GovComm 2014-11-10 Public Reports Pack

8/10/2019 GovComm 2014-11-10 Public Reports Pack

1/41

CANTERBURY CITY COUNCIL

GOVERNANCE COMMISSION

MEETING TO BE HELD ON MONDAY, 10 NOVEMBER 2014

AT 7.30 PM IN THE GUILDHALL, WESTGATE, CANTERBURY

Dis !i"# i$%

I%&'('%&'% C)*i!+*% Chris Gay

C$#%-i $!s Councillor Baker, Councillor S Cook, Councillor Cragg, Councillor Dixey,Councillor Doyle, Councillor Fitter, Councillor Gilbey, Councillor Howes,Councillor Perkins and Councillor Wratten

O//i-'!s Colin Carmichael, atthew !rcher, Haroon !wan, ark "llender, CharlotteHammersley

A G E N D A

Page #s$

1 A($ $ i's /$! A"s'%-'

2 Mi%# 's $/ )' *s +'' i% % & '

3 O# s *%&i% +* '!s /!$+ )' (!' i$#s +'' i% ( & )*

+ D-SC.SS

4 S-!# i% G$i% $! *!& " C$#%-i $! B*5'! )/ & )'

+ D-SC.SS

6 D!*/ !'($! $/ )' C$++issi$% $ # C$#%-i )( & 0)

+ C 1S-D"2

A% $ )'! #! '% "#si%'ss

Document Pack


2/41

! "# $ % &! "#'( )*+# , ! - &. - $ ! / ! &% &

-& 0

$ & 0 ! "

# $ % & # %

" ' & (##! $ & ! (##

& ) * % (##

- 1

"* % & # & + ,

- 1 2 "3 4 +# -

' & . /0 * % & & & # ! (## 1

-1 ' # ) & * & , )# &. & * ) & * & # * * , ' . ) & * & & & # * * #

! . & 2 * ,

31 " "! % & & * & . #* & . * # 4

4 5 ,

Document PackAgenda Item 2 Page 2


3/41

-

/ - 4 2 4! 2 4 1 - ! 1 -

$& & * & # # # & & 6 % " * % & ** # 5% . * # (% % & ,

# % . * * # &* * . * & * & * * # . &

% # * , "&& * & * & % * # & * . & # & #

5 ,

% & * # % & & & * , & %

& # & & * * & 2 % & ,

) * 7 # . & & & # * 1

' 2 # # && # & % , 8 9 % & & & % #

# , ' * % & & # % % ## * % * & * % ,

- ' * # + % # & *

& & & * 2 # & & % &, ) & # & &

# ## & * # * 2 , ) * # + & # * # & # #

+ & % * & & # # ,

/ # & & & & * % ,) ! (## & : ## &

# * & ,

3 # 6 % " -000 # . # & $ % & 1

" & # $ % ; # & * & & * & * %


4/41

/

: ' * & & ! . & % # * , 9 * % # # ** * % & ** # & ,

' & $& & # *# & ,

3 1

' # & * ## & & & # * % , ) & & & #

* # # * & & #& & & ,

& $

# > & & % && # &* * & & * 1

$ * 1 % & * # & ? ' * 1 # # & &

* ? " 1 * % & # & & * ,

' & & # $ . $## . $## % &$ , ' % $ * . &

# & * # ,

&5 $ & & 5 &5 $ $ & $ & 1

' & ) * % (## * & ## & &% # * & # * & * & # & * , ' # & % / * & &1. 9 & * & ,

' & # * 1

" & # * % & & & & * % # , ' * &

& & * # ,

" & ## & * & % # & # % ,

% . * # % * # && * * , )

% &, ' * # & & ## & &,

Page 4


5/41

3

- & # * . & & &,

' & & ,

$

' & " 9$$ ,

-

' & " 9$$ ,

! - & & $ ! & 5 & $

' & " 9$$ ,

& % & - 6 0

% # & * # " ! & * % & # *

% , ' & *


6/41


7/41

A

' ! (## * & & * & 8 & ** * ,

1& : $ & $ ,& $ &

' & # * & & # & " 9$$2 & 1

" % * % & &? ' # ? ' * * # ?

& ' ## $ ? & & ?

# ) % # 2 & ? " # & * & ,

; 6 % & $ & & &$ & / &7

' & # * 1

! * & & * ,

- ' B # & #& # ,

/ ' % # & * * % *## # & ,

' ! (## & & & #* # C ,

, 7 &

' % * & & * # / & & & * ,

4 $ 5 9

) * & < * *

0) # > & # & + % * % & & 9 ,

) & # * & * # & & 9 & % ,

' ! (## * & & % + * , + * & & & &

Page 7


8/41

D

## & & % &% & ! # & & & * , & $& &5 & ** ! & # & % & # & & & & % * * , ' & # &

& * & (% % & ,

' & * & # & , )# A & &. % & + & * ## & , ) & * % & * & * # * & # * * * ,

) " 9$$ & & ,

' & ) * % (## * & & * * % * # & . % & * & * & # * ,

: 4 1 =

! & . 0 > % . -0 3. ' & . 5 . . D,/0*

' & C,/- *

Page 8


9/41

Canterbury City Council Future Committee Structure

Outstanding matters from the previous meeting

1. Introduction

At the last meeting on 20 October, the Commission considered a report setting outvarious features of a proposed committee structure. The report together with theviews expressed b the Commission at that meeting have informed a draft report to!ull Council set out later on this agenda for the Commission"s consideration.

