Issue - meetings

It was proposed by the Chairman, seconded by the Vice-Chairman and Members agreed that the recommendations detailed in the report be approved, namely that:

·  Signatories of paper and e-petitions would be added together when calculating thresholds.

·  The total number of signatories required to debate a petition at Council remains at the proposed 1500.

·  The committee raised no other objections to the remaining proposed changes.

The Chairman outlined the CRWP recommendation to the Standards Committee, namely:

1. that the number of signatories required to debate at council should be reduced from the proposed 1500 to 1000.

2. That the number of signatories signing paper and e-petition should be added together when calculating the threshold reached, rather than them being reported separately.

3. That the appropriate Cabinet member is copied into the response to the petitioner when a petition doesn’t reach the minimum threshold (under 50 signatories) and is treated as correspondence.

Nick Hughes, Committee Services Manager, presented the report to the committee.

The committee the discussed the report and made the following points:

-  Members raised concerns about the proposal to add together signatories on paper and e-petitions.

-  Members asked whether Democratic Services currently check for duplicate signatures in submitted petitions. The Committee Services Manager confirmed that current resources doesn’t allow for detailed cross-referencing of petitions.

-  Councillors highlighted the need to provide accessible petition schemes and the importance of not disenfranchising those who don’t have access to e-petitions. 

It was proposed by Cllr Campbell and seconded by Cllr J Bayford, that:

1.  Signatures from paper and e-petitions should not be added together when calculating thresholds.

2.  The total number of signatories required to debate a petition at Council is reduced from the proposed 1500 to 1000 as recommended by the CRWP.

This was voted on by the members and the proposal was LOST.

It was proposed by Cllr Campbell, seconded by Cllr Crittenden and AGREED by members that:

1.  Signatories of paper and e-petitions would be added together when calculating thresholds.

2.  The total number of signatories required to debate a petition at Council remains at the proposed 1500.

3.  The committee raised no other objections to the remaining proposed changes.

Cllr Garner and Cllr Whitehead spoke under rule 20.1 on this item.

Nicholas Hughes, Committee Services Manager, outlined the proposed changes to the Council’s petition scheme:

? To accept e-petitions from Change.org and 38Degrees.

? To completely remove the Council's e-petition facility.

? Retain ability to submit paper petitions.

? If under 50 signatories, to treat as correspondence.

? 50-1500 signatories, to deal with it as a petition by an officer in consultation with the Cabinet Member, then reported for information to Cabinet or Council, depending on subject matter.

? Council would debate petitions with over 1500 signatories.

? Members of the public can only speak to petitions to the Full Council with over 1500 signatories.

? The main rejection categories were mainly unchanged.

? The appeals process was unchanged.

? The scheme retained the ability to simultaneously do e-petition and paper petitions, but reported as separate numbers.

At this point Mr Tucker resumed position as Chairman.

The key issues raised during discussion were:

-  Members were happy with accepting petitions from 38Degrees and Change.org instead of using the council petitions site in future.

-  The importance of keeping petitions accessible to those without internet access by combining paper and electronic petitions, and the associated possibility of repeat signatures. It was felt that the necessity for inclusivity outweighed the accuracy of numbers.

-  The view that decision making appeared to be controlled by Senior Officers rather than Members. This was discussed at length, covering the outcomes for each size of petition and it was felt that smaller petitions also needed assurance of the inclusion of a councillor.

-  The reasoning for increasing the threshold of signatories for petitions to be debated at council. It was explained that this was in order to speed up the process, so that actions could be taken in a timely manner. Members were keen to ensure the public received a message of willingness from the council and felt that as there were not many petitions of that size it would be reasonable to keep the number at 1000.

It was proposed, seconded and agreed that the Committee would recommend to the Standards Committee the proposals for petitions set out in the in the report subject to the following changes:

1.  That the number of signatories required to debate at council should be reduced from the proposed 1500 to 1000.

2.  That the number of signatories signing paper and e-petition should be added together when calculating the threshold reached, rather than them being reported separately.

3.  That the appropriate Cabinet member is copied into the response to the petitioner when a petition doesn’t reach the minimum threshold (under 50 signatories) and is treated as correspondence.