Issue - meetings

The Committee were presented a report* which outlined a task and finish group’s recommendations on changes to the constitution with tracked changes provided. The Chair opened the floor to Members who raised the following points/questions:

The following was discussed:

-       Under time, place and notice of meetings (4.3) it was suggested that the word approved be removed, to read “the Chief Executive will send a summons”

-       Regarding recommendation G, rules regarding Substitute Members were discussed and how this might impact a committee politically, specifically the Planning Committee. It was clarified that an individual member could choose their substitute as per 3.1 under substitutes. It was noted that training was an important factor, particularly for planning which should not be political and ensured good attendance on committees.

-       Quorum was highlighted and the conciseness of 6.1 was discussed. It was noted that there was an error in the wording under 6.1 and that it should not be a quarter of Members present but a quarter of the whole number of Members.

-       Paragraph 9 (single issue debate) was discussed and clarification was sought as to why this had been removed. The District Solicitor & Monitoring Officer explained that it was unknown as to why this was the case and that this should be investigated.

-       A typo was highlighted under 11.1.6 (b) as it read “within in” and discussion took place as to how this section should be worded.

-       Regarding 12.1 it was sought as to why this had been removed. The District Solicitor and Monitoring Officer explained that it was uncertain as to why this was removed.

-       Regarding 15, voting was discussed whether section 106 of the Local Government Finance Act 1992 should be included within the constitution. This section outlined the legal requirement that any Member who was 2 month or more in arrears with Council Tax payments must declare the fact and not vote at any meeting at which the budget or council tax matters would be discussed.

The Chief Executive reassured Members that officers conducted checks months prior to the vote on the budget in order to be compliant with this legislation.

RESOLVED to RECOMMEND: To Council that

a)    The Council Procedure Rule 25.2 be suspended to allow the following amendments to be made to the Constitution at its next meeting.

b)    Subject to any further changes to recommendations (c), (d) and (g)

below, the Council Procedure Rules be amended as outlined in

Appendix B to this report subject to the following:

                      i.        Under 4.3word approved be removed, to read “the Chief Executive will send a summons”.

                    ii.        With the removal of “present at the meeting where physical presence is required (or in attendance including remotely where such physical presence is not required)” from 6.1.

                   iii.        That point 9 to 9.2, single issue debate be kept, pending an investigation by the Monitoring Officer as to whether it could be removed.

                   iv.        That 11.1.6 (b) be kept unchanged, but with proposition changed to motion.

                    v.        That  ...  view the full minutes text for item 17

The Committee were presented a report which outlined a task and finish group’s recommendations on changes to the constitution. The Chair opened the floor to Members who raised the following points/questions:

• A Member raised that they had requested for a document from a constituent be circulated to Committee Members, which raised points and questions that related to the report. In addition, the Member raised that appendix b had not been labelled. Concern was raised that the amendments had not included tracked changes and so a direct comparison to what had been changed could not be compared. Furthermore, they noted that other changes had been made that were not mentioned in the report.

The Interim Monitoring Officer explained that appendix b had been included in the report and was found from page 27 and should have been marked as such. Unfortunately, tracked changes for these recommendations were not available. The Monitoring Officer was happy to take the report away and to prepare a tracked changed version for the next standards committee in February.

• A point was raised by a Member of the Committee that because this report had been delayed, would it be more appropriate for these recommendations to be decided by the new administration in the next municipal year.

• An invited Member raised that they were on the task and finish group and noted that there was a need for the changes to be cross checked and a lot of clarity needed on the report presented.

• A member of the Committee highlighted that it was unfortunate that this report had passed from one Monitoring Officer to another, in addition, if this was left to the new administration, this process may be restarted from the beginning and that this should be the starting point when a lot of work had already been undertaken.

• A Member added that there was a risk of a future administration undoing or changing the work of a previous administration. In addition they wanted to know whether the recommendations should be deliberated or to wait until the report had been revised.

The interim Monitoring Officer suggested that revised report with tracked changes could be presented to the Committee at the next scheduled meeting, with any recommendations sent to the next Full Council.

• A Member noted that it would be preferred for the report to be deferred and presented back to the Committee with the tracked changes.

Cllr N Woollatt MOVED, seconded by Cllr S Clist that the Committee deferred this report to the next scheduled Committee meeting so that it included tracked changes.

It was therefore:

RESOLVED That the report be deferred to the next Standards Committee.

(Proposed by Cllr N Woollatt and seconded by Cllr S Clist)