#hilst there was broad agreement for the ma$orit of the recommendations set outin the report to the last meeting, it was agreed that some of the recommendationsre%uired further discussion. This paper highlights those areas of the report whichthe Commission agreed to return to at this meeting.

2. Full Council

The role of the !ull Council would remain unchanged. !ull Council would continue to

have responsibilit for approving the budget and polic framewor& and decisionsoutside that. The minutes of the council"s committees would be submitted to !ullCouncil and could be debated, but resolved decisions could not be overturned, as is

currentl the case.

At the meeting on 20 October, 'd (ammond, (ead of )rogrammes, *ocalAccountabilit at the Centre for )ublic +crutin advised that the role of !ull Councilcould be developed to include a review of the polic framewor& at the outset of thecouncil ear ahead to identif an upcoming matters that could benefit from a !ullCouncil debate. )reviousl , the council held +tate of the Area debates which hadsimilar intentions but these were not continued. These could be reintroduced oralternativel , a mechanism which enabled !ull Council to identif topics it wanted todebate during the course of the ear could be introduced.

3. Service Committees

nder the Committee + stem, decisions will need to be ta&en b a series ofcommittees covering the council"s different functions and made up of councillorsfrom all political parties reflecting the political balance of the council. )reviousl , itwas usual for the council"s officer and committee structure to align. (owever, thecurrent council officer structure is designed around cost, performance and customersatisfaction rather than groupings of related functions. +ince the Committee + stem

last operated, local government has changed and it will continue to change aseconomic austerit extends into the future. -n whatever structure is adopted, it is

Agenda Item 3Page 9


10/41

not perceived there would be an immediate need to change the officer structure. -tis suggested that it would be more appropriate for the committees to represent thefunctions relating to the council"s &e polic priorities. These would also reflectfunctions which ma relate to one another.

At the meeting of the Commission on 20 October, the Commission considered anassessment of the number of reports made to the council"s committees over the

past four ears and the topic areas the covered. The anal sis showed that therewould be a reasonabl even spread of business if three service committees wereintroduced as set out below. The committee names provide an indication of the

t pes of functional areas it is proposed the cover. )lease note that the list offunctions for each committee is not intended to be exhaustive. The structure is alsoset out on a chart at Appendix A.

Policy and Resources Committee

A )olic Committee existed in the council"s previous committee s stem and is a &efeature of the committee structures of those councils that have reintroduced thes stem since 2012.

The )olic and esources Committee"s role could include/

Ta&ing decisions on matters that cut across more than one service committee. Approval of the council"s Corporate )lan. ecommending a Capital and evenue udget to !ull Council and edium Term

!inancial +trateg .

Corporate performance monitoring. +hared +ervices matters. atters relating to 3eneral )urposes that are currentl within the remit of the

3eneral )urposes and *icensing Committee 4e.g. staffing matters, electoralregistration, appointments to outside bodies5.

nder the present 'xecutive s stem, *icensing and General Purposes functions arecombined into one 3eneral )urposes and *icensing Committee. -t is suggested thatmatters within the remit of 3eneral )urposes which include electoral registrationfunctions, health and safet at wor&, pensions, staffing matters and Contracts+tanding Orders be incorporated into the Terms of eference of the proposed )olicand esources Committee.

The council also has an Appointment +ub Committee and egulator Appeals +ub

Committee that report into the 3eneral )urposes and *icensing Committee. These

Page 10


11/41


12/41

ecommending communit policies to the )olic Committee (ousing 'nvironment

(ealth Culture *eisure Communit development Communit and voluntar sector funding Communit +afet 4and communit safet scrutin 5 udget and performance monitoring

The Commission also discussed an alternative committee structure based on the

council"s officer structure which is set out at Appendix . -t was broadl felt it wouldnot wor& as well as one designed around functions for the following reasons/

-f the committee s stem were aligned to the officer structure, there wouldpotentiall be greater duplication with reports needing to go to severalcommittees.

The officer divisions are not as easil understandable to members of the publicas are areas of the council"s activit . The ma$orit of responses to theCommission"s %uestionnaire suggested committees that addressed councilfunctions.

*in&ing the committee structure so closel to the officer structure would notallow for individual functions to move easil between officer services.

+ignificant change to the officer structure could not ta&e place without change tothe committee structure.

-f the officer structure was changed, the ember expertise developed wouldeither be located within the wrong committee or would also need to be moved.

Conflict could arise between individual committees due to some services beingrepresented on more than one committee with, for example, polic issues beingdecided b one committee and operational issues b another.

There would be an increase in wor&load as certain reports 4e.g. par&ing, propertand housing5 would need to be considered b more than one committee.

Recommendations

That the councils services committees be aligned to the councils functionsrather than the present officer structure.

That three service committees be introduced to reflect the business of thecouncil: Policy and Resources, Regeneration and Property and Community.

