Babergh and Mid Suffolk District Councils to pilot pioneering developer contributions database

I don’t normally reproduce Council press releases, but this one might be of wider interest...

Residents and those in the development industry will be able to see how money collected from developers as part of planning agreements is being spent on providing infrastructure for local communities when a new database goes online. 

Both Babergh and Mid Suffolk are working with the software provider Exacom as part of a pilot exercise involving two other local authorities to hone this innovative, new database which will transform the way that information is held for developer contributions paid for by legal agreements and the Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL).

Babergh and Mid Suffolk District Councils Section 106 and CIL data will be used by the software provider in the launch of the Planning Obligations Public Facing Module across the country. This will be hosted on the Councils’ websites later in the summer and will enable people to search for information by district, ward, parish or infrastructure type with details of where monies are collected, allocated and spent. It will also allow people to see legal agreements secured as part of the planning process. The information will be updated daily.

Babergh and Mid Suffolk expect to be able to host this database on their websites in the summer. Today, their data was used as part of the national launch of the database by Exacom. 

The Public Facing Module, comprising of information on infrastructure funding in Babergh and Mid Suffolk can be viewed online at: http://pfm.exacom.co.uk/midsuffolkbabergh/index.php

Ralph Taylor and Geoff Kirby, Directors of Exacom, said:

We believe that this is a revolution in planning obligation transparency and will set the future standard in planning obligation transparency for the rest of the UK. We would like to thank Babergh and Mid Suffolk District Council for their assistance in launching this project with their planning obligation data.

Babergh District Council’s Cabinet Member for Planning, Councillor Nick Ridley, said:

This is ground breaking technology and we are sure that residents across the district will be interested to see how contributions secured from developers as part of planning applications are benefiting their local communities. We are proud to be the first local authorities in the country to demonstrate this database.

Mid Suffolk District Council’s Cabinet Member for Assets and Investment, Councillor Nick Gowrley, said:

This exciting project is the culmination of two and a half years’ work which will bring together a range of detailed data on our website in the summer for the benefit of residents, people in the development industry, our Parish Councils, Councillors and community groups. This speaks to the Council’s agenda of openness and transparency and the database will provide information in real time in that it will update every 24 hours.

Is this defection a sign of things to come?

An unexpected defection in Babergh, the District Council which covers most of South Suffolk, has seen Dean Walton, the councillor for Sudbury East, join the Green Party. So far, so uninteresting. However, what is interesting is that he has left the Conservative Party to join them.

From the perspective of Babergh, which is in no overall control, the new composition of the Council is:

• Conservatives - 18
• Liberal Democrats - 16
• Independents - 7
• Green - 1
• No Description - 1

However, given the rather vast gulf between Conservative and Green policy on virtually everything, one does wonder whether his switch indicates a lack of ideology or philosophy. Alternatively, one might wonder if his adoption as a Conservative candidate was based on anything other than living locally.

I've been involved in the process of approving council candidates in the past, and in every instance, we've attempted to ensure that all candidates are actually Liberal Democrats. However, where local community campaigners have been suborned to one or other political party, there is the risk that their loyalty is to their causes rather than their party.

It is a sign of the times that candidates are often adopted because they are willing rather than because there is a choice of options, even where the party has been in power for some time, and even though there is more money available to councillors than ever before. Frankly, not many people want to serve at local level, even if getting elected in some cases is inevitable.

In my own ward, my councillor doesn't live here. She doesn't live in any of the neighbouring wards either, not that this is in itself a criticism. However, given that it is currently a safe Conservative seat, it might be reasonable to wonder why a more local candidate couldn't be found.

Perhaps it is the commitment of time that is required. In a rural area like Mid Suffolk, council meetings and committee meetings don't take place in the evening, thus ruling out most people with jobs. What that means is that councillors are disproportionately self-employed and/or old, and by implication rather unrepresentative of the population.

That lack of effective competition means that voters are likely to be poorly served by their councillors in terms of feedback, in terms of communication and in terms of accountability. After all, what is the incentive to interact if you were the only choice?

I do wonder whether, due to the reasons above and many others, the strength of the link between candidate and party has weakened in recent years, increasing the risk of defections, encouraging early resignations and a lower rate of re-election as councillors grow weary of public service rather sooner than was once the case.

Perhaps we need to worry about the effects this will have on our democracy?