Agenda item

Report of the Senior Democratic Services Officer / Legal Officer

The Committee gave consideration to the report as set out on pages 6-9 of the agenda, which asked it to note the progress achieved to date in updating and revising the Council’s Constitution, taking into account feedback received from individual Members and Members of the Constitutional Working Group (CWG) .

The Head of Law & Governance provided the Committee with a brief summary of the report, which gave an overview of the feedback received from Members following circulation of a revised draft Constitution after the previous meeting of Full Council in December 2018. The feedback received had been largely supportive of the revised Constitution as a whole, however there remained a divergence of opinion with regard to a small number of key procedural issues which still needed to be addressed.

In relation to quorum, Officers had recommended that this should be set at a minimum baseline of 3 Members for all meetings; however the CWG indicated that it wished to increase the fixed minimum number of Members present to one third of the overall Membership for all meetings.

With regard to the requirement for an item to be moved and seconded before it can be debated, the Head of Law & Governance stated that Officers recommended the retention of the provision in the existing Constitution i.e. that no speeches should be made until a motion was on the table. This was recommended on the grounds that the principles of good governance, best practice, case-law, statutory guidance and the Constitutions of other local authorities consistently advocated this approach as an example of good administration, avoiding the risk of decisions being challenged on procedural grounds. This approach also allows the Chair of a meeting to exercise efficient control, keeping track of any amendments moved during the course of debate.

Members however took a different view, and felt that although this provision had existed within the Council’s Constitution for a number of years, it had seldom been applied in practice and to the best of their knowledge was not applied at other local authorities either. Members were instead of the view that Committees should be able to hold a free debate, from which it was anticipated that a substantive motion would arise. The Committee felt that this would resolve the issue of members of the public in attendance forming the impression that by moving a recommendation at the beginning of the debate, those Members moving and seconding the motion had already reached a pre-determined view.

The Head of Law & Governance acknowledged that there were acute difficulties involved in balancing the principles of good governance with the desire to satisfy public perception, but reiterated that the view of Officer’s was that good governance should always take priority over public perception.

With regard to a formal scheme of substitutions, the recommendation of Officers was that there should be a fixed proportional number of named substitutes for each Committee, who should be trained as appropriate where the requirement for training in order to sit on the Committee existed. Officers also recommended that Democratic Services should be notified of any substitutions by 5pm the day prior to the meeting. However, it was the unanimous view of the CWG that the scheme should have greater flexibility, with no limit on the number of Members that can be substituted, no named substitutes and a cut-off for naming of substitutes of 12 noon on the day of the meeting. The Head of Law & Governance expressed a concern regarding the potential this proposal would have to create an imbalance on certain Committees, however the extension of the time limit to 12 noon was not deemed to be problematic.

The Committee were advised that the feedback provided would be incorporated into a report to be produced for the April meeting of Full Council. The report would outline where there remain differences of opinion between Officers and Members of the CWG, and all Members will be asked to decide upon what final arrangements they wish to put in place. Subject to any final amendments, the recommendation contained within the report would be to approve and adopt the draft revised Constitution with effect from the new 2019/20 Municipal Year. It was confirmed that upon adoption, a hard copy of the new Constitution would be provided to all Members.

It was moved by the Chair, seconded by J Kaufman and

UNANIMOUSLY RESOLVED THAT:

(i)       The progress made to date by the Constitutional Working Group in updating and revising the Council’s Constitution be noted by Members; and

(ii)     The final recommendations of the Constitutional Working Group, following consideration of feedback from Members, be agreed as set out in the foregoing minutes.