Page 12


13/41

That matters relating to General Purposes be included in the Terms ofReference of the proposed Policy and Resources Committee.

!. "ecision revie#

A process could be introduced for controversial decisions ta&en b a committee to

be reviewed. nder the council"s previous committee s stem, the )olic Committeewas able to review and in effect 8call in" decisions ta&en b another committee butnot et implemented.

-t is proposed the )olic and esources Committee could review a decision whencertain conditions had been met/

The review is re%uested within three wor&ing da s of the da on which thedecision was published9

The re%uest is made in writing to the onitoring Officer that the decision bereviewed and the re%uest is signed b at least one third of the )olic andesources Committee.

-t was also suggested at the meeting of the Commission on 20 October that toensure 7ecision eview did not cause unnecessar dela to decision ma&ing and was

onl reserved for exceptional circumstances, a set of criteria should be introduced toassess an potential review.

A decision could be reviewed if there was evidence/

The decision had not met the normal re%uirements for decision ma&ing 4forexample financial or e%ualities implications not being considered orinade%uate consultation5.

The decision had been ta&en outside the udget and )olic !ramewor&. The decision was not supported b a proper reason explaining wh it had

been ta&en.

A decision could not be reviewed if/

-t has been certified as urgent in accordance with the council"s urgencprocedures.

-t has been ta&en b a regulator committee of the council 4)lanning or*icensing5.

The Commission also discussed whether 7ecision eview should fall to the !ullCouncil rather than the proposed )olic and esources Committee. #hilst this

Page 13


14/41

would reflect the ultimate sovereignt of the Council, the si6e of !ull Council andfre%uenc of its meetings would mean that decisions could be slowed down to suchan extent that the were not ta&en in a timel fashion without a special meetingbeing called. The sense of the previous meeting is reflected in the recommendation

below that if the Commission consider there should be a mechanism b whichdecisions can be reviewed, then that power is exercised b the )olic and esourcesCommittee.

-f this role were to fall to the !ull Council then it is suggested that the number ofsignatures re%uired should be sufficientl high to ensure that decision ma&ing was

not significantl slowed down on a regular basis. Cambridgeshire Count Councilallow for decisions to be reviewed either b their 3eneral )urposes Committee orthe !ull Council although there is a significant hurdle to be crossed before Council

can debate the decision. 7ecisions can be reviewed b eight or more councillors ofthe Council at the 3eneral )urposes Committee 4which consists of 1: embers5. !ora debate at !ull Council, the threshold is set higher so that more than half of theCouncil 4;< embers5 must support the review. !or practical reasons previouslreferred to, Cambridgeshire have ensured onl the most compelling cases aresub$ect to decision review.

Recommendation to ull Council: that controversial decisions be referred to the

Policy and Resources Committee for a decision revie! in cases !here the conditions

and criteria outlined above have been met.

$. %e&t steps

The views of the Commission on the features of the proposed committee structureoutlined above will inform the recommendations to be included in the final report to!ull Council. A draft of the final report is set out later on this agenda for theCommission"s consideration.

Page 14


15/41

Full Council(39)

WhitstableHerne BayCanterbury Rural South

Area Member Panels

Rural North

Committees

Community(9)

Policy(9)

Regenerationand Pro erty

(9)

Planning(9)

! ointments

Sub (")

Regulatoryand ! eals

Sub (")

#icensingSub(3)

Planning Sub$

Committee(%)

Appendix AStructure 1 (alignedto council functions)

#icensing(9)


16/41

Full Council(39)

WhitstableHerne BayCanterbury Rural South

Area Member Panels

Rural North

Committees

Resourc(9)

Strate!y and"e#ocracy

(9)

"irectSer$ices

(9)

%lannin! Sub(9)

&ppoint#ts Sub (

Re!ulatoand &ppe

Sub (

'icensin!Sub(3)

%lannin! andRe!eneration

(9)

Co##issionedSer$ices

(9)

o$ernanceWor in!%arty (*)

%lannin! Site+isit Sub

Appendix BStructure 2 (aligned toofficer structure)

'icensin! (9)


17/41

Scrutiny Going Forward

A discussion paper by Cllr Neil Baker

Introduction

I decided it may be useful to put forward some thoughts regarding the ongoingScrutiny function of Canterbury City Council post-May 2015, when a committee formof go ernance will begin!

I ha e deliberately not included any recommendations in this paper as my chief aim isto focus a public debate on the matter at meeting of the "o ernance Commission!

#either ha e I chec$ed whether any of these ideas are actually achie able in practice!

Policy and Resources Committee as the Senior Committee

%he issue of whether the &olicy and 'esources Committee should be seen as a(senior) committee and ha e the ability to alter the iews of other committees hasalready been the sub*ect of some debate!

+n one side of the argument, there is a feeling there needs to a be a committee whichcan meet more often than ull Council in order to pro ide a focal point! +n the otherside, there is concern the & ' Committee could become an (./ecuti e) in all butname!

