Portobelllo Community Council- Greatest Hits

[Bob Jefferson]

The other thing to bear in mind when reading the PCC minutes is that John gives a monthly report on behalf of PAS, so some of the more minor planning issues you quote form part of that PAS report as an independent body. Perhaps the minutes do not always make it clear which hat he is wearing. I think that's the problem - too many hats being swapped around by the same people for too long. I support regime change but no-one thus far seems prepared to step up to the plate.

[seanie]

I don't recall the last time there was a report from PAS, or the last time they exercised their authority to object on behalf of the PCC. That particular function seems to have fallen by the wayside.

[rathbone]

[Bob Jefferson]

Perhaps it should. Did PCC ever get round to adopting the model constitution and, if so, is there any such mechanism contained therein?

[Mark Cameron]

Is that the model that they were attempting to alter to increase the minimum required up to 50 people? Never did hear the outcome of that attempt to secure their positions...

[seanie]

The Council eventually acquiesced and allowed the modification, so 50 people are needed to trigger an EGM.

[Mark Cameron]

Staggering! Was there a pcc vote on that issue and if so how did that go?

[seanie]

Don't think there was a vote.

[Porty]

[Mark Cameron]

Do you know who raised the issue of the increase Seanie? Was there overall agreement?

[seanie]

I can't really remember. There were certainly a number who thought increasing the number was important. Whilst others were OK with it as it stood, I don't think they felt particularly strongly about it. Be it 20 or 50 an EGM is likely to be a pretty rare occurrence; there aren't man issues of such urgency that they can't wait till the next meeting.

I find that people who don't have strong feelings tend to acquiesce to those that do.

[Bob Jefferson]

So what do you think was the motive behind seeking this amendment? And does the present constitution limit the length of time that an individual can hold the post of Chair, Secretary etc?

[seanie]

I think, although I'm not certain, that the PCC constitution had previously had a provision for 50 people to trigger an AGM, so in that sense it was preserving the status quo. There was also a concern that 20 was quite low, and so EGMs could be triggered too easily causing disruption.

There are no time limits in the standard constitution or scheme. That could cause difficulties. It varies across the country but there are areas where Community Councils struggle to have enough members so forcing people to stand down would put their viability under threat.

[Bob Jefferson]

Yeah, the fact that there have never been enough candidates to force an election in recent years speaks volumes. It's easy to snipe from the sidelines, but if people want to see change then they have to be prepared to get involved themselves. When are the next elections?

[Porty]

I'm not sure that's right Bob. I may be mistaken but in the last or penultimate elections there was potentially 18 candidtates for 15 posts and some people stood down to avoid elections, is that correct?

[Porty]

[seanie]

I think there's an inherent problem with Community Councils. They exist first and foremost to represent the views of the community, but as said before determining the views of the community is difficult, so by and large Community Councils fall back on hoping that the views of those on the Community Council broadly mirror the views of the community at large. But Community Councils tend to be unrepresentative. Most people don't have the time or interest that's required to commit so you generally end up with people with a special interest or who have a strong interest in the community. But, peversely, that mitigates against being an effective Community Councillor. Because a Community Council should be putting the views of Community Councillors second to those of the community , should be able to recognise that distinction. But people who care deeply about things, who have strong views, who are those most likely to put in the personal effort to be a member of a Community Council, are also the kind of people least likely to play devil's advocate, put their own views second, and strive for an impartial approach. Why be impartial when you know you're right? That's a difficult square to circle. I think people who commit to being on a Community Council do so with the best of intentions, to represent and defend the interests of the community. But the question of whether their views actually do represent the community often goes unasked, let alone answered.

[Porty]

With you all the way.

I believe that here in Portobello our community council is diverse and has the potential to represent a wide range of views. Maybe the age profile of councillors is a bit older than average but we do have some young blood, people with families, older people with young attitudes from a variety of backgrounds. Is it not the case that a wide range of views are expressed but often the reporting of outcomes is spiked and spun to best fit with the authors personal stance?

The group has got to be led in an appropriate, fair and reasonable manner. If they had a Community Council on Coronation Street with Norris and Mary running the show, I don't think they would take many people with them.

[Porty]

[rmolehusband]

[wangi]

1 Duddingston Crescent is in the Craigmillar CC area; however Forthview Bar is within Portobello CC.

[Porty]

I wasn't aware.

I suppose if PAS are in a bad mood and having a slow objection month, they are quite prepared to push the boundaries. Inclusivness is good practice.

Be helpful if they kitted up in uniforms. Porty's colours; blue and yellow with a big "O" on the front and back. This would make it easier for people to identify the objection squad and put their tuppence worth in about their neighbours planned velux. it would certianly qualify as "community consultation" and it would put off people who support applications. Job done.

[Makaveli]

We just got planning permission through for a dormer window at the front of the house - didn't like to mention it on here in fear that the objection squad came into full effect!!!

[rmolehusband]

[rmolehusband]

[Porty]

[Porty]

[seanie]

I can shed some light. There was no 'policy' as such, at least nothing was ever formally discussed and adpoted. More it was a sort of 'custom' that emerged.

[Porty]

Eh??? We have the Chair of Portobello Amenity Society insisting it is customary for PCC to object to new build dwellings in the conservation area and no discussion required. No wonder PCC are so often at odds with the community they serve.

Sean, there's a lot of clever people in that room. Does anyone ever say:

"Hang on a minute John. recenty we have objected to half a dozen single new build applications in the conservation area and they have all been approved. Isn't it time we dropped the objection custom?

Our time and resources are limited. The planners clearly place little worth on our objections. Why don't we devote our energy to something positive. We are not Portobello Amenity Society no matter how much you would like us to be"

Why does noboby step up and say enough is enough, we look foolish.

[Porty]

And the one we didn't object to was rejected on almost every key criteria.

[Mark Cameron]

Porty you'd better edit this thread title before the next PCC meeting or you might find PAC lodge an objection to the introduction of a single new build l in Portobelllo

[Porty]

My typos are legendary. 3 lll's in portobelllo- well i never.

[Pal of Porty]

I was staggered this morning to see the PCC being ripped apart by learned individuals on the BBC's Breakfast News this morning. They were really giving them some stick. Oh how I laughed when I realised that PCC stood for Press Complaints Commission.

[Porty]

[SoupDragon]