Cllr. Addenbrooke moved and Cllr. Taylor-Smith seconded the report’s reception.

Cllr. Addenbrooke introduced the Council’s new Charter for Public Participation, which was developed with input from over 600 residents following the Grenfell tragedy. The Charter aimed to increase transparency and responsiveness and included a five-year review requirement based on recommendations from the Grenfell inquiry. Resident feedback guided the Charter's development, resulting in regular evaluations, staff training, best practice sharing, and the creation of a resident oversight group. Cllr. Addenbrooke said by integrating the Charter into its Constitution, the Council formalised its commitment to resident-led public participation.

Cllr. Taylor-Smith expressed gratitude to Cllr. Addenbrooke and all stakeholders for their contributions to making this project a success. He highlighted the importance of reviewing the Council’s progress since the initiative began five years ago. The project was started in response to inquiry commitments and demonstrated inclusive engagement, involving over 600 participants. Although the Council received some criticism about outreach and communication, constructive feedback from various committees proved valuable for planning and policy development. Cllr. Taylor-Smith stated that the revised charter outlined how residents could successfully influence council services, showing the effect of meaningful consultation.

Cllr. Simmons expressed that the report and its process appeared superficial and ineffective, describing it as a “tick boxing exercise” that did not lead to meaningful change within the Council. She said the Council claimed to have implemented the Charter for Public Participation and other governance principles, but these commitments were often ignored or unenforceable after adoption. She stated that engagement with non-executive Councillors and scrutiny was minimal, consisting mainly of one briefing after decisions had already been made. Cllr. Simmons claimed the Council continued to favour majority party members and privileged certain residents, offering incentives and recognition, while others felt excluded or feared reprisals.

Cllr. Dent Coad noted that while the Council attempted to boost public participation, minority party Councillors were frequently neglected and felt left out. She suggested that their calls for greater transparency were often dismissed, and significant decisions such as acquiring Kensington-Chelsea College were made without their knowledge. She claimed that officers sometimes treated Councillors more like subordinates and recommended training to address this concern. According to Cllr. Dent Coad, strategic reviews tended to take the place of meaningful action, and promises of progress failed to bring about real change. As a result, both Councillors and residents ended up disappointed, feeling that the review did not achieve substantive improvement and that many remained marginalised.

Cllr. Lari pointed out that the Council had previously broken its own charter by proposing to build a skyscraper near Trellick Tower, which would have altered the area’s character and went against residents’ preference for a care home. The planning inspector later ruled these plans illegal. Cllr. Lari then asked how the new charter and the Resident Oversight Group would help prevent similar problems in the future and ensure accountability.

The Mayor addressed Cllr. Addenbrooke's point of order, asking Cllr. Lari to retract his remark about the skyscraper near Trellick Tower,  ...  view the full minutes text for item 10

Olivia Schelts-Harris, Head of Consultation and Participation introduced the report on behalf of the Strategic Director of Grenfell Partnerships & Communities. She summarised how the revised Charter was the outcome of an extended process of pre-engagement, public consultation and codesign including over six hundred residents over the course of 2025 as well as council staff who would implement the new public participation commitments. The updated Charter sought to emphasise different levels of public participation relevant to need, including continuous engagement, codesign and coproduction rather than just consultation. While it would be part of the Constitution, there would be diagrams, roadshows, easy read and translated version to make sure the Charter was adopted and residents could hold the Council to account for how it was applied.

Ms Schelts-Harris and Maxine Holdsworth, Chief Executive, responded to the following comments and questions from councillors.

(i)                There would be a training programme for officers.

(ii)               Care would be taken to ensure that all the different presentation methods were consistent.

(iii)              That the questionnaire designs needed to balance the requirements to obtain monitoring data to ensure the Council could evince it was meeting its Public Sector Equality duty against making them too burdensome to complete.

(iv)             The need to adhere to the Gunning Principles, the caselaw on consultations.

(v)               The low response rates to some consultations and the risks of ‘consultation fatigue.’

(vi)             There was an expectation that ward councillors would be informed about ward-specific consultations before they started.

Members also raised a wider issue about residents, displeasure when they had to repeat details of their case each time they contacted the Council.

The Committee RESOLVED to:

(i)                Note the thorough review process, the product of which is the new ‘Our Public Participation Commitments,’ attached at Appendix 1, and

(ii)               Recommend Full Council to adopt the document and incorporate it into the Constitution with immediate effect (replacing the previous Charter).

Action by: Head of Governance and Mayoralty