A good framework for public consultation isn’t everything (From The Argus)

A good framework for public consultation isn’t everything

2:31pm Monday 25th January 2010 in Your Argus

If Councillor Oxley (Letters, January 18) really believes that Brighton and Hove City Council “consults with integrity” he cannot know about the consultations carried out by its planning officers in developing their masterplan for Brighton Marina. At one of the so-called consultation events, I was one of many present who were keen to discuss the need to prevent excessively tall or dense development. I was told that topics had already been decided by officers and what we wished to discuss was not among them. When I insisted on bringing up this crucial issue, I was told that if I continued to be “disruptive” I would be asked to leave. Another participant who tried to raise the subject was told by a council officer that he was being “childish”.

Another example: during the council’s consultation on Explore Living’s planning application for Brighton Marina, more than 100 savebrighton members wrote to complain about misleading images in the supporting documents (which, at the recent public inquiry, Explore Living was forced to admit to). The complaints fell on deaf ears and were not mentioned in the planning officer’s report.

Whatever the council’s fine words, all too often its officers prove by their actions that they “consult” because they have to, but have no real interest in listening to residents’ views or allowing them to influence their recommendations. And too many councillors accept this dismal state of affairs.

Brian Simpson
savebrighton campaign, The Cliff, Brighton

Councillors are to be congratulated for reversing the decision to close the Brighton History Centre in response to fierce public opposition. The council’s Community Engagement Framework merits equal praise. However, Councillor Oxley, in his alarmingly complacent letter, has apparently overlooked discrepancies between the fine intentions of this Framework and the reality of many recent council-led public consultations. Poorly presented exhibitions, biased questionnaires and late notice of imminent deadlines are just some of the factors contributing to the sense that little more than lip service is paid to the concept of community engagement. On issues ranging from communal bins to cycle paths and building development schemes – including those by commercial developers, which the council is charged with overseeing – public consultations often fall short. Yet Councillor Oxley claims that the council demonstrates “high standards of consultation and responsiveness”. Anyone suspecting otherwise can look at the clear guidance in the Government’s Code of Practice for Public Consultations, online at www. berr.gov.uk/files/ file47158. pdf Sorry, Councillor Oxley, but the Audit Commission does have a case.

Ninka Willcock
Terminus Street, Brighton