils, as one rural authority says '(we are) committed to developing and maintaining an effective dialogue with community councils'. Another (rural authority) refers to a desire to make community councils 'more representative and have greater credibility' and another (rural again) seeks to encourage community councils to carry out their role of ascertaining the community's views more effectively because of evidence that this is not always done. Several local authorities refer to community councils along with other community and voluntary groups, making clear that community councils will not be treated differently from other groups in their efforts, as one urban authority, said 'to establish a continuous dialogue with representative organisations which will develop into mature partnerships'. The smaller sub-category of councils appear not to have considered the role of community councils very explicitly, although may have in place some well-developed structures for community involvement. This sub-category includes a case study area where community councils were given a distinctive role on the local authority’s area committees some years ago but recently the local authority has had some difficulty in defining the role of community councils, for a number of reasons, including the disruption to relationships caused by several years of spending cuts. The development of new structures for community involvement do not always encompass community councils, for example in regeneration areas that have no community councils. This has created a complex pattern of community involvement in which the role seen by the local authority for community councils has not been made explicit in some developments while in others they are assumed to be given the same rights as other community groups. There is a desire by councillors and officers to see community councils as having no special access in relation to consultation, although there is a simultaneous desire to develop them further and a history of giving them a special role on area committees. The third category may consist only of one authority, in an intermediate area, where the authority has recently developed an approach to involvement that seeks to focus primarily on voluntary organisations that are seen as being able to represent specific needs or issues to the local authority more effectively than community councils. Community councils are not, however, excluded. Roles and community consultation This concluding section summarises the evidence about the activities of community councils, the roles they play and the place they occupy in the overall framework for community consultation provided by local authorities. The activities of community councils can be seen as fulfilling several roles. Broadly, six can be detected. Community councils: · organise special events such as outings for older
people or gala days which have benefits in terms of social cohesion, social
integration and community development; This typology of roles may over-simplify what in practice happens, for example, as a meeting between a community council and a public official contributes to the last three of these roles simultaneously. Community councils vary from each other and over time in how many of these roles they attempt to fulfil. For example, some never provide services to local people nor organise social events such as galas. Some may concentrate on campaigning on an issue of local concern while others may focus on responding on planning or other proposals from the local authority. Some rarely liaise with other community and voluntary groups while others are selective in the choice of issues on which such liaison is focused. In general, community councils spend a lot of time on seeking to influence local authorities, in responding to opportunities to comment on proposals and in participating in local authority structures for community consultation. In relation to their role in community consultation, community councils are given a distinctive role in a small minority of local authorities’ consultation policies. While most councils seek to accord community councils the same access and participation rights as other community and voluntary groups, in practice in a large number of authorities they are the dominant community group to play a role. The views expressed in this report are those of the researchers and do not necessarily represent those of the Department or the Secretary of State for Scotland. Further extracts can be found here The full report can be found here back to Kingsbarns Community Council more Extracts up to Top |