Agenda item

·       Part 4 – Procedure Rules

 

·       Part 1 (Explanation and Summary) & Part 2 (Articles of the Constitution) – decision to recommend to Council deferred from Constitution Committee held on 25 April.

The Cabinet Member for Governance and Licensing introduced the report on the Constitution review.  At its meeting on 30 September 2021 Council agreed to undertake a review of the Constitution. The format was based on the following parts:

 

·       Part 1 – Summary and Explanation

·       Part 2 – Articles

·       Part 3 – Responsibility for Functions

·       Part 4 – Rules of Procedure

·       Part 5 – Codes and Protocols

·       Part 6 – Members’ Allowance Scheme

·       Part 7 – Management Structure

 

Part 3 had already been agreed at Council, Parts 1 and 2 were discussed at the last meeting of the Committee but a decision deferred until Part 4 was available. 

 

Several workshops had been arranged since the last meeting of the Committee to which all Members had been invited to attend.  The workshops had been very productive and typographical, grammatical and format errors had been highlighted.  Reference was made to the mapping documents appended to the report and Members were reminded that yellow was for additions, blue for amendments, red for deletions and green, the text to be included in the final document.

 

The Assistant Director of Governance and Deputy Monitoring Officer stated that the workshops had been very constructive and helpful.  The mapping documents in respect of Parts 1 and 2 were not appended to the report as these had been discussed at the last meeting. Clean versions of Part 1 and Part 2 were appended to the report. No significant comments had been made during the workshops in respect of these documents.

 

Part 4, the Procedure Rules, had been the most challenging aspect of the Constitution review, currently these rules were dotted throughout the Constitution.  By putting all the Procedure Rules together, it was hoped that they would be easier to follow.  The workshops on the Procedure Rules had been well attended, with further discussions taking place with Members by email and in person. 

 

The workshop sessions had been split, one session had covered the Council Procedure Rules, Access to Information Procedure Rules and Budget and Policy Framework Procedure Rules.  The second session had covered, Cabinet Procedure Rules, Overview and Scrutiny Procedure Rules, Licensing Procedure Rules, Officer Employment, Disciplinary and Dismissal Procedure Rules and Temporary Appointments to Town and Parish Councils Procedure Rules.

 

One of the key aspects of the review was to deliver consistency throughout the Constitution.  Currently at Council meetings members of the public could only ask a question or make a statement on a topic on the Council agenda, however a Councillor could ask a question on anything and it was therefore proposed to remove this requirement from the Constitution.  This would then allow the public to ask a question or make a statement at Council on any topic.  The public could also ask two questions together with supplementary questions. A supplementary question without notice contradicted the requirement to notify the Council of the questions to be asked, therefore it

was proposed to remove this from the Constitution.  Councillors were only allowed to ask one question with no supplementary question.

 

A further point raised during the workshop was a procedural point in relation to the withdrawal of a motion.  It was stated that the ability to withdraw a motion should be made before it had been seconded, rather than halfway through the debate and this had been clarified within the document.

 

Speaking by non-Committee Members at meetings was also raised during the workshops and the inconsistency between meetings.  At some meetings the whole Committee had to give consent for a non-Committee Member to speak, at others it was the Chairman’s discretion and at others there was no clear rule.   It was therefore proposed that the ability for non-Committee Members to speak at Committee for all meetings would be at the discretion of the person chairing the meeting, this would provide clarity and consistency and was to be implemented fairly across the chamber.

 

Reference was made to the Planning Procedure Rules document which had been circulated.  It did not change the Planning Protocol which the Committee had considered at its last meeting, but was appended to that document and was consistent with the other Procedure Rules in the Constitution.   The document did not change anything that had been discussed previously in relation to the Planning Review.

 

Further typographical errors had been found following publication of the documents and these would be amended. The Assistant Director of Governance and Deputy Monitoring Officer stated that for Full Council, a clean version of the reviewed Constitution would be included with links to the mapping and working documents contained within the report.  He concluded by thanking Members for their participation and engagement in attending the workshops.

 

Members thanked the Assistant Director of Governance and Deputy Monitoring Officer for the amount of time, work and progress made with the Constitution Review.

 

Members discussed the report and appended documents before them and the following comments were made:

 

·       How political balance was now referenced within the document, it was in a better format.

·       Would a clean version of the Part 4 document together with an index be seen by Members before Full Council?

·       Concern that the proposed changes in respect of public speaking at Overview and Scrutiny Committees would have a negative impact on “free speech”.

·       Why the Scrutiny Review documentation had not been discussed at the workshops or why it was still not available publicly.

·       Concern that the proposed change to give discretion to the person presiding over a meeting to decide whether or not to allow non-committee Members to speak at a meeting was denying democracy.

 

The Assistant Director of Governance and Deputy Monitoring Officer responded to the comments made.

 

Further views were expressed by Members in relation to the proposed changes to the Constitution in relation to the notice that members of the public had to give to speak at a committee with references being made to both Planning and Licensing Committees. 

 

Comments were also echoed in respect of the amount of work that had been undertaken by Officers in respect of the Constitution Review.  It was stated that the Constitution Committee made recommendations to Council in respect of the proposed changes following the Constitution Review, the final decision on any of the proposed changes rested with Full Council.

 

Discussion on how the recommendations within the report were voted on followed.

 

An amendment was put forward that the notice period for members of the public to speak at Overview and Scrutiny Committees be reduced from three days to one as contained within Part 4.  The proposal was seconded and on being put to the vote AGREED.

 

One Member stated that he agreed with the consistent approach in relation to it affecting all Councillors however, he did not agree that the Chairman should have the power to stop questions being asked and another amendment was put forward to remove the addition to all Committees within the Constitution which stated that Members of the Council not on a particular Committee would only be permitted to speak at the Committee with the discretion of the person presiding the meeting.  The amendment failed to receive a seconder.

 

The recommendations contained within the report were then voted on with the Assistant Director of Governance and Deputy Monitoring Officer giving a brief overview of each Part of the Constitution and answering Members questions thereon.  Concern was expressed by some Members about taking all the recommendations enbloc and therefore they were taken separately in three parts.

 

The first recommendation was proposed, seconded and AGREED.

 

Recommendation 1

 

That the Constitution Committee notes the progress to date in respect of the comprehensive review of the Council’s Constitution.

 

The second recommendation was proposed, seconded and AGREED subject to the amendment that the notice period for members of the public to speak at Overview and Scrutiny Committees be reduced from three days to one as contained within Part 4.

 

Recommendation 2

 

That the Constitution Committee recommends Parts 1, 2 and 4 of the Constitution to Full Council for approval, subject to the amendment within Part 4 that the notice period for members of the public to speak at Overview and Scrutiny Committees be reduced from three days to one.

 

Councillor Ashley Baxter asked for his vote against this proposal to be minuted.

 

Members agreed that recommendations 3, 4 and 5 could be taken together and these were proposed, seconded and AGREED.

 

Recommendation 3

 

That the Constitution Committee recommends

 

(i)       That the Councillor Code of Conduct, Protocol for Relationships between Members and Officers and the Code of Conduct for Council Staff form the new Part 5 (Codes and Protocols) section of the new Constitution.

 

(ii)      That the Members’ Allowance Scheme forms the new Part 6 (Members’ Allowance Scheme) section of the Constitution.

 

(iii)     That the Council’s management structure, following the Chief Executive’s review of her Corporate Management Team and Senior Leadership Team, forms the new Part 7 (Management Structure) section of the new Constitution.