Summary of Proceedings
Robert Bennett’s Testimony
- Role and Background at Liverpool City Council: Robert Bennett, currently the Coordinator of the Certification Unit at Liverpool City Council, works under the Planning and Compliance Directorate, reporting to Director Lina Kakish. He started at the council in November 2017 as Team Leader of Building and Compliance, overseeing building surveyors (certifiers) and the compliance team investigating unauthorised development. His role evolved around 2019 when the compliance function was reassigned to another coordinator, leaving him focused on building surveying and certification, including swimming pool safety. As of January 2025, his section remains under Community Standards within the Planning and Compliance Directorate.
- Current Responsibilities and Team Structure: Bennett’s day-to-day work involves his team assessing development applications, construction certificates, complying development certificates, occupation certificates, building information certificates, hoardings, tower cranes, and conducting critical stage inspections for new building work. He currently supervises eight staff members, down from a potential 12-13 due to five vacancies (including one recent resignation and one position permanently removed from his team).
- Complaint Handling Process: Bennett outlined the general process for handling complaints about unauthorised property use or structures at the council. Complaints can originate externally (from the public) or internally (from staff observations) and are logged into the council’s pathway system as a customer request. These are assigned to an officer for investigation, starting with a desktop assessment (reviewing property history and aerial images), followed by attempts to contact the owner or occupier, or a site visit if contact fails. If an unauthorised use or structure is confirmed, a notice of intention to serve an order is issued, allowing for representations. If no adequate response is received, an order is issued, which could include stopping use, stopping works, demolishing works, or restoring works, depending on the nature of the non-compliance.
Matters Arising of Interest to Ratepayers: Are Ratepayers Getting Good Value for Their Money?
Ratepayers of Liverpool City Council are concerned about whether their contributions result in efficient service delivery, effective management of council resources, and robust enforcement of planning and compliance regulations. The following matters from Day 43 of the inquiry highlight areas where value for money is in question:
- Operational Efficiency and Staffing Challenges:
- Significant Staff Vacancies: Robert Bennett’s team, responsible for critical certification and building surveying functions, operates with five vacancies out of a potential 12-13 positions, including a recent resignation and a permanently removed role. Ratepayers may question the value for money if understaffing leads to delays in processing applications, conducting inspections, or addressing community concerns about building safety and compliance, potentially impacting development timelines and public safety.
- Impact on Service Delivery: With a reduced team, the capacity to handle the volume of work—ranging from development assessments to swimming pool safety inspections—may be compromised. If ratepayer-funded services are slowed or quality is diminished due to staffing shortages, the perceived value of council operations decreases, as community needs for timely and thorough oversight might not be met.
- Effectiveness of Compliance Processes:
- Structured Complaint Handling: The detailed process Bennett described for managing complaints about unauthorised use or structures—starting with desktop assessments, site visits, notices of intention, and potential orders—demonstrates a structured approach to enforcement. This could reassure ratepayers that their contributions support a systematic effort to maintain compliance with planning regulations, protecting community standards and property values. However, the effectiveness of this process under current staffing constraints remains unclear, and delays could undermine value if issues persist unresolved.
- Response to Non-Compliance: The ability to issue orders like stopping use or demolishing unauthorised works is a critical tool for enforcement. Yet, if understaffing or resource limitations hinder timely investigations or follow-ups on representations, ratepayers may doubt the value of their investment in a council that struggles to enforce regulations promptly, risking ongoing non-compliance that could affect neighbourhood amenity or safety.
- Transparency and Community Trust:
- Clarity in Organisational Structure: Bennett’s consistent placement under the Planning and Compliance Directorate, specifically within Community Standards, across organisational changes (from 2022 to 2025) provides some transparency about accountability lines. Ratepayers may find value in understanding where responsibilities lie for building certification and compliance. However, frequent restructures or changes (e.g., loss of a compliance function to another coordinator) could confuse accountability, reducing trust if it’s unclear who handles specific community issues.
- Public Perception of Enforcement: While the complaint process appears thorough, the lack of detail in the testimony about turnaround times or success rates in resolving unauthorised uses may leave ratepayers uncertain about outcomes. If council processes funded by ratepayer money do not visibly result in effective enforcement or community updates, trust in the council’s ability to protect local interests could erode, diminishing perceived value.
Conclusion
The Day 43 proceedings of the Public Inquiry into Liverpool City Council reveal challenges in operational efficiency, compliance enforcement, and transparency that affect whether ratepayers are receiving good value for their money. Robert Bennett’s testimony highlights significant staffing vacancies in the Certification Unit, potentially impacting service delivery for building assessments and inspections. While the complaint handling process for unauthorised property use or structures appears structured, its effectiveness under current resource constraints is uncertain, risking delays in enforcement. Additionally, organisational clarity exists, but public perception of enforcement outcomes remains unclear, potentially undermining trust. Ratepayers deserve assurance that their contributions fund an efficient, well-staffed, and transparent council capable of upholding community standards, yet evidence from this hearing indicates areas where value for money remains uncertain. As the inquiry progresses, these issues warrant scrutiny to ensure improvements at Liverpool City Council.
