Agenda item

(1)  By Councillor Mrs Linda Neal:

 

DECISION:

 

This Council declares that the decision of some members of the non-administration group to return to a situation where the important scrutiny function is exercised in part through a “Shadow Cabinet" with an overtly political agenda has profound implications for the progress of the authority and is to be regretted.

 

The Council reminds members who have chosen to go down this route that the CPA report, which they along with the whole Council, accepted in January stated that the presence of a Shadow Cabinet had led to a situation where “the skills and commitment of Councillors is not harnessed for the benefit of local people” (para 57). The same report also highlighted the limited capacity amongst some members (para 59).

 

The Council declares that the reforming of a Shadow Cabinet, with an overtly political agenda, can only further dilute member capacity to the detriment of service to our residents. In order to minimise this danger the Council resolves that with immediate effect:

 

Clr M Taylor replaces Clr John Hurst as Chairman of the Communications and Engagements DSP with Clr Nadarajah becoming the Vice Chairman.

 

Clr Fines replaces Clr Kerr as Vice-Chairman of the Development Control Committee.

 

In this way the Council can ensure that the member appointed to serve the community of South Kesteven in undertaking these important functions have both the capacity and the confidence of residents in their willingness to place their duty to the public ahead of their political aspirations.

 

The Council also asks that if the “Shadow Cabinet” continues then with immediate effect it extends to all other members the courtesy of confirming positions and membership, the constitution and remit, methods by which members were appointed, and how it intends to resolve the fundamental obstacles to effective scrutiny outside the Council’s constitution that were identified by the CPA report.

 

The following motion had been proposed by Councillor Mrs Neal:

 

This Council declares that the decision of some members of the non-administration group to return to a situation where the important scrutiny function is exercised in part through a “Shadow Cabinet" with an overtly political agenda has profound implications for the progress of the authority and is to be regretted.

 

The Council reminds members who have chosen to go down this route that the CPA report, which they along with the whole Council, accepted in January stated that the presence of a Shadow Cabinet had led to a situation where “the skills and commitment of Councillors is not harnessed for the benefit of local people” (para 57). The same report also highlighted the limited capacity amongst some members (para 59).

 

The Council declares that the reforming of a Shadow Cabinet, with an overtly political agenda, can only further dilute member capacity to the detriment of service to our residents. In order to minimise this danger the Council resolves that with immediate effect:

 

Clr M Taylor replaces Clr John Hurst as Chairman of the Communications and Engagements DSP with Clr Nadarajah becoming the Vice Chairman.

 

Clr Fines replaces Clr Kerr as Vice-Chairman of the Development Control Committee.

 

In this way the Council can ensure that the member appointed to serve the community of South Kesteven in undertaking these important functions have both the capacity and the confidence of residents in their willingness to place their duty to the public ahead of their political aspirations.

 

The Council also asks that if the “Shadow Cabinet” continues then with immediate effect it extends to all other members the courtesy of confirming positions and membership, the constitution and remit, methods by which members were appointed, and how it intends to resolve the fundamental obstacles to effective scrutiny outside the Council’s constitution that were identified by the CPA report.

 

 

In moving her motion, the Leader stated she did so with a huge amount of deep regret and sadness.  She considered that an agreement had been broken with the re-emergence of a Shadow Cabinet and this she felt would sweep away two years of hard work.

 

There then followed a heated debate in which several members of the opposition groups strongly contested the way in which the background to the disbanding of the former Shadow Cabinet and the awarding of committee chairmanships and vice-chairmanships in April had been represented by the Leader and the Vice-Chairman.  The point was made that there was nothing in the Council’s Constitution to prevent a Shadow Cabinet being formed.

 

A member challenged the legality of the motion, highlighting the Constitution’s reference to chairmanships/vice-chairmanships being appointed at the annual meeting of the Council.  There was no provision for this to take place at ordinary meetings.  The Monitoring Officer stated that this member had raised this issue with him before the meeting. The Monitoring Officer stated he would now give the same legal advice to the Council as he had to this member.  In essence he saw no Constitutional or legal impediment which prevented the motion being debated.  Appointing Chairmen or Vice-Chairmen of committees was clearly within the powers of the Council to decide and initiate. The fact that the Constitution refers to the appointment of chairmen/vice-chairmen at the annual meeting did not, in his view, preclude the full Council from deciding to appoint chairmen at another time or at an ordinary meeting. During the municipal year, circumstances may arise which require the full Council to consider the appointment of chairmen, a by-election which changes the balance of power, for example.  He could not therefore see any specific prohibition in the Constitution which would prevent this position.