%his ties in with the o erall discussions about how the scrutiny function will be performed going forward! hile cross party committees will mean there is an inbuiltscrutiny element at all times, there appears to be a lac$ of formal (call-in) process!

t the pre ious meeting of the "o ernance Commission, the idea of ha ing ullCouncil as the final arbiter was raised! hile I belie e e erybody considers ullCouncil to be the so ereign body of the Council, e en if a process were put in place torefer decisions to ull Council this could lead to an e/cessi e waste of time for what

could be urgent items! &otentially, two months could pass between a committeedecision being called-in and ull Council ne/t meeting!

a ing (emergency) ull Council meetings is theoretically an option, but the costsin ol ed could 3uic$ly spiral out of control! %his could be reduced by ha ing erytight rules on how items can be referred to ull Council but this ris$s stiflingdemocracy, something the "o ernance Commission has heard lots of representationsabout and hopes to a oid!

Agenda Item 4Page 17


18/41

%herefore, could another option be a (middle ground) of ha ing an ad hoc ScrutinyCommittee which only meets when call-ins of decisions are lodged 4and appro edunder whate er set of new criteria may be needed to then decide whether the issue

does indeed warrant a referral to ull Council6

#one of this ignores the fact that whate er form of "o ernance, whate er Committeestructure, whate er &arty or coalition of &arties hold a ma*ority of seats, decisions willalways ha e to be made and, of course, some of these decisions will be more popularthan others!

It is essential that any form of ongoing scrutiny cannot be hi*ac$ed for (political) purposes purely to delay decisions being ta$en! If this were to happen, there arereputational ris$s as well as, in may cases, financial ris$s!

%his suggests ongoing scrutiny would need new rules about the call-in process, and ona related but separate note, a detailed policy of which decisions could be made underemergency powers and how they are reported needs to be implemented 4or, rather, re-e aluated as this is already in place under the e/isting go ernance structure !

In Summary: Questions to Consider

- Is the &olicy and 'esources Committee a (senior) Committee that can re ersethe otes of other Committees but ha e no o ersight relating to its own otes6

- ould it be worth considering, if at all possible, creating an ad-hoc ScrutinyCommittee which can call the decision of any Committee in for re iew todecide if it needs to be referred to ull Council as the so ereign decision-ma$ing body 4with real thought needed about how to ensure any call-in

process cannot be hi*ac$ed for purely political purposes 6

Page 18


19/41

1

Canterbury City Council Future Committee Structure

Draft report of the Governance Commission

1. Introduction

All local authorities operated under a committee system until the Local GovernmentAct 2000 came into force which required most councils to adopt an Executivesystem. Most of those adopted a Leader and a!inet. "he Localism Act 2011 hassince #iven councils the option of reintroducin# a committee system if they chooseto do so. "he city council has committed to adopt a committee system forimplementation at the Annual ouncil meetin# in 201$.

"he report sets out a draft committee structure which incorporates proposedrecommendations to %ull ouncil on which there was !road a#reement at the lastmeetin# and recommendations the ommission a#reed to return to at this meetin#for further deli!eration.

2. Methodology

At its meetin# on 2& 'uly 201&( the ouncil resolved to chan#e its #overnancearran#ements to a committee system. )t was also a#reed that the council*s +oliticalMana#ement Mem!er +anel should act as a ommission( with an entirelyindependent hairman to develop the detailed desi#n of how the ommittee systemwould operate practically.

Mr hris Gay( who was hief Executive for 2& years until his retirement in 1,,-( wasappointed to the role of hairman !y the current hief Executive( olin armichael.

"he ommission Mem!ers were ouncillors /eil a er( imon oo ( 3arry ra##(Michael 4ixey( 5osemary 4oyle( en %itter( 'ohn Gil!ey( 'oe 3owes( Alex +er ins and'ohn 6ratten.

"he tas s of the ommission as in developin# the new structure were a#reed at thefirst meetin# on 7 eptem!er as follows

8 "o identify the num!er and names of individual committees and how will theyrelate to the other committees of the council.

8 "o identify the !road roles( responsi!ilities of those committees.8 "o identify whether( and to what extent( each committee will have power to ta e

decisions on matters within their area of responsi!ility.

Agenda Item 5Page 19


20/41

2

8 "o identify whether there will !e an overview and scrutiny committee( and if not(how the council*s limited statutory scrutiny duties will !e met.

8 "o identify whether there will !e a mechanism for matters decided !y acommittee to !e referred to the %ull ouncil or any other committee for

reconsideration.8 "o consider where there are perceived difficulties with pu!lic consultation and

en#a#ement( how( if at all( this can !e addressed within the new committeesystem arran#ements.

8 "o consider the schemes of dele#ations !oth from council to committees andfrom committees to officers.

8 "o consider how the committee system will demonstrate accounta!ility ofdecisions ta en.

8 "o review the potential costs associated with the committee system

arran#ements.

"he ommission su!sequently held five meetin#s in pu!lic to develop theommittee ystem structure set out in this report. "o inform its recommendations(the ommission invited participation from mem!ers of the pu!lic at its meetin#(received written representations and considered evidence from council officers andan expert witness from the entre for +u!lic crutiny. "he ommission alsoconsidered the structures adopted !y other councils that had moved to theommittee ystem since 2012.

