Agenda item

The Director for Legal and Democratic Services to submit a report receiving the Leader’s report on the Governance Development Group’s work on the review of Governance arrangements (which is to be considered by the Extraordinary meeting of the Council on 21 November 2018) and requesting the Committee’s comments on the Leader’s report.

The Director for Legal and Democratic Service submitted a report (copies of which had previously been circulated to Members) receiving the Leader’s report on the Governance Development Group’s work on the review of governance arrangements (which would be considered by the Extraordinary meeting of the Council on 21 November 2018) and requesting the Committee’s comments on the Leader’s report.

 

Referring to the presentation slides, which had been circulated during the meeting, the Chief Executive

 

(a)  advised that the Council had commissioned the Local Government Association’s (LGA) Peer Challenge, which had been undertaken in December 2017.  This had resulted in a list of recommendations, concerning capacity, prioritisation and governance (together with a report and Action Plan) from the LGA, which were accepted by Council.  The Council responded by prioritising a number of the identified areas and took steps to improve (and it continued to focus on capacity and prioritisation issues).  A further review of the Council’s governance arrangements had been undertaken by the LGA in March 2018;

 

(b)  highlighted the key findings of the LGA Governance Review, which had confirmed and validated the views of Members and officers.  These were:-

 

·         Where policy development happened was unclear

·         Risk that “Everyone involved in everything”

·         Lack of clarity over leadership resulted in costly and slow decision making

·         Overlaps between the committees

·         Sub structures diluting and disempowering committees

·         Scheme of delegation too inflexible and rigid

·         Council’s governance needed a radical overhaul

 

(c)  emphasised that the Committee’s observations of the Council’s lack of a ‘check and challenge’ function were accurate.  He acknowledged that the Committee was eager to ensure that the Council’s decision making and performance were effective.  However, ‘check and challenge’ was not within the scope of this Committees Terms of Reference.  The proposed Cabinet model would provide for a ‘check and challenge’ function in the form of Scrutiny.

 

Also referring to the presentation slides, the Director for Legal and Democratic Services

 

(a)  advised that key findings from the LGA Review had been reported to this Committee on 27 March 2018 and at the meeting Members had commissioned an informal member/officer group (the Governance Development Group) to bring forward proposals to strengthen and streamline the current Committee structure and create a clearer route for policy development;

(b)  stated that on 8 May 2019, the Council had approved Phase 1 proposals and had agreed that the Governance Development Group should review the Council’s governance arrangements and consider the merits of alternative governance models;

 

(c)  advised that the Group had

·         met on a regular basis

·         reflected on local experiences

·         visited other councils, who were chosen based on their adopted model of Governance.  This ensured that a range of models could be seen, as it was important to understand all of the alternative governance structures and how they worked at each council.  All but one council had changed its governance model in the past six years.  It became clear that one system was not inherently better that the other but had to fit the individual council at that time.  Good governance was best described as, “…how local government bodies ensure that they are doing the right things, in the right way, for the right people, in a timely, inclusive, open, honest and accountable manner.”

·         conducted external stakeholder engagement, which included a Parish Council representative and some members of the Town and Place Partnership

·         carried out a public survey and provided questionnaires at the Seniors’ Forum Annual Seniors’ Day.  The feedback highlighted that the public did not have a clear understanding of the Council’s decision making process, Ward Councillors should be consulted on decisions affecting their Wards, more scrutiny was needed and the decision making process should be more open and transparent

 

(d)  informed Members of the alternative models of governance, which had been considered:-

·         Hybrid arrangements, which could be resource intensive and bureaucratic

·         Committee system, which was not right for the Council’s strategic vision

·         Leader and Cabinet model, which would be recommended to Council tomorrow. 

 

(e)  advised that the Leader and Cabinet model had been identified as the form of governance which would deliver the outcomes identified at the start of Phase 2.  This model gave the ability to make quicker and more timely decisions.  Meetings could be more regular and decisions could be taken outside of meetings.   There would be the ability to review decisions and maintain checks and balances, as decisions would be scrutinised as part of the process.  Currently, the public were not sure which committees made which decisions.  The Leader and Cabinet model would increase public understanding of ‘who was accountable for what’ and the Council would promote public engagement (portfolio holders would be involved in this);

 

(f)   confirmed that more detailed information would be provided at tomorrow’s Extraordinary Council meeting (eg how a Cabinet and Scrutiny function work etc).  Members’ comments at this evening’s meeting would be circulated via email in advance of tomorrow’s Extraordinary Council meeting and hard copies would be provided at the meeting;

 

(g)  highlighted the Governance Review – Action Plan – 2018/19 (Appendix C of the report), confirming that the Council’s Constitution would be streamlined to make it more reader friendly and easier for the public to use.