 

The member challenged this advice.  The Chairman ruled that he would accept the advice of the Monitoring Officer as given.

 

Councillor Thompson then addressed the meeting and endorsed some of the points that the Vice-Chairman had made under his communication to the Council.  Accordingly, he confirmed that he would also be requesting the Chief Executive to remove his name from the membership of the Independent Group

 

Further strongly expressed exchanges of opinion took place between members of the opposition groups and the administration.  It was stated that a Shadow Cabinet was not illegal and was, in fact, no concern of the administration if one were set up.  The accusation that a Shadow Cabinet would be detrimental to the residents of South Kesteven was fiercely denied by an opposition member. He stated he had always been supportive of a strong Cabinet provided there was a Shadow Cabinet.  There were several more speakers from oppostion groups expressing their support for the right to form a Shadow Cabinet and the retention of Councillors Hurst and Kerr in their present posts.  The Leader responded and stressed that she had been asked to put this motion forward on behalf of the administration.  It was not, she emphasised, about a fear of a Shadow Cabinet but about one of the parties to an agreement breaking that agreement.  She urged support for the motion as presented.  A call for a recorded vote was indicated.

 

This was supported in accordance with Council procedure rule 16.4. The names of members voting either for, against or abstaining from the motion of Councillor Mrs Neal are recorded below:-

 

FOR                    AGAINST              ABSTAIN

 

Cllr Auger                        Cllr Miss Channell

Cllr Mrs Bosworth                        Cllr Neil Dexter

Cllr Bryant                        Cllr Mrs Gaffigan

Cllr Carpenter                        Cllr Galbraith

Cllr Mrs Cartwright                        Cllr Hewerdine

Cllr Chivers                        Cllr Fereshteh Hurst

Cllr Conboy                        Cllr John Hurst

Cllr Craft                        Cllr Howard

Cllr Fines                        Cllr Mrs Jalili

Cllr Fisher                        Cllr Joynson

Cllr Helyar                        Cllr Kerr

Cllr Mrs Kaberry-Brown                        Cllr O’Hare

Cllr Kirkman                        Cllr Wilks

Cllr Lovelock                        Cllr Avril Williams

Cllr Martin-Mayhew                        Cllr Mike Williams

Cllr Nadarajah

Cllr Mrs Neal

Cllr Nicholson

Cllr Parkin

Cllr Pease

Cllr Radley

Cllr Sandall

Cllr John Smith

Cllr Mrs Judy Smith

Cllr Stokes

Cllr Mike Taylor

Cllr Thompson

Cllr Turner

Cllr Graham Wheat

Cllr Mrs Mary Wheat

 

30                        15                        0

 

The motion was therefore carried.

 

 

(2)              by Councillor Stephen O’Hare        

   

DECISION: This Council believes in local democracy and representing the people of our communities.

 

The following motion had been proposed by Councillor O’Hare:

 

That this Council believes in local democracy and so endorses and totally supports the right of any individual Councillor to bring to this Council for debate and decision any issue affecting the district or any part of it and especially an issue affecting the people of the area represented by that local Councillor.

 

In support of his motion, Councillor O’Hare referred to an impending paper from the Constitution and Accounts Committee to the Council recommending mechanisms to reduce the length of Council meetings.  One such mechanism would be to give authority to the Chairman to assess and determine which Notices of Motion should be debated at a meeting.  This, he suggested, would reduce democracy;  his motion therefore sought to preserve the right of every Councillor to raise matters of concern to their constituents.  The motion received a seconder.

 

As an amendment, it was proposed and seconded that this Council believes in local democracy and representing the people of our communities.

 

In support of the original motion, a member acknowledged the present difficulties with long meetings as people had a limit to their concentration span.  However, he suggested a solution to this was to have more frequent Council meetings.  A vote was taken on the amendment which was carried and became the substantive motion.  Following a further vote, the substantive motion was carried.

 

The Chief Executive advised the Chairman that as the meeting would shortly come up to the three hour limit, a vote would need to be taken in accordance with Council Procedure Rule no 9.  A vote was taken on continuing the meeting for a further hour.  The vote was lost.