Agenda item

Resolved: that the Committee would refer its views to Mayor and Cabinet as follows - the Committee recommends that - in advance of making its decision- Mayor and Cabinet should ensure that it has sufficient details from officers about:

·         The framework for making decisions, with specific reference to the role of local councillors. This follows from Members’ concern about the availability of funding for important projects that lack popular appeal. And in addition - how appropriate consideration will be given to funding projects for minority and/or marginalised groups.

·         The types of projects that can and cannot be funded. This is in reference to Members’ concerns that the funding could focus on infrastructure to the detriment of community projects and services.

·         How communication with residents will be carried out to raise awareness of what the funds are designed to achieve - as well as to help residents understand their important role in the process and to increase participation from all sections of the community.

·         How the voting system is intended to work in practice - in order to ensure wide participation and the security of the ballot.

            The Committee intends to revisit these issues as part of its future work programme. In addition, it will propose a workshop for councillors to develop a consistent approach to NCIL and to share ideas about best practice.

6.1    Simon Zelestis (Programme and Infrastructure Manager) introduced the report, the following key points were noted:

·         Community infrastructure levy was implemented in Lewisham in 2015 – proposals for allocation were developed in 2016 and 2017.

·         The current proposals for neighbourhood community infrastructure levy (NCIL) funding had been considered on a number of occasions by scrutiny and other groups.

·         In future, the intention was for NCIL spending to be reported in the planning annual monitoring report.

·         Responses had been provided on issues raised by the Committee (and others) in the report to Mayor and Cabinet.

6.2    Simon Zelestis and David Syme (Strategic Planning Manager) responded to questions from the Committee, the following key points were noted:

·         In response to the Committee’s previous comments – additional information had been provided about the process for allocating and spending funds.

·         The proposals included a review mechanism to determine how the scheme was operating at the end of the first year.

·         The most recent indices of multiple deprivation were from 2015. These were the latest (and only nationally recognised) analysis of deprivation.

·         The Council’s existing audit and financial management processes would be used to ensure that funding was being spent correctly.

·         The same mechanisms would be used for money spent by the Council and for funding spent by other groups.

·         Officers had developed framework criteria to ensure that spending was being delivered in line with the Council’s corporate strategy.

·         It would be the role of members to support local people to balance funding between popular and less popular (but no less important) bids for funding.

·         Funding had been provided for an additional officer post to support this work in the cultural and community development division.

·         The resourcing and availability of officer time would be reviewed after the first year.

·         Consideration had been given to the structure of the local assemblies’ team and the new requirements on it to support this work.

·         5% of the NICL funding would be retained for administration – as well as 4% from Mayoral CIL funding.

·         It was recognised that the structure of ward assemblies would need to change – and that the voting system would need to be improved.

·         Voting would be open to all residents of a ward. Additional work was taking place to explore future options.

·         Lewisham’s proposals had been modelled on successful schemes in other boroughs.

6.3    In Committee discussions, the following key points were also noted:

·      Scrutiny at the Safer Stronger Communities Select Committee would focus on the capacity of local assemblies to equitably distribute the increased level of funding that was being made available.

·      There were concerns about how funding would be made available for projects that were important but not popular.

·      Members asked whether costs for officer time could be recovered from the NCIL budget. In particular, there were questions about the amount of time officers in the assemblies’ team were likely to spend on carrying out this work.

·      There was a concern about how the availability of the new funding would be communicated to residents. Members also asked how the voting would be secured to ensure that only residents would be able to vote.

·      The Committee welcomed the proposals and thanked officers for returning to the Committee with responses to the questions that were raised previously.

6.4      Resolved: that the Committee would refer its views to Mayor and Cabinet as follows - the Committee recommends that - in advance of making its decision- Mayor and Cabinet should ensure that it has sufficient details from officers about:

·         The framework for making decisions, with specific reference to the role of local councillors. This follows from Members’ concern about the availability of funding for important projects that lack popular appeal. And in addition - how appropriate consideration will be given to funding projects for minority and/or marginalised groups.

·         The types of projects that can and cannot be funded. This is in reference to Members’ concerns that the funding could focus on infrastructure to the detriment of community projects and services.

·         How communication with residents will be carried out to raise awareness of what the funds are designed to achieve - as well as to help residents understand their important role in the process and to increase participation from all sections of the community.

·         How the voting system is intended to work in practice - in order to ensure wide participation and the security of the ballot.

            The Committee intends to revisit these issues as part of its future work programme. In addition, it will propose a workshop for councillors to develop a consistent approach to NCIL and to share ideas about best practice.