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, as that was a planning matter, outside her portfolio.

Cllr. Addenbrooke noted that receiving 600 responses to the consultation was a significant improvement compared to 30 responses five years earlier, and explained that the team had worked diligently to engage various groups across the borough; incentives for participation were introduced based on residents’ feedback about barriers such as childcare and accessibility, and the Council aimed to serve residents by co-designing the Charter with a diverse panel, resulting in broad and critical input from the community.

RESOLVED:

That the recommendations as stated in the report be adopted