Modern.gov Breadcrumb
- Agenda item
Modern.gov Content
Agenda item
West of England Devolution
Minutes:
The Board considered the outcome of the public
consultation process which ran from the 4th July to the
15th August. The Board
considered whether it would wish to submit further comments to the
Secretary of State by the deadline of the 26th August
and whether there should be an Extraordinary Full Council before
final consent was given by Cabinet.
During discussion the following issues were noted/raised:
a. It was confirmed that at this point in time there was no change to the devolution deal,
despite speculation in the press in relation to government policy
re Metro Mayors. Each local authority
would be making representations for absolute clarity.
b. How representative was a response rate of
0.15% – it was noted that a Secretary of State consultation
did not generally engender a large public response and the Council
had been advised that the response rate was not out of kilter with
other devolution consultations.
c. The public response had not identified
particular concerns around the proposal for a metro
Mayor.
d. One of the issues was about how the public
would be engaged in devolution issues going forward – for
example an engagement around what the public would like to see
devolved. A factor in the response rate
could also have been the timing over the summer period.
e. The role of the Board was to review the outcome of the consultation and whether there was anything particularly different arising out of the consultation to the Council’s views.
f. It was a widely publicized consultation and 70% of respondents
from Bristol were in favour of the proposals, however concerns were
expressed about the response rate and whether this could
realistically be taken as a representative view.
g. The consultation report was large as the Councils needed
to provide comprehensive information to
the Secretary of State. Officers have been in close contact with
DCLG regarding the information required in the report.
h. Information would be provided on the exact costs of the consultation but there had been a budget of approximately £9k shared between the 3 authorities.
i. The consultation was primarily about the process and this probably impacted on the public’s level of engagement.
j. It was the Secretary of State who would
consider whether the consultation process and outcome were
sufficiently robust to go forward with a decision.
k. If the public had been very opposed to the
proposals this would have emerged, for example through a social
media campaign.
l. The Council discussed with other
authorities and the DCLG what needed to go into the
consultation. The report had to cover
the questions which the Secretary of State might ask.
m. Going forward the Council would take on board comments made by the Board about ways in which the public could be more involved in council decision making, including the way the Council supports members in terms of providing information for them to pass on to the public.
In conclusion the Board
Resolved:
(1) To note the consultation and that there were no further comments from the Board.
(2) That there would not need to be a further Full Council meeting on the issue.
Supporting documents:
- West of England Devolution 240816 OSM v8, item 26. PDF 75 KB
- Appendix 1 - Consultation Proposal - Issued to Full Council 290616, item 26. PDF 223 KB
- Devolution Consultation Final Report_Aug 2016, item 26. PDF 1 MB