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 Makawi, substituted by Councillor Fodor

·       Councillor Eddy, substituted by Councillor Weston

·       Councillor Holland, substituted by Councillor Bradshaw. 



Declarations of interest


There were no declarations of interest. 



Minutes from the previous meeting and decisions log pdf icon PDF 88 KB

Additional documents:


The minutes from the 26th May 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 26th June 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 29th June 2023.

Additional documents:


Public Forum

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



Questions (and answers)

PQ 01

Clive Stevens

Q1. Time needs to be set aside another day for discussion on the working of the Escalation Panel process which may be triggered in a timely manner by a group of councillors who disagree for good reason with a committee decision (to be made or made). I read in Agenda 6 (item 4) that officers have given an example of needing 10 signatories, some cross party, to bring an issue to the Escalation Panel. Are the requirements of 10 signatories and cross party just “random” suggestions or have they been researched and are being put forward as considered proposals?

A1. The proposals in the report relating to the number of signatories and the need for cross-party support for escalation are only suggestions for the Working Group to consider. There may be alterative views about the criteria to refer decisions to the Escalation Panel


Sian Ellis-Thomas

Q2. Can the committee please explain how the new committee system model will hold Councillors to account when there are serious or multiple accounts of misconduct against them?

A2. Under s.27 of the Localism Act 2011, the Council is required to adopt a Code of Conduct for councillors. This will continue to be the case under the Committee model of governance. The current Code of Conduct will be the subject of review at a future meeting of the Working Group. The current procedure for the consideration of complaints against councillors sets out the potential sanctions that can be imposed when there is a breach of the Code of Conduct and it is anticipated that similar arrangements will be in place under the Committee model of governance. The current potential sanctions are as follows:

·       To Report on findings to Full Council i.e. “naming and shaming’’.

·       To Recommend to a Group Leader that the member concerned be removed from any committee or sub-committee.

·       To recommend, In relation to any members of the executive that the member concerned be removed from the Executive.

·       to recommend the Monitoring Officer to arrange appropriate training for the member concerned.

·       to recommend removal of any member concerned from any outside body appointments.

·       to require the withdrawal of Council facilities e.g. use of computer or internet.

·       to exclude a member from the Council’s offices or other premises except for the purpose of attending formal meetings.


Sian Ellis-Thomas

Q3. Given the current rather lame sanctions that are in place, can the committee also explain how improvements to sanctions for misconduct can be such that they result in a significant incentive for better adherence to the Code?

A3. The Working Group may wish to review the potential sanctions that might be imposed for a breach of the Code of Conduct for councillors when it’s reviewed in due course.






Sian Ellis-Thomas


Clive Stevens


Suzanne Audrey


David Redgewell and Gordon Richardson


In response to PQ03,  ...  view the full minutes text for item 5.


Council Procedures under the Committee Model of Governance pdf icon PDF 211 KB


The Director of Legal and Democratic Services introduced the report which set out a variety of details for the Group to discuss. The Group went onto consider the report, commenting as follows: 

Terms of Reference of Policy Committees (including sub-committees)

-          The Committee agreed with the proposal for shared Terms of Reference and common ways of working, with the caveat that each Policy Committee would have unique elements.

-          The group discussed the future production of the Corporate Plan, noting that the existing Plan would remain in place until a replacement could be agreed at Full Council.

-          The Director of Legal and Democratic Services confirmed that any decision between £100k and £500k (i.e., below the ‘Key Decision’ threshold) would be made by officers in consultation with the Chair or Vice-Chair of each relevant Policy Committee.

-          It was agreed that the agendas for the Policy Committee Chairs/Vice Chairs meetings would be shared with Members of the relevant Committee, including details of any decisions that would be considered in order to provide the opportunity for advance comment.

-          The Group agreed that the Key Decision threshold should continue to include the current requirement for matters that would 'be significant in terms of its effects on communities living or working in two or more wards in the city.’

Policy Committee Procedure Rules

-          The Committee agreed they would need to consider the options for enabling additional public forum contributions, such as amendments to publication dates, amending speaking times and production of increased information for the public about how to engage.

-          It was agreed that Public Forum submissions for the Policy Committees must relate to the Terms of Reference for each body but did not need to be restricted to items on the agenda.

-          The Group discussed the Finance Sub-Committee and the breadth of work it would be responsible for. In view of this it was agreed that the Sub-Committee be a standing body.

-          Members were reminded that Policy Committee Chairs would have a casting vote. If the Chair does not wish to exercise this casting vote, the decision falls.

-          Members requested that relevant briefings from officers were scheduled into the Committees work programmes, to ensure Members had the right expertise to make informed decisions.

-          It was agreed that more detail should be added regarding the Forward Plans including that items be added with as much notice as possible.

Escalation Panel Procedure Rules

-          Members considered the proposals in relation to the Escalation Panel and agreed that in order to escalate a decision 10 or more Councillors would need to request this, from Members of at least two political groups.  They also agreed that the original decision makers could not be involved in reviewing the decision.


·       There must be 10 Member Signatories, from at least 2 Party Groups for a decision to be escalated. 

·       That Escalation Panel Members must not have been involved in making the original decision.


Forward Plan and Decision Pathway

-          Forward Plans  ...  view the full minutes text for item 6.


Work Programme - for noting only pdf icon PDF 51 KB


The Committee noted the Work Programme.