Resolved: That all items on the agenda be web-cast.

Apologies were received from Councillors Nelson-Gracie, Mrs Gibson and Councillor Malcolm Greer, Cabinet Member for Regeneration.

It was noted that Councillor Mrs Hinder was substituting for Councillor Mrs Gibson, and that Councillor Clive English was substituting for Mrs Joy from 7.30pm.

It was noted that Councillors Verrall and English were visiting Members, interested in agenda item 8.

There were no disclosures.

Resolved:  That all items be taken in public as proposed.

Resolved:  That the minutes of the meetings held on 13 and 23 December 2010 be agreed as a correct record and duly signed by the Chairman.

Interview with;

Councillor Malcolm Greer, Cabinet Member for Regeneration;

David Edwards, Director of Change, Planning & The Environment;

Rob Jarman, Head of Development Management; and

Michael Thornton, Head of Spatial Planning.

The Chairman welcomed David Edwards, Director of Change, Planning and the Environment, Rob Jarman, Head of Development Management and Michael Thornton, Head of Spatial Planning to the meeting, and invited them to present the information to the Committee.

Mr Edwards summarised that the rural economy was very important to the borough as 30 percent of businesses were within the rural areas, representing a key contribution to the whole borough’s economy. Mr Edwards told the Committee that the Council had been working closely with Members to establish priorities that enabled continued growth of economy across the borough. This included work on the core strategy, and the potential scope for business development over the next 15 years. Mr Edwards informed the Committee that the Localism agenda is still in the early stages, and more information should form in the next 6-9months. Mr Edwards explained that Mr Jarman and Mr Thornton were there to present more information on the Bill.

Mr Thornton commented that the scrutiny report covered the topic well. The Committee was informed that the Localism agenda would abolish some previous planning policies, and gave an example of the regional tier between district and national policies that would no longer exist.  He explained that in its place the Localism agenda created Neighbourhood Development Plans (NDP) in addition to the Local Development Framework (LDF) that was currently in place. The new NDPs will allow local communities to put forward plans to develop their areas providing they agree with the LDF.  Mr Thornton informed the Committee that NDPs would be approved by a referendum of local residents only, it would not include the businesses within that area.  This could potentially create tension between the communities, regardless of how helpful the NDP process is intended to be for rural economies.

Mr Thornton stated that there were several questions of the practicality of the changes proposed by the Bill. Examples included; social housing reforms having an ‘affordable rent’ and the community having the ‘right to buy’ assets.  He highlighted that there would also be changes to enforcement powers, as the current 27 planning policy statements were being condensed into one. Mr Thornton summarised that the Planning Policy Statements (PPS) that would most affect the rural economy were PPS7, sustainable development in rural areas, PPS4, sustainable economic growth and PPS22, renewable energy. There were concerns that important  details within these could be lost when merged.

Mr Jarman highlighted that with regard to the rural economy and agriculture the approach had changed to be more business like and commercial with supermarkets in Kent driving the standard and prices of goods.  He reminded the Committee that if Kent suppliers could not meet those standards, supermarkets would simply look elsewhere. He believed that this would be regardless of the public becoming more interested in where their food originates from. The Council would need to be mindful of this when receiving planning applications for things such as polytunnels. 

Mr Jarman stated that within planning they were noticing change, for example  ...  view the full minutes text for item 16.

The Committee considered the future work programme, and noted the joint Local Development Document AdGroup (LDDAG) and Leisure and Prosperity meeting scheduled for 21 February 2011. The Chairman highlighted that a new Forward Plan had been circulated since the agenda was created. The Committee expressed disappointment that the original work programme had not been adhered to.

The Chairman informed the Committee that as part of the rural economy review, a Rural Business Survey could be undertaken by Members. An example survey was circulated and it was agreed that Members would use this to survey local businesses and return their results to the Overview and Scrutiny Officer by the end of March 2011.

The Overview and Scrutiny Officer informed the Committee that as a witness was scheduled for 26 April 2011, the rural economy review report would not be presented to the Committee for approval before the end of the municipal year. The Committee considered whether to ask for a written response instead of interviewing the final witness or allow the Chairman and Vice-Chairman to agree the final report. It was agreed that the witness should be interviewed as planned.

Resolved: That:

a)  The work programme be noted; and

b)  The rural economy review be circulated to the Committee following the April meeting prior to approval from the Chairman and Vice-Chairman for submission to Cabinet.

6.30pm to 8.18pm.