Breadcrumb Content

Agenda and minutes

Venue: The Bordeaux Room, 1st Floor, City Hall, BS1 5TR

No. Item


Welcome, Introductions, and Safety Information


The Chair welcomed those present and introductions were made.



Apologies for absence


Apologies were received from Councillor Holland, substituted by Councillor King, Councillor Gollop, substituted by Councillor Goulandris, and Councillor Makawi, substituted by Councillor Mack.



Declarations of interest


There were no declarations of interest.



Minutes from the previous meeting and decisions log pdf icon PDF 90 KB

Additional documents:


The minutes of the meetings on 28th April 2023 were approved as a correct record.

Members noted the decision log.



Public Forum pdf icon PDF 103 KB

Up to 30 minutes is allowed for this item.


Any member of the public or Councillor may participate in Public Forum. The detailed arrangements for so doing are set out in the Public Information Sheet at the back of this agenda.


Public Forum items should be emailed to and please note that the following deadlines will apply in relation to this meeting:


Questions - Written questions must be received 3 clear working days prior to the meeting. For this meeting, this means that your question(s) must be received in this office at the latest by 5pm on Monday 22nd May 2023.


Petitions and Statements - Petitions and statements must be received on the working day prior to the meeting. For this meeting this means that your submission must be received in this office at the latest by 12 Noon on Thursday 25th May 2023.


Please note, your time allocated to speak may have to be strictly

Additional documents:


The following public forum questions and statements were received for the meeting.



Questions (and answers)

PQ 01

Martin Fodor

Q1. What evidence has the CMWG gathered from other authorities like core cities or local government bodies like the LGA gathered to advise on this issue of devolved decision making?

A1. Local decision making was one of the key design principles that was developed by the CMWG during their first phase of work, which involved discussions with the LGA, CfGS and other Local Authorities.  Members gathered a good deal of information during this process, the most pertinent of which is captured in the report.


Martin Fodor

Q2. When can an inquiry be held to develop these ideas into practical proposals?

A2. The CMWG will be considering their first report regarding local decision making at their meeting on 26th May 23.  Once Members have provided a steer on which model (s) they would like to explore further appropriate steps will then be taken to produce a more detailed report of options. 


David Redgewell

Q3. What discussion have taken place with the chief executive of the west of England mayoral combined Authority about this committee functions and the mayor for the west of England Dan Norris and when time and dates please.

A3. Members of the CMWG will be considering partnership working at their meeting on 28th July 23 which will include further consideration about any discussions that may be required with WECA and other key external stakeholders.


David Redgewell

Q4. In view of the west of England mayoral combined Authority being responsible for Transport Regional planning and Housing skills and Education Economy growth and Tourism. With the west of England mayoral combined Authority also being told to absorb the local Enterprise partnership and North Somerset council into the Authority and with the cabinet decision to Transfer the Transport and public transport staff to west of England mayoral combined transport Authority.  What discussion have taken place about the working arrangements between the western gateway transport board city and county of Bristol council, Banes South Gloucestershire council and North Somerset council and the west of England mayoral combined transport Authority and Mayor Dan Norris over these committee and the Role of leader and Deputy leader of the council

If no meeting has taken place when does this committee intend to discuss these proposals with the west of England mayoral combined transport Authority and mayor Dan Norris.

A4. As above.


Suzanne Audrey

Q5. Although not perfect, I believe Neighbourhood Partnerships were important. The Neighbourhood Partnership meetings I attended enabled police officers, council officers and others to meet and discuss local issues and priorities. Although attempts have been made locally, nothing has really been able to replace the Neighbourhood Partnership meetings in the area where I live. To help me understand why they were abolished, please can members of the committee explain what the problems were with the Neighbourhood Partnership Model?

A5. Please see the Cabinet report of  ...  view the full minutes text for item 5.


One City Report pdf icon PDF 249 KB

Additional documents:


The Director of Policy, Strategy, and Digital introduced the report, setting out the role of the City Office and Bristol City Council’s status as a key stakeholder. It was noted that many partners had stated an aspiration to continue the One City Approach, with the Council’s involvement, although recognised that the model may change with the new Committee system of governance. The Group went onto consider the report and ask for additional details in a number of areas.  The discussion was as follows:

·       The One City Approach was an excellent example of the Council working in partnership with the city, especially in response to the Coronavirus pandemic, and the consensus from Members was that it should remain in place. The City Office team were happy to explore different models or approaches that best reflected the needs of the city.

·       Examples of the work of the City Office included setting up a weekly City Partners Group, made of CEOs and Chairs of organisations that provide major infrastructure in Bristol during the pandemic. This was a forum to speak to the Director of Public Health, cascade information across the city, and request or offer support to other partners.

·       The One City takes a ‘convene and ask’ approach by bringing people together in a room and asking them to follow a common direction for the benefit of the city. This worked very well at a strategic partnership level, and organisations developed their own plans and activities, based on a shared understanding.

·       The One City Boards are a useful forum for connecting partners with relevant experience or specific sectors. Each Board was chaired by the Cabinet Member with the relevant portfolio.

·       As the City Office takes a city-wide strategic approach, Members were reminded that work was done by the Council to ensure communities had a voice.

·       It was agreed that a further brief discussion on One City would take place at the July meeting, in order to confirm that arrangements for the body would continue largely unchanged in 24/25 but that a review may be required in a future year. Members thanked the City Office and all its partners who have supported the city.


That a further discussion on One City take place at the July meeting of the Committee Model Working Group, which would ask Members to confirm the arrangements for the 24/25 Municipal Year.



Mayoral Commissions Update pdf icon PDF 195 KB


The Head of Equalities and Inclusion introduced the report which provided an initial overview of current activity related to the Mayoral Commissions. Members were reminded that these Commissions were made up of volunteers and received funding from the Mayor’s Office budget. During the ensuing discussion the following points were made:

·       The Equalities Team shared responsibility for liaising with the Commissions, including working with them on drafting new policies and supporting provision of their annual reports to Full Council.

·       The History Commission had been established as a short life task and finish group with a specific remit and would soon be completing their work.

·       As the Commissions were introduced at different times and with differing roles and responsibilities, they didn’t all follow one standard operating model.  This may be one area that required review in the future.

·       Members agreed that a flexible approach was required so the new administration can make an informed decision on the future of the Commissions. 



That further consideration to the approach to the Mayoral Commissions be considered at the July meeting of the Committee Model Working Group.



Local Decision Making pdf icon PDF 173 KB


The Director of Legal and Democratic Services introduced the report which set out an initial range of options for the Group to consider relating to decision making under the new committee system. The Group went onto consider the report, commenting as follows:

·       The Group agreed that they would like more decisions to be made at a local level but were mindful of the potential costs, so requested more information on this in order to make fully informed recommendations. 

·       Some Members raised that their quarterly neighbourhood forums worked well and had a high level of attendance which could be further improved with the right support.

·       After some discussion about the various options to expand the current arrangements for local decision making, Members agreed that this should take the form of expanding the existing Area Committees, with other options such as reintroducing Neighbourhood Partnerships or establishing Parish Councils being disregarded.

·       Members agreed that a Working Group be established to further develop the proposals around increasing the remit of Area Committees including additional devolved powers, objectives, costings, logistics etc. The Group will be made up of one representative from each party and report back monthly to the Committee, with full recommendations to be made be in autumn 23.



That the CMWG establish a Working Group to consider how to increase local decision making through the existing Area Committees.  The Area Committees Working Group would aim to complete their review in autumn 23, and would provide progress updates at each meeting of the CMWG.



Work Programme - for noting only pdf icon PDF 51 KB