. Features of a committee system

9nder a committee system( decision ma in# flows from the full council meetin# as a!ody. "he council can dele#ate :and sometimes must dele#ate; its functions topolitically !alanced committees or officers except where re#ulations prescri!e that afunction cannot !e dele#ated. ommittees can appoint and dele#ate to su!8committees and a committee or a su!8committee can dele#ate further to an officer.

"he committee structures of councils that have chosen to return to the committeesystem vary !ut there are some common themes. Most have a +olicy ommittee:some are called +olicy and 5esources or +olicy and %inance; in addition to servicearea committees such as housin#( community and environment which ta e decisionson all aspects of their su!


21/41

>

"here are different approaches adopted !y councils in that some operate atraditional system with multiple service committees. "his approach requires carefulco8ordination !etween the committees to ensure strate#ic oversi#ht is not lost.Most councils have instead adopted a streamlined system which consists of two or

three service committees plus re#ulatory committees. "his council had movedtowards the latter approach !y the time the Executive system was introduced as aresult of the Local Government Act 2000.

!. Conte"t to the proposed committee structure

"he committee system that the ommission recommends must address thedemocratic needs of the council. )t must also oversee a su!stantial economic andadministrative entity. "he council is an or#anisation which employs over ?00 people

and spends approximately @120 million each year servin# a population of around1$0(000. )t effectively runs ?$ separate !usinesses under its um!rella coverin# adiverse ran#e of services from waste and recyclin#( throu#h to food hy#iene(plannin#( !uildin# control and licensin# pu!s and taxis. "hese services are entirelyunconnected to each other yet each of them requires decisions to !e ta en either !ycouncillors or officers on a daily !asis for them to function effectively.

"his council is quite unique in its diverse nature of coast( country and towns. )tserves three distinct ma


22/41


23/41


24/41

-

9nder the present Executive system( Licensin# and General %urposes functions arecom!ined into one General +urposes and Licensin# ommittee. )t is su##ested thatmatters within the remit of General +urposes which include electoral re#istration

functions( health and safety at wor ( pensions( staffin# matters and ontractstandin# Crders !e incorporated into the "erms of 5eference of the proposed +olicyand 5esources ommittee.

"he council also has an Appointment u!8 ommittee and 5e#ulatory Appeals u!8ommittee that report into the General +urposes and Licensin# ommittee. "heseu!8 ommittees deal with senior council officer appointments and appeals and meetvery infrequently. uch !odies would in future report to the +olicy and 5esourcesommittee.

At the meetin# on 20 Ccto!er( the ommission also discussed whether or not theproposed +olicy and 5esources ommittee should have a co8ordinatin# role with#reater financial and policy ma in# powers than the other service committees."here is a need for such a committee is to provide strate#ic oversi#ht of policydevelopment and decision ma in#. "he ommittee*s co8ordinatin# role is intendedto meet the efficiency principle as it would ensure that wor pro#rammin# ma esthe !est use of the council*s resources.

An example of how this oversi#ht role would wor in practice can !e demonstrated

in the way that !ud#et and performance monitorin# would ta e place. )ndividualservice committees would consider !ud#et and performance reports for thosefunctions within their terms of reference. All reports would then !e su!mitted tothe +olicy and 5esources ommittee to#ether with any comments from the servicescommittees so that one !ody would have complete oversi#ht of the !ud#et andperformance of the council as a whole. "he councillors of the ommittee would !ea!le to effectively scrutinise the reports in a way that the way of wor in# and thesiBe of %ull ouncil would not allow.

&egeneration and %roperty Committee

"he functions that would !e included within the remit of the 5e#eneration and+roperty ommittee include

8 5ecommendin# relevant policies to the +olicy ommittee :e.#. orporate+roperty trate#y;

8 +roperty disposals8 Economic 4evelopment

8 5e#eneration8 +ar in#( travel and roads

Page 24


25/41

?

8 ud#et and performance monitorin#

:A separate +lannin# ommittee( would deal with 4evelopment ontroldecisions;

Community Committee

"he functions that could !e included within the remit of the ommunity ommitteeinclude

8 5ecommendin# community policies to the +olicy ommittee8 3ousin#8 Environment

8 3ealth8 ulture8 Leisure8 ommunity development8 ommunity and voluntary sector fundin#8 ommunity afety :and community safety scrutiny;8 ud#et and performance monitorin#

"he ommission also discussed an alternative committee structure !ased on the

council*s officer structure which is set out at Appendix . )t was !roadly felt it wouldnot wor as well as one desi#ned around functions for the followin# reasons

8 )f the committee system were ali#ned to the officer structure( there wouldpotentially !e #reater duplication with reports needin# to #o to severalcommittees.

8 "he officer divisions are not as easily understanda!le to mem!ers of the pu!licas are areas of the council*s activity. "he ma


26/41

7

8 "here would !e an increase in wor load as certain reports :e.#. par in#( propertyand housin#; would need to !e considered !y more than one committee.

&ecommendations'

8 That the councils services committees be aligned to the councils functionsrather than the present officer structure.

8 That three service committees be introduced to reflect the business of thecouncil: Policy and Resources, Regeneration and Property and Community.

