Issue - meetings

The Scrutiny & Elections Officer advised Members of the work completed during the previous scrutiny review and the draft recommendations created.  They also advised of committee reports considered by Executive and Council in the period since the previous review.  They advised Members they would need to consider if any of the previous recommendations identified were still relevant and required either submission to Executive or consideration as part of the current development of governance arrangements for the new company.

A Member confirmed that they believed governance arrangements was dealt with within the new set up, and that it was clear that all projects and the Business Case developments would be presented to Members at Council.  They felt that all governance and communication issues previously identified would be resolved with the new arrangements.

The CEO, DDL, noted that a portfolio of sites proposed for development via Dragonfly had been presented to Council prior to the creation of the wholly-owned company.  These were also noted within the Business Case presented to Council.  They noted that all required monitoring would be catered for within the new governance arrangements and these would be aligned to Council operations which would be more rigorous than the previous arrangements with Robert Woodhead Limited.  They noted that the link with scrutiny was still to be determined but would be accommodated within final arrangements, and further work was to take place on the arrangements for the internal Board.

A Member noted that they felt the original recommendations, identified by scrutiny within the previous review, were now void due to the current situation.  They were aware that the proposed Board would have 7 members and queried how these would be chosen.  The CEO, DDL, confirmed that the company would have to satisfy usual company regulations in relation to the appointment of Board members.  There would likely be 5 internal members made up of Dragonfly management/Council Members and 2 external members likely from within the industry.  It would also be vital that anybody acting as an external member had no conflict of interest in relation to another company with the same remit as Dragonfly.  They also thought it would be possible for any Councillor appointed to remain a Board Member for their specified term, even if they were no longer a Councillor to ensure stability in company Board membership.  The CEO, DDL, noted that their previous experience, whilst as a joint officer supporting the JVC Boards at both authorities of the Alliance, had been mixed due a number of Board membership changes which had resulted in instability.  They felt it was appropriate for Board members to serve for a 4 year period, as a minimum, to enable stability.

A Councillor noted that although Robert Woodhead Limited were no longer involved, the process should still be the same with all reports going direct through Council.  The CEO, DDL, felt the move to a wholly-owned company would enable more prescription over how the company operated.

The Monitoring Officer noted that there was extensive work taking  ...  view the full minutes text for item 49