No, no, no and no again – it isn’t true. What it appears they CANNOT do is review planning applications that have been discussed by the Planning Committee and this is possibly what the Chief Executive has cited in his “legal advice” (though so far he has refused to name his specific source for this legal advice). BUT an Overview and Scrutiny Committee (or its Task and Finish Forums) can discuss planning policy and planning strategy and there is even a further clause in the paragraph possibly cited by the Chief Executive that says that, in certain circumstances an Overview and Scrutiny Committee CAN discuss matters which would normally be excluded from its remit.
Firstly, can Overview and Scrutiny Committees discuss planning policy? Yes, for example:
Nuneaton and Bedworth HERE has a “Planning and Environment Overview and Scrutiny Panel”
Derby HERE has a “Planning, Housing and Leisure and Overview Scrutiny Board”
Wandsworth HERE has a Strategic Planning and Transportation Overview and Scrutiny Committee”
Windsor and Maidenhead HERE has a “Planning and Environment Overview and Scrutiny Panel”
Staffordshire Moorlands HERE has a Service Delivery Overview and Scrutiny Panel which discusses, amongst other things: Overview and scrutiny of the portfolio(s) covering regeneration, environment, culture, leisure and planning development and property.
One can only assume (because, as mentioned above. the Chief Executive has so far failed to reveal the specific source) that he has given his “legal advice” based on the Local Government Act 2000 which says that an O and S Committee indeed cannot be an alternative way to make complaints against a council and it will not investigate a complaint on behalf of an individual EXCEPT in certain circumstances. Oddly, most councils neglect to publish the second part of this advice (EDDC included).
Here are both parts:
Firstly the part which is published by many councils:
Local government matter” in relation to a member [bringing something for overview and scrutiny] means a matter which relates to the discharge of any function of the authority and affects all or part of the ward for which the member is elected or any person who lives or works in that ward but excludes:
(a) a local crime and disorder matter as defined above;
(b) any matter relating to a planning decision*;
(c) any matter relating to a licensing decision*;
(d) any matter relating to an individual or entity where that person has a statutory right to a review or right of appeal (other than a right to complain to the Ombudsman);*
(e) any matter which is vexatious, discriminatory or not reasonable to be included in the agenda or discussed at an overview and scrutiny meeting; or
(f) any matter specified in an order made by the Secretary of State.
Here is the second part, which continues immediately after (f) above, which most councils neglect to put in their documentation to which the asterisks above refer:
* A matter will not be excluded, even though it falls within (b), (c) or (d) above, if it consists of an allegation that a function for which the authority is responsible has not been discharged at all or that its discharge has failed or is failing on a systematic basis.
This is indeed the allegation put before the Task and Finish Forum investigating EDBF.
What “legal advice” does the Chief Executive have about this section?
Sidmouth Independent News 
Llayer upon layer of distraction for the TAFF. You might almost think it had ll been designed to put them off a scent – and not a nice scent.
There are local parallels here to the international banking crisis. There was a cosy relationship between government and bankers, with secret meetings, politicians being board members of banks, no accountability. And look where that got us!