8 That matters relating to General Purposes be included in the Terms ofReference of the proposed Policy and Resources Committee.

(. )icensing Committee

A Licensin# ommittee is statutory and is required primarily to determine individuallicensin# applications. eyond that it should dischar#e all of the authorities licensin#functions except those of licensin# policy. )t has also specifically !een #iven functionsin the Gam!lin# Act 200$.

+resently the wor of the Licensin# ommittee is com!ined with that of the General+urposes ommittee. 1 3owever( once the authority moves into a committee systemthat amal#amation of functions into one committee is more difficult to


27/41


28/41

10

performance monitorin# is reported to the relevant committee. "he +olicy and5esources ommittee would have a corporate performance monitorin# role andconsider the annual performance report.

Standards' the tandards ommittee comprises !oth city councillors and co8optedparish councillors. 6hen the statutory code of conduct was a!olished in 2012( it wassu##ested that tandards could !e com!ined with Audit as a committee solely of citycouncil Mem!ers. 3owever( the parish councils stron#ly supported a councilcommittee on which they were represented( as the city council*s Monitorin# Cfficeralso has responsi!ility for the parish councils. "he role of +arish ouncillors on thetandards ommittee su##ests that it should remain as a standalone committee.

Governance' the +olitical Mana#ement Mem!er +anel :+MM+; serves to discuss anddevelop #overnance issues( particularly technical ones( with officers in an informalway !efore ma in# recommendations to %ull ouncil or relevant committee.

9nder the new committee system( a proposed Governance 6or in# +arty wouldta e on the role of the +MM+ !ut the 6or in# +arty*s findin#s would then !eformally de!ated !y its parent committee in advance of %ull ouncil.

Recommendations to Full Council:

a" That the !tandards Committee be retained under the Committee !ystem.b" That an #udit and Governance Committee be introduced.c" That a Governance $or%ing Party &hich ma%es recommendations to its parent

#udit and Governance Committee be introduced.

1 . /vervie0 and Scrutiny

Cverview and crutiny is a feature of the Leader and Executive system( desi#ned toprovide chec s and !alances to more centralised decision ma in#. "he council*soverview and scrutiny function has evolved since its introduction. +resently there isan Cverview ommittee which considers matters in advance of the Executive and a

crutiny and Audit ommittee( the scrutiny element of which focuses on scrutinisin#decisions that have !een ta en !y the Executive. "he crutiny and Audit ommitteealso mana#es a rollin# pro#ramme of scrutiny reviews.

6hilst scrutiny is a feature of the Executive system( it can operate in a committeesystem in !roadly three ways

1; A standalone scrutiny committee. "his could only have the responsi!ility forexaminin# the wor of other committees and underta in# the council*s statutoryscrutiny requirements.

Page 28


29/41

11

2; crutiny is em!edded into the wor of individual committees with eachcommittee responsi!le for monitorin# !ud#ets and performance relatin# to itsfunctions. )n addition( mem!ers of the committee could hi#hli#ht areas ofconcern and request reports on issues relatin# to their functions in much the

same way as the present crutiny and Audit ommittee does.

>; crutiny is conducted !y %ull ouncil where!y a council8wide de!ate on anaspect of the wor or report of a particular committee could ta e place. "hisoption would present a le#al concern that the council could !e de!atin# issueswithout havin# had access to all the relevant material. "herefore( if there was to!e a de!ate at %ull ouncil( Mem!ers would need to consider all materialassociated with the issue which would su##est that this type of scrutiny could notta e place as a matter of routine.

Most councils that have adopted a committee system since 2012 have chosen toem!ed scrutiny within the wor of each committee. "he exception is ri#hton and3ove ouncil which has a standalone scrutiny committee( !ut as a unitary authorityhas wider statutory scrutiny powers :health and flood scrutiny; than those of districtcouncils.

4istrict councils have


30/41

12

11. ,rea Member %anels Committees

"he five Area Mem!er +anels :AM+s; that form part of the council*s currentstructure of committees under the Leader and Executive system( did not exist underthe previous committee system. "hey were introduced to allow Mem!ers to expressviews on services relatin# to their particular part of the district to the Executive. )naddition( the AM+s have served to promote local democracy and their en#a#ementrole had developed over time. "he AM+s are #enerally well attended !y mem!ers ofthe pu!lic and a means of en#a#in# mem!ers of the pu!lic in the council at the mostlocal level.

Recommendation to Full Council: that the &or% of the #rea (ember Panels issupported and should continue under the committee system sub)ect to the ne*t

recommendation.

A further consideration for this ommission in relation to area wor in# is that inApril 201>( %ull ouncil considered a report loo in# at whether a CommunityGovernance &evie0 should !e carried out to loo at the option of creatin# towncouncils in the district. )t resolved That the interest in initiating a CommunityGovernance Review be reassessed following any Electoral Review in 2013 ! Aommunity Governance 5eview in the near future would !e timely as #uidancesu##ests that local authorities should !e encoura#ed to review their electoral

representational arran#ements every 1081$ years 2. "he last full review of theanter!ury district was carried out in the late 1,70s.

"he Electoral 5eview is due to complete in 4ecem!er 201& for implementation atthe local elections in May 201$. )t is therefore su##ested this council recommend aommunity Governance 5eview for the district to the new council.

