Agenda item

Report LDS002 from the Head of Legal & Democratic Services.

(Enclosure)

DECISION:

That the Council approves the adoption of the new style Leader and Cabinet executive arrangements in accordance with s33B of the Local Government Act 2000 as amended by s64 of the Local Government and Public Involvement in Health Act 2007.

The Head of Legal and Democratic Services introduced report number LDS002. The Council had consulted with the public on the proposals for new types of executive arrangements, which the Council was now required to consider. A decision had to be made before 31 December 2010. 45 preferences had been recorded, but it was noted that this represented a very small proportion of the electorate in South Kesteven, which stood at over 100,000. The Minister for Housing and Local Government had written to local Councils to urge them not to spend significant sums of money on consultation regarding this as the Government were due to propose changes to how local government operated, although full details were not yet available. It was, however, still necessary for the Council to consider these arrangements at this time.

The recommendation in the report was then moved and seconded.

A debate then took place. It was noted that some Members would have liked to have seen an option to return to the committee system, as it was felt that the Cabinet did not give enough value to the existing Policy Development Groups. Some Members were of the opinion that a directly elected mayor would not be appropriate for the district as there were four distinct towns, but that it was also inappropriate to have a Leader and Cabinet system if the Cabinet was not representative of the wishes of the community in terms of political balance and geographical balance. It was noted that the Council did not have the authority to change the directive from the Government. Some Members expressed that the public had shown it had an appetite for government by consensus with the result of the General Election.

An amendment was then moved and seconded to add a further recommendation to the recommendation in the report to state:

It is recommended that the Leader appoint a Cabinet that is balanced both politically and geographically and giving greater value to the findings of the Policy Development Groups.

A debate then took place. Members expressed some support for the amendment, stating that as it stood the ruling group appointed whoever it wanted to posts and that these were not necessarily the best people for the job. Other Members noted that the ruling group had been given a mandate at the local elections to appoint people to positions as it saw fit, and noted that previous administrations had taken the same approach. Some Members noted that a politically balanced Cabinet was something that was used in other areas and expressed support for this and noted that it may improve communication with other Members. Members noted that the consultation had yielded a terrible result in terms of the number of responses, but it was noted that the Council had been specifically directed not to incur significant expenditure as the situation was likely to change in future.

On being put to the vote, the amendment was defeated. The original motion then became the substantive motion, and on being put to the vote, this was duly carried.

(The Council went in to recess between 3:39 pm and 3:58 pm)