Agenda item

The Director of Legal and Democratic Services provided a brief introduction to the report, following which the Head of the Executive Office provided a presentation and responded to questions from Members. The ensuing discussion was as follows:

·       The current key decision pathway required the Council to publish forthcoming key decisions 28 days in advance. The threshold for a key decision was presently those resulting in expenditure or savings of £500k or over or being significant in terms of its effects on communities living or working in two or more wards in the city.  Members confirmed that the principles of political oversight and long-term planning needed to remain in place, therefore it was agreed that Policy Committees would publish Forward Plans, ideally at least 2-months in advance with final details to be confirmed at a later date.  It was also suggested that ward Members be kept fully informed about Key Decisions affecting their wards.

·       Decisions that cost between £100k and £499k (i.e., below the key decision threshold) were Officer Executive Decisions (OEDs) taken by senior officers.  OEDs were made in consultation with the relevant Cabinet Members and details of the decision were then published.  Members advised that they would like to consider how this arrangement would work in the committee model, with a view to determining if any changes should be made to improve transparency.

·       Members noted the approach to emergency decision making, details of which were covered in the Council’s Access to Information rules (see APR15 and 16), agreeing that a similar mechanism would need to be in place, with details to be agreed in due course. 

·       The Group discussed the principle about democratic decision making and all agreed that the current levels of political oversight must be retained, which included that all decisions currently made by Members must continue to be so.

·       Members were advised that the Council could choose to have a Leader and Deputy Leader in the Committee Model. The benefits included having named individuals who could speak on behalf of the Council, although some Members were concerned about the potential for the Leader and Deputy Leader to have too many ‘powers.’  After discussion, Members agreed that Leader and Deputy Leader positions would be created, with both positions appointed by Full Council.  It was noted that a fuller discussion about the roles and responsibilities of the Leader and Deputy Leader would take place at a future meeting, to include job roles from other Local Authorities.

·       Members inquired about the various external bodies e.g., Boards which had Cabinet Member involvement and it was agreed that details would be provided following the meeting.

·       Regarding Call In, Members agreed that once the Group had determined the number of Committees and their responsibilities this would be given further consideration, but there was consensus that this process should be retained.

·       Members considered the approach to briefings, confirming that the Chairs and Vice Chairs of each policy Committee would be invited to attend, in a similar way to how Cabinet Member briefings operated currently.  Agenda setting meetings should operate how they do now for some meetings (e.g., Development Control) so that all Lead Members (one from each political party) be invited, and draft reports should be available.  Members agreed to discuss this further at a later meeting.

·       The Group discussed the approach to setting the Budget and Policy Framework, deciding that this would be subject to further consideration after agreement was reached regarding the number of Committees as well as roles and responsibilities of all Members.  It was noted that the Council’s Corporate Strategy was in place until 2027.

·       Discussion moved to the arrangements for Member Forum and Public Forum.  All Members agreed that both should be retained in the new model and some suggested that the Forums needed to be expanded, although noted that time constraints were an important consideration.  The current principle of enabling Chairs to take a flexible approach to managing public forum should be maintained.

·       Members noted that further discussion was required in relation to petitions, including the threshold for a debate and appropriate pathway for response.

·       Consideration must be given by the Working Group to the approach to Scrutiny and there were several options for the Committee Model to consider at their meeting in March 23.

RESOLVED:

The following matters were agreed in relation to the Committee Model of governance:

·       That a Leader and Deputy Leader would be in place, appointed by Full Council.  Roles and responsibilities to be confirmed at the 14th April 23 meeting.

·       That Forward plan (s) would be in place, with more details to be considered.

·       That Emergency Decision Making would be enabled with similar arrangements to those set out in APR 15 and 16.

·       That the Chairs and Vice Chairs would be consulted on OEDs in advance, with other changes to the process to be considered in due course.

·       That Member Forum/Public Forum, would be retained in the new model with full details to be confirmed.

·       That agenda setting meetings take place before Policy Committees, with the Lead Members in attendance.

·       That regular briefings be arranged for the Chairs and Vice Chairs of the Policy Committees.

·       That the CMWG will take regular reports of recommendations for decision to Full Council, commencing in March 23.