)f town councils were created as a result of the review( it would clearly affect thecouncil*s own arran#ements for area wor in# and local en#a#ement. )t would

therefore !e sensi!le to review the role of the AM+s in parallel with any ommunityGovernance 5eview.

Recommendation to Full Council: That the ne& council in + - be as%ed tocommence a district/&ide Community Governance Revie&, and that the role of the

#rea (ember Panels be revie&ed in parallel.

2 4epartment for ommunities and Local Government and Local oundary ommission for En#land Guidance(March 2010.

Page 30


31/41

1>

12. /ther meetings

oint 3ransportation 4oard

"he 'oint "ransportation oard :'" ; is primarily a consultative !ody of Dent ounty

ouncil. o( the principle of the '" *s future is for the ounty ouncil to decide(althou#h the city council could also choose to withdraw. "he '" usefully provides aforum for city and parish councillors to discuss hi#hways functions which are mainlya county function !ut which have local pu!lic interest. As a !ody primarily of theounty ouncil( the wor of the '" could not !e incorporated into the wor of aservice committee.

Recommendation to Full Council: that the 0oint Transportation 1oard continueunder the committee system.

5hitstable 6arbour 4oard

+rior to 2002( 6hitsta!le 3ar!our activities fell within the remit of the +roperty andEn#ineerin# ommittee. %ollowin# a est =alue 5eview recommendation( the3ar!our oard was introduced in 2002 0> to #ive strate#ic direction to themana#ement of the har!our and its property portfolio. )t has the status of adedicated council committee with dele#ated authority from the ouncil to ma ecertain decisions relatin# to the 3ar!our. "he oard comprises !oth electedcouncillors and independent mem!ers with relevant expertise.

Recommendation to Full Council: that the $hitstable 2arbour 1oard continueunder the committee system.

5or7ing parties- sub8committees

6or in# parties were a feature of the previous committee system which have also!een used !y this council under the Leader and Executive system.

"he su!8committees that operated under the previous committee system were

specific to the !usiness of the council as it was then. %or example( the 3ousin#Appeals and entral ervices u!8 ommittees( neither of which are now li ely to !erelevant followin# operational chan#es. u!8 ommittees can either !e self8contained with their own decision ma in# powers( or they may ma erecommendations for their parent committee to resolve.

)t will !e for the individual committees to appoint su!8committees to address the!usiness needs of the council as necessary. imilarly it will !e for the new council toesta!lish the wor in# parties it needs at the !e#innin# of the council year andreappoint or dis!and them annually thereafter. )n order to ensure resources aremana#ed appropriately( it is su##ested the +olicy and 5esources ommittee could

Page 31


32/41

1&

authorise any wor in# parties that need to !e esta!lished durin# the course of theyear.

Elsewhere in this report( a Governance 6or in# +arty is su##ested to covernecessary functions. Ctherwise it is su##ested that the wor in# parties to !erecommended to the new council !e considered once the ommission*s wor todevelop a committee structure has concluded.

6hist co8optin# external representatives onto wor in# #roups and review panels ispossi!le under the current onstitution( it has rarely occurred. )n fact( the lastnota!le example was when a representative of the Dent Association of +arishouncil*s was co8opted onto the 200& +arish ontri!utions crutiny 5eview. "hepurpose of the co8option was to improve the deli!erations of the review panel andact as a lin !etween the review process and the parish councils in the district.)nstead( external advice has !een re#ularly sou#ht throu#h expert witness sessionsdurin# reviews. 5epresentations received in response to the ommission*s surveydescri!ed the expertise availa!le locally and indicated there could !e considera!lescope for #reater co8option onto su!8committees( wor in# parties and review panelsthan had !een previously.

Recommendation to Full Council: that the process outlined above for appointingsub/committees and &or%ing parties be commended to the ne& council.

Recommendation to Full Council: that the Political (anagement (ember Panelconsiders the &or%ing parties to be recommended to the ne& council follo&ing theconclusion of this Commission.

Recommendation to Full Council: that e*ternal representatives be co/opted onto&or%ing groups, sub/committees and revie& panels &here e*ternal e*pertise&ould improve deliberations.

1 . 4est 9alue &evie0s

est =alue 5eviews : =5s; were a feature of the previous ommittee ystem(intended to focus on the !est value duty of continuously improvin# efficiency(economy and effectiveness. )n 2012 the council decided to reintroduce a version ofest =alue 5eviews as they had !een particularly valued previously and were seen asa way of extendin# the role of non8Executive councillors. 6hilst our present =5pro#ramme does not operate in exactly the same way as it did under the ommitteesystem( =5s provide a mechanism for ta in# a time limited loo at specific issuesand ma in# recommendations for improvin# them.

+reviously the pro#ramme of est =alue 5eviews was overseen !y a su!8committeeof the policy committee. )f =5*s were to continue then it is li ely the +olicy and

Page 32


33/41


34/41

1-

5*penditure over 6+ , per decision &ould need to be referred to thePolicy and Resources Committee for approval &ith unlimited e*penditure&ithin the budget frame&or%.

