Issue - meetings

In accordance with Council Procedure Rule 10, to consider motions on notice from Members.  The following motion(s) were received:

(a)  Councillor Bennett – Hygiene Ratings

(b)  Councillor Yates – Houses in Multiple Occupation (HMO’s) – Community Impact and Evidence Gathering

(c)   Councillor Hiney-Saunders – Support National Gambling Reform

(d)  Councillor Peake – Change the Council Constitution to have one Scrutiny Committee

(e)  Councillor Watson – Definition of the role of Leader of the Opposition

In accordance with Council Procedure Rule 10, to consider motions on notice from Members.

(a)  Motion from Councillor Tait – to consider changing the constitution regarding political proportionality on Scrutiny Committees

(b)  Motion from Councillor Anne Clarke – the Whistleblowing policy

In accordance with Council Procedure Rule 10, Councillors were able to submit Motions on Notice for consideration at meetings of Council.  Two motions were submitted.

a)              Motion submitted by Councillor Tait - to consider changing the constitution regarding political proportionality on Scrutiny Committees

“Our current constitutional arrangements regarding proportionality can be found on page 147 of the constitution under item 4.5.2.

To date, it has been the case that whichever political party is in overall control of the Council, automatically is entitled to have majority representation on all scrutiny committees.

All key decisions are made by the Executive, which again is made up solely of members of the same party. So, if you think about it logically, it is like marking your own homework.

We all know how the party system works; it is not acceptable to vote against the party line, this carries the possibility of having the whip removed. I would argue that these group decisions could be carried through to scrutiny, if the majority of scrutiny committees themselves are made up of the controlling party.

Would it not be better to have a more balanced approach, by having committees made up of members with possible relevant experience or knowledge and broader/opposing opinions, rather than a majority group of likeminded, same thinking members?

The actual legislation regarding this matter is very loosely written and states: “that proportionality rules generally apply, however local authorities can choose to apply these rules for certain scrutiny bodies and local authorities can decide to disapply proportionality rules through a unanimous vote”.

It also states that scrutiny exists to challenge decisions made by the Executive, and surely this would be better achieved when led by opposition members rather than always requiring a majority of members from the controlling party?

Therefore, I put forward a motion for the Council to consider changing the current constitution regarding political proportionality on scrutiny committees, in favour of a more diverse arrangement. I therefore move that this motion is passed to the Standards Committee to be considered and debated.

During discussion the following comments were made:

·       The proportionality of Scrutiny Committees had not previously been raised as a concern by elected members and was not considered to be an issue with Labour group members.  The ‘whip’ had never been used and Scrutiny agenda papers were not discussed in Labour group meetings.

·       It was important that Scrutiny remained independent and some other authorities had opposition members chairing these committees.  Clarity was sought from the Monitoring Officer on the legislation relating to proportionality and political balance requirements for scrutiny committees.  It was suggested this could potentially be explored by the Standards Committee.

·       Due to the impact of political proportionality requirements there was an imbalance with one member of the Independent Group not having a scrutiny seat whilst some within the Labour group sat on more than one scrutiny committee.

The Monitoring Officer confirmed that the legislation was not clear but the legal default position was that on all committees, including  ...  view the full minutes text for item 34