Agenda and minutes

It was agreed that Agenda Item No. 5, “Governance & Audit Committee – Terms of Reference” should be taken immediately before Item No. 4, “Future Code of Conduct Complaints System”.

An apology for absence was received from Mr Hinchley.

The Chairman informed Members that, owing to changed job circumstances, Mr Hinchley had indicated an intention to tender his resignation as an Independent Member of Council.

The Working Party paid tribute to Mr Hinchley on his valuable contribution to its work and wished him well for the future.

To receive any declarations of interest.  Members are advised to consider the extract from the Standard Board Code of Conduct for Members, which forms part of the Declaration of Interest Form at the back of this Agenda.  If a Member declares an interest, they should complete that Form and hand it to the Officer clerking the meeting.

The Chairman declared a personal interest in Agenda Item No. 4, “Future Code of Conduct Complaints System” (Minute No. 26 refers).

To approve the Minutes of the Constitutional Review Working Party meeting held on 15 February 2012, copy attached.

On the proposal of Councillor Watkins, seconded by Councillor Nicholson, the minutes of the meeting of the Working Party held on 15 February 2011 were approved and signed by the Chairman.

Councillor Campbell, Vice-Chairman of Governance & Audit Committee, spoke under Council Procedure Rule 24.1.

Nikki Morris, Business Support & Compliance Manager, presented her report and, in so doing, stated that the Council’s Senior Management Team was of the view that the following proposed change in the Terms of Reference (Annex 1);

“To recommend to Cabinet the Council’s policy in Equalities (PSED)”

should be deleted.

In support of this view, Harvey Patterson, Monitoring Officer, pointed out that policy development was ultimately the responsibility of Cabinet.

Councillor Campbell stated that, as he understood it, the intended role of the Governance & Audit Committee in relation to the equalities policy would be one of assessing the robustness of the policy and its implementation and making recommendations to Cabinet, as the Committee deemed necessary.

On the proposal of Councillor Hayton, seconded by Councillor Wright, it was AGREED TO RECOMMEND to the Standards Committee that the revised Terms of Reference, as attached as Annex 1 to the Report, be approved and referred to Council for ratification.

Report to follow

As an Independent Member serving on the Standards Committee, the Chairman declared a personal interest in this item (Minute No. 23 refers).

Councillor Campbell spoke under Council Procedure Rule 24.1.

The Chairman expressed disappointment that he had not been consulted on the report prior to publication and despatch.

Councillor Campbell stated that, in his view, the informal Standards Working Party should have had an opportunity to consider the report before the Constitutional Review Working Party.

The Monitoring Officer explained that it had not been possible to engage the Standards Working Party on the report, for reasons set out in paragraph 1.5.  He also pointed out that it now seemed unlikely that Chapter 7 of the Localism Act 2011 would come into full force and effect by 1 July 2011.

All Members of the Working Party felt that, in view of the lateness of receipt of the report, they had not had time to properly consider its contents.

On the proposal of Councillor Nicholson, seconded by Councillor Hayton, it was AGREED TO RECOMMEND to Standards Committee:

1.  that the current Standards committee, sub-committees, processes and Code of Conduct continue until Chapter 7 of the Localism Act 2011 comes into effect;

2.  that the remainder of the report be deferred to enable the Standards Working Party to consider it first  and submit its comments to the Constitutional Review Working Party, prior to onward referral to the Standards Committee and Council.

Councillor Campbell spoke under Council Procedure Rule 24.1.

In response to a Member’s query, the Democratic Services & Scrutiny Manager pointed out that the “5 days” referred to at paragraphs 2.6.1 & 2.6.2 of the report and the “5 clear days” referred to at paragraph 2.7 should read, “5 clear working days”.

Following consideration of the report, it was proposed by Councillor Nicholson, seconded by Councillor Watkins and AGREED TO RECOMMEND to Standards Committee:

“That Access to Information Procedure Rule 20.1 be amended to read:

’20.1  Reports intended to be taken into account

‘When an individual Cabinet member is taking a key decision they must make that decision considering a report from the relevant officer and that decision must not be made until 5 clear working days after receipt of that report.

‘When an officer is taking a key decision they must make that decision considering a report and that decision must not be made until 5 clear working days after the receipt of that report’”.

Councillors Campbell and King spoke under Council Procedure Rule 24.1.

Following discussion, it was AGREED TO RECOMMEND to Standards Committee, on the proposal of Councillor Hayton, seconded by Councillor Wright:

That Council Procedure Rule 2.2 be amended as follows: