Skip to main content

Agenda and minutes

Venue: Remote Meeting

Contact: Sally Gabriel  Member Services Manager

Link: audio recording

Items
No. Item

159.

Apologies (00-07-15)

To receive any apologies for absence.

Minutes:

Apologies were received from: Councillors: Mrs E M Andrews, T G Hughes and A Wyer.

160.

Protocol for Remote Meetings (00-07-29) pdf icon PDF 313 KB

To note the protocol for remote meetings.

Minutes:

The protocol for remote meetings was NOTED.

161.

Public Question Time (00-07-47)

To receive any questions relating to items on the agenda from members of the public and replies thereto.

 

Minutes:

Rosie Wibberley referring to Item 7 (Governance Arrangements) on the agenda stated that: the current system of a Cabinet, with a leader who can appoint councillors he knows will agree with him, appears to be a reflection of central government. Whilst this system may be effective in reducing decision making times, this is primarily due to the lack of appropriate debate, and the subsequent scrutiny of these decisions seems to be a case of shutting the stable door after the horse has bolted, especially as the reports by this committee can then be ignored. With the current cabinet containing a majority of councillors from a political party that does not have a majority on full council, my question is “do the members of this council believe that the Cabinet offers a fair and accurate representation of their views and is therefore a democratic reflection of the electorate, or is ‘efficiency’ more important than democracy?”

 

 

Honorary Alderman Nation again referring to Item 7 on the agenda stated that: My question is addressed to the Leader of the Council. For almost 2 years this Council has dragged its feet carrying out a review of its system of governance in almost complete secrecy. Only once have the public had an opportunity to comment – 6 people sent in written submissions and 5 attended a Zoom session with two members of the Working Group, and others, but with several other councillors having been told they could not participate.

 

Due to my having made FOI requests to see the minutes of the 8 working group meetings which took place in secret, I have them but they have still not been put in the public domain. The draft minutes of the last working group meeting, 2 March, show how the working group was still so confused that they couldn’t make up their minds whether to recommend the status quo or scrubbing the PDGs in favour of 2 Overview and Scrutiny committees. In both options the present Strong Leader and Cabinet system would continue.

 

Is the Leader aware how unhappy the people of Mid Devon will feel about the failure, after 2 years, to address their concerns about the undemocratic and exclusive manner in which this Council is run and does he feel that sufficient has been done to involve the public in a debate about the system of governance and options to change this?

 

 

Mr Craythorne again referring to Item 7 on the agenda asked 2 questions:

 

Question 1 

 

Slide 3 from the LGA governance workshop shows attendees’ concerns about rudeness, tolerance (or lack thereof, I guess), negativity, inflexibility, disrespectfulness, and so on.

 

Given that without a catalyst, changes in personal behaviour are extremely difficult to bring about, does the Council recognise that it needs to put in place new structures which spread power, responsibility and accountability, enable engagement and participation in decision making, and thus help neutralise the temptation to engage in this kind of unhelpful and damaging behaviour?

 

Question 2

 

Slide 2 of  ...  view the full minutes text for item 161.

162.

Declarations of Interest under the Code of Conduct (00-13-12)

Councillors are reminded of the requirement to declare any interest, including the type of interest, and the reason for that interest, either at this stage of the meeting or as soon as they become aware of that interest.

 

 

Minutes:

Members were reminded of the need to make declarations of interest when appropriate.

163.

Chairman's Announcements (00-13-34)

To receive any announcements which the Chairman of the Council may wish to make.

 

Minutes:

The Chairman had no announcements to make.

164.

Notice of Motions (00-13-54)

1)            MOTION 572 (COUNCILLOR G BARNELL – 8 March 2021)

 

The Chairman has decided to allow this motion on notice out of time.

 

The Council has before it a MOTION submitted for the first time.

 

The proposals arising from the work of the Governance WG have not been sufficiently developed to be properly considered by the membership at today’s meeting. We propose that the Council postpone a decision on the recommendations of the Governance WG in order that changes can be:-

 

1.    More fully developed by members and considered by each of the Council’s non regulatory committees.

2.    Considered by the Council as an important contribution to forthcoming State of the District debate on the best Governance arrangements for the Council.

In accordance with Procedure Rule 14.4, the Chairman of the Council has decided to allow this motion (if moved and seconded) to be dealt with at this meeting.                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                             

 

Minutes:

1)            MOTION 572 (COUNCILLOR G BARNELL – 8 March 2021)

 

The Chairman had decided to allow this motion on notice out of time. He indicated at this point in the meeting that in relation to the motion only, part of procedural rule 16 be suspended to enable the motion to be discussed without the notice required under rule 14, referring specifically to the first few paragraphs of rule 16 and 16(a) in particular. 

 

Secondly, in relation to the motion and the report on the Governance Working Group, he MOVED that Procedure Rule 16.3 be suspended to allow members to speak more than once.

 

Upon a vote being taken (with regard to the suspension of procedure rules) the MOTION was declared to have FAILED.  However, the Chairman ruled that he intended to allow discussion of Motion 572 notwithstanding.

 

The Council had before it a MOTION submitted for the first time.

 

The proposals arising from the work of the Governance WG have not been sufficiently developed to be properly considered by the membership at today’s meeting. We propose that the Council postpone a decision on the recommendations of the Governance WG in order that changes can be:-

 

1.    More fully developed by members and considered by each of the Council’s non regulatory committees.

2.    Considered by the Council as an important contribution to forthcoming State of the District debate on the best Governance arrangements for the Council.

The MOTION was MOVED by Councillor G Barnell and seconded by Councillor A Wilce.

Consideration was given to:

·         Views that the Governance Working Group had not followed the remit set by Council and considered all models of governance available and had just recommended the improvement of the policy development groups.

·         The need for a State of the District Debate to involve the public in the continuation of the work started by the working group.

·         There was a need to look at reform and that this should be progressed by the groups themselves which should include how the Scrutiny and Audit Committees were best supported.

·         The working group should have considered a State of the District Debate within its work.

·         The fact that a petition could change governance arrangements.

·         The lack of involvement of all members in the work of the working group.

·         Whether the motion sought to suppress discussion of the report of the working group and that this would not stop a State of the District Debate taking place.

·         The lack of public involvement in the consultation process that did take place.

·         There did not seem to be overwhelming support for change.

·         Whether the working group had considered openness and transparency and the need for all members to take ownership of any decision for change.

·         The need for further and better engagement with the public in any event.

·         How the initial public consultation advertisement was worded and the need to think about democracy rather than governance.

·         How the State of the District Debate could be better used by focussing on important issues such  ...  view the full minutes text for item 164.

165.

Governance Arrangements - Report of the Governance Working Group (1-10-00) pdf icon PDF 437 KB

Following a review of governance arrangements between January 2020 and March 2021, to provide the Council with a report on its work and its recommendations.

Additional documents:

Minutes:

Following a review of governance arrangements between January 2020 and March 2021, the Council had before it a *report on the work of the group and its recommendations.

 

The Chairman of the Working Group addressed the Council stating that the working group had worked steadily with an open mind supported by LGA independent representatives to look at a range of options on a way forward.  He outlined the consultation exercises that had taken place, the remit for the group provided by Council and the recommendations that were before members of the Council. He made reference to some of the comments with regard to the membership of the working group, whether there had been enough consultation, the guidance provided by the LGA representatives, the number of options for governance that was available country-wide and the number of meetings of the working group that had taken place.  He felt that the review was complete and that the Council had before it a number of recommendations for consideration.

 

Councillor R L Stanley MOVED, seconded by Councillor C R Slade that the recommendations within the report be taken on block.

 

Councillor Mrs N Woollatt MOVED  AMENDMENT, seconded by Councillor F W Letch requiring the recommendations to be taken separately.

 

Upon a vote being taken, the AMENDMENT was declared to have been CARRIED.

 

Discussion took place regarding:

 

·         With regard to whether there was a clear mandate for change

·         Disappointment at the lack of options put forward by the working group

·         Whether the policy development groups should be replaced with overview and scrutiny committees as had happened in other authorities, these committees could develop policies and have task and finish groups and would include pre and post scrutiny and whether by keeping the policy development groups, the Council were missing an opportunity.

·         The current policy development groups allowed the opportunity for policy development, greater engagement by members was required in developing clear work programmes for creating policy.

·         The need for the policy development groups to plan the work that they wanted to progress.

·         Whether 2 overview and scrutiny committees would be all too encompassing.

·         The fact that the policy development groups had been bogged down with routine monitoring of performance and the need for policy formation to take place.

·         The need to use the talent of members across the 4 current policy development groups.

·         The need to encourage a broader range of involvement by inviting local stakeholders to attend meetings and to seek their professional advice.

·         The work of the Standards Committee with regard to the areas of the Constitution which required amendment.

 

(1)          Councillor C R Slade MOVED, seconded by Councillor R L Stanley that: in the absence of a clear mandate for change at this time, the Council keeps the current executive governance arrangements;

 

Upon a vote being taken, the MOTION was declared to have been CARRIED.

 

(2)          Councillor C R Slade MOVED, seconded by Councillor R L Stanley that: the Council endorses the continuation of the Policy Development Groups  ...  view the full minutes text for item 165.