5*penditure outside of the budget frame&or% &ould need to be approved

by Full Council.

1#. Fre:uency of meetings and urgency provisions

)t is su##ested that the service committees meet approximately every six wee sinitially( althou#h this will need to !e reviewed and the frequency increased orreduced as appropriate to meet the !usiness needs of the council. Existin#committees such as the +lannin# ommittee which are recommended to !e carriedforward to the new system( would continue to meet with the same re#ularity as they

do now.

+rovisions for ta in# ur#ent decisions must !e incorporated into the arran#ements.)t is su##ested they should only !e used where failure to ta e the decision would( orwould !e li ely to( harm the interests of the council and or pu!lic. +reviously( thecouncil had Executive u!8 ommittees whose tas it was to ta e ur#ent decisions!etween meetin#s. "hey were flexi!le as to whether they would meet durin# theday or the evenin#. )t is su##ested these su!8committees are revived. ometimes itmi#ht !e appropriate to convene a special meetin# of a su!8committee( other timesa


35/41

1?

Recommendation to Full Council: that the procedure and criteria for allo&ingurgent decisions to be ta%en be introduced.

1$. Committee si;e Member and officer 0or7load

urrently the city council has a !road representation of councillors of wor in# a#eand in desi#nin# the new system( it needs to ensure that the num!er of meetin#sthat councillors would !e expected to attend is not so onerous that it prevents a!road spectrum of people from standin# as councillors. )f there were to !e anincrease in the total num!er of meetin#s held from the present system then therewould !e resource implication for !oth Mem!ers and officers( particularly in li#ht ofthe reduction in councillors from $0 to >, which will coincide with theimplementation of the new committee system.

ased on the structure outlined in this report( >, councillors would share 70 placeson 10 committees. > An avera#e of 2 committee places per councillor. Each councillorwould also attend 1 Area Mem!er +anel and %ull ouncil. %or comparison under thecurrent Leader Executive ystem( $0 councillors share 10, places on 11 committees(an avera#e of Analysis of Green ard. Licensin# Licensin# u! and +lannin# +lannin# u! counted as 1 committee.Appeals and 5e#ulatory Appeals not counted as meet rarely and not on current #reen card. 2.0$ committees& 2.17 committees per councillor.$ Approximate num!er of meetin#s is !ased on assessment of current wor load and assumin# service

committees will meet on six wee ly !asis.

Page 35


36/41

17

Governance 6or in# +arty &tandards &3otal' + meetings

"he approximate num!er of meetin#s when compared to the last year of theprevious committee structure and the council*s current Leader Executive system is asfollows

201> 1& 10$2001 02 7&

"he siBe of the future committees will !e lar#ely dictated !y the political !alance ofthe council which will not !e nown until after the Local Elections next year. "hemem!ership of committees will !e su!


37/41

1,

4istrict ouncil. Dent ounty ouncil and hepway 4istrict ouncil are not activelyparticipatin# in the sharin# of services and will formally leave the presentarran#ement when the new committee comes into effect. ervices delivered arehuman resources( information communications technolo#y( revenues and !enefits

and the contact centre dealin# with the various ways the council interacts with thepu!lic.

6ith the creation of the arms8len#th mana#ement company( East Dent 3ousin#( asu!stantial amount of housin# activity was passed to this new company controlled!y its corporate mem!ers anter!ury ity ouncil( 4over 4istrict ouncil( hepway4istrict ouncil and "hanet 4istrict ouncil. "he East Dent :3ousin# Mana#ement;ommittee oversees the wor in#s of East Dent 3ousin# and performs the importantrole of decidin# on certain ey matters when the parties are in dispute. "his has

proved to !e extremely rare.6here a Mem!er is placed on a


38/41


39/41

21

)f this role were to fall to the %ull ouncil then it is su##ested that the num!er ofsi#natures required should !e sufficiently hi#h to ensure that decision ma in# wasnot si#nificantly slowed down on a re#ular !asis. am!rid#eshire ounty ouncilallow for decisions to !e reviewed either !y their General +urposes ommittee or

the %ull ouncil althou#h there is a si#nificant hurdle to !e crossed !efore ouncilcan de!ate the decision. 4ecisions can !e reviewed !y ei#ht or more councillors ofthe ouncil at the General +urposes ommittee :which consists of 1? Mem!ers;. %ora de!ate at %ull ouncil( the threshold is set hi#her so that more than half of theouncil :-, Mem!ers; must support the review. %or practical reasons previouslyreferred to( am!rid#eshire have ensured only the most compellin# cases aresu!


40/41

22

Recommendation to Full Council: that the Council elected in + - be re8uested todevelop a ne& consultation strategy.

21. Spea7ing rights

Mem!ers of the pu!lic can spea at council committees to inform de!ate anddecision ma in#. "he usual spea in# ri#ht allow for individuals :spea in# on !ehalfof themselves or or#anisations; to spea for three minutes( su!


41/41

22. Conclusion

"he draft structure set out in this report is intended to ena!le the council to functioneffectively from the Annual ouncil meetin# in 201$. )t will !e a new way of wor in#and consequently ad

Documents

GovComm 2014-11-10 Public Reports Pack