 

A Member referred to Appendix C, querying who would have the opportunity to contribute to the drafting of the Procedure Rules within the Constitution.  The Director for Legal and Democratic Services advised that she would draft the Procedure Rules with direction and feedback from the Governance Development Group.  The Procedure Rules would be submitted to Council for approval.

 

A Member commented that there was a lot of expertise amongst Members and asked if they could provide suggestions for the Actions detailed at Appendix C before the drafting process began.  They were in no doubt that this Council needed a Scrutiny function to ensure effective decision making within the Council.  Presumably, not everything could be scrutinised but hopefully Members would have the opportunity to feed into what would be reviewed.

 

The Director for Legal and Democratic Services confirmed that this would be considered.  She was always pleased to receive comments and input from Members and had a record of issues which Members had advised her of earlier in this Review process.

 

The Chief Executive reiterated that Officers had not lost sight of matters raised by Members during Phase one of the Review process.  He highlighted that Member engagement was fundamental to the implementation of the proposed change in governance arrangements.

 

Referring to the proposed revised Constitution and need for greater public engagement, a Member commented that they would like to see a comprehensive index within the Constitution to ensure it would be easier to use. Much thought should be given to public consultation and engagement and this too should be laid down in the Constitution.  Highlighting Appendix B of the report (Public Survey Results), the Member commented that participation in the survey had been poor.  Methods of engagement needed to be considered thoroughly and established correctly, to ensure all residents in the Borough had the opportunity to be involved.  It was not enough to promote surveys and consultations on the Council’s website and in the Melton Times.

 

Another Member commented that every home in the Borough received information relating to council tax, which presumably also promoted the Council’s website.  Could this also be used to engage the public without internet access.

 

The Chief Executive advised that a large scale survey was planned for March 2019.  Also the Council would soon appoint a Corporate Engagement Officer who would focus on this work.  He confirmed that he would look into the information, which was included on Council Tax demands.  It may be possible to include a questionnaire, to ensure that all residents were given the opportunity to engage in a way most suited to them.

 

 

A Member raised the Member Away Days and asked if these could be included in the Constitution.  It was essential to involve all Members and a remit should be passed to Cabinet on this.

 

Another Member noted that Member Away Days were cross party events, which engaged all Members, regardless of their political party.  They commented that the name of the event, ‘Member Away Day’, did not accurately reflect its purpose and the work undertaken and asked if it could be changed.  The name ‘Member Strategic Development Day’ was suggested.

 

The Director for Legal and Democratic Services confirmed that inclusion of this event in the Constitution would be considered under Standing Orders, the written rules, which govern how the Council conducted internal organisational, administrative and procurement procedures and procedural matters for meetings.

 

The Chief Executive added that the Council’s Corporate Improvement Team was reviewing the Policy Framework, with a view to the Council implementing a new Corporate Plan.  Consultation and Member engagement would form a significant part of this.

 

A Member commented that the role of the opposition would be an important element of the Scrutiny function and queried the kind of processes would be put in place to prevent impasse (eg Cabinet’s proposed budget being refused).

 

The Director for Legal and Democratic Services advised that Scrutiny would be involved in the decision making process from the beginning, enabling opposition Members to feed into the Cabinet, who would ultimately make the decision.  The democratic mandate was placed in the ruling group.

 

The Member asked if the opposition could delay the decision making process for a budget and the Chief Executive advised that it was not uncommon for groups to prepare their own versions of the budget, which could then be used for political purpose (to demonstrate what they would spend money on etc).  However, this would add a ‘check point’, which would place a pause in the system and could be a useful and positive part of the decision making process.  Budget setting was a decision made by Full Council.  Cabinet would be obliged to consider Scrutiny’s request but would not have to accept it.  The risk of a lack of clarity and inconsistency was present in both models but was far less likely in the Cabinet model.

 

A Member commented that that the Cabinet model would give smaller groups within this Council the opportunity to have a greater and wider influence on decision making and would result in Members feeling more included and valued. The Review process had begun last year and the option of a Cabinet model of governance was proposed shortly after.  The Council had been on a huge journey.  It was hoped that all Members had the opportunity to contribute and engage with the Review.  The Member expressed their thanks to the Governance Development Group for their excellent work and to all Members for their involvement.

 

There being no further comments or questions from Members, it was

 

RESOLVED that Members’ comments on the Leader’s report, regarding the future governance of the Council be reported to the Extraordinary meeting of Council on 